The key concern of Tobacco Control is always to supply a forum for research, analysis, commentary, and debate on policies, programmes, and methods which are very likely to further the objectives of a tobacco control policy that is comprehensive. The introduction should indicate why the research reported or issues discussed are important in terms of controlling tobacco use, and the discussion section should include an analysis of how the research reported contributes to tobacco control objectives in papers submitted for review.
Papers firmly anchored to a strategic policy and programme context are more inclined to be accepted for publication. While the journal seeks to attain a worldwide readership, writers must look into whether their intended submissions target problems or themes, that are apt to be of great interest to researchers employed in other countries. Overly parochial problems, that have few classes for tobacco control policy outside a paper’s local context, are not likely to be provided with high concern. The manuscripts editors will generally speaking maybe not offer high priority to:
- Studies of smoking cigarettes prevalence and its own correlates. These are most suitable to national journals. Few individuals residing outside a national nation have an interest in whether that nation has 30% or 35% of cigarette cigarette smokers.
- Knowledge, attitudes, behaviour (KAB) studies of specific populace teams or medical researchers. Once again, they are better suited to national journals or even to wellness speciality that is professional. Few individuals far away will tend to pay for essay be thinking about (for instance) whether nurses in a local medical center are thinking about helping patients quit. Nationwide studies, and the ones using such studies into initial areas are of more interest.
- Reports that evoke unanimous “so what?” responses from the editors. They are documents with findings that appear to hold no apparent value for changing policy or training in tobacco control. They often times show methodological finery, but take us anywhere don’t crucial or interesting.
- Advice pieces where in actuality the views are unoriginal, badly argued, naive or neglect for crucial issues that are ethical favor of sloganeering.
- Papers that show the writers have not exposed Tobacco Control nor comprehend its focus that is primary on control in the place of on tobacco as well as its usage and wellness effects. We have been thinking about such documents, but only when their writers address the implications of the findings for tobacco control.
- Papers with glaringly apparent, deadly methodological issues.
- Documents on topics that want extremely technical or language that is discipline-specific to be recognized because of the most of readers.
- Documents that are replications of currently well-established findings or provide little information that is new.
- Local studies where in fact the implications for the journal’s audience that is international ambiguous.
- Reports written for governments or neighborhood wellness authorities that some body thought could be offered a fast make-over and presented as a log paper.
Editorial policy
Tobacco Control adheres towards the highest requirements concerning its editorial policies on publication ethics, clinical misconduct, permission and peer review criteria. To see all BMJ Journal policies please make reference to the BMJ Author Hub policies web web page.
Articles are posted under an exclusive licence or non-exclusive licence for British Crown workers or where BMJ has agreed CC BY applies. The terms are as stated in accordance with our licence terms for US Federal Government officers or employees acting as part of their official duties. Writers or their employers retain copyright. Open access articles are reused beneath the regards to the appropriate innovative Commons licence to facilitate reuse associated with the content; please refer to the Tobacco Control Author Licence when it comes to applicable Creative Commons licences”.
Tobacco industry funded work
Tobacco Control will likely not give consideration to for book documents work that is reporting, in entire or in component, by a tobacco business or tobacco industry company. Nor will the consider that is journal by writers whom accept tobacco industry capital, including capital for research expenses, for many or element of any author’s income, or other types of individual remuneration. For more information, please check this out editorial offering the thinking behind the journal’s policy. Failure to declare contending passions at distribution, or whenever a write-up is commissioned, can lead to instant rejection associated with the paper. If your contending interest comes to light after book, Tobacco Control will issue an official modification to or retraction of this entire paper, as appropriate.
Material previously published online
Tobacco Control is prepared to think about documents based wholly or in component on product previously posted on the web. But writers must look into an editorial with this topic: Prior book on the net: brand brand new log policy. The editor keeps the right that is customary make modifications any way you like of course essential to reduce, because of the approval of this author(s), product accepted for publication. Any written or material that is illustrative happens to be posted somewhere else must certanly be duly recognized and associated with the penned consent of this copyright owner (this might be the publisher as opposed to the writer).
Fast monitoring
Under unique circumstances in which a paper’s findings have actually straight away relevant policy implications warranting urgent publication, manuscripts are fast tracked in front of the normal queue of documents. In the event which you feel you feel it is of sufficient importance to be handled urgently that you have good reasons why this is true for your paper, please detail these in a cover letter, explaining the importance of your work for the field and the reason. This demand will not guarantee that the editors will concur, and just a few documents per year is going to be expedited with this foundation, nonetheless it can help the editors to judge the paper’s value when you look at the present context.
Formatting, terms and revised manuscripts
Documents on e cigarettes should make use of the term ‘electronic cigarettes’ on very first usage, and after that the abbreviation ‘e-cigarettes’ may be used. Documents on other delivery that is nicotine may continue using the definition of ‘electronic smoking distribution systems’ accompanied by the abbreviation ‘ENDS’ after first usage.
Whenever uploading a revised manuscript, writers must also consist of a split manuscript file showcasing the tracked changes to demonstrate the editors the real difference through the version that is previous. The monitored modifications document must certanly be uploaded as a supplementary file.
Analysis reporting gu >
BMJ calls for conformity to your reporting that is following. Please upload the appropriate finished list for the submission to your study type, and label it “Research checklist”. If no appropriate list is present for the research kind, this is suggested regarding the distribution kind.
CONSORT statement – necessary for all randomised managed studies
PRISMA statement – necessary for all systematic reviews
EVEREST statement – Required for many financial evaluations
STARD statement – Required for many research that is diagnostic
STROBE statement – Required for all observational studies
SQUIRE statement – Required for many quality enhancement studies
Guidance and kinds can be obtained from EQUATOR.
We welcome video clip abstracts to accompany accepted research articles. These enable authors to really talk through their work beyond the restrictions of the formal article to improve the user’s understanding. Note you to consider submitting a video abstract until your paper has been accepted that we will not ask. Please don’t try to upload a video clip abstract upon initial distribution of one’s manuscript.
There are lots of tutorials online that could guide the creation of a video clip abstract, using commonly and sometimes software that is freely available. Windows film Maker and Apple iMovie will be the many typical examples. Samples of movie abstracts can be obtained from The BMJ. Listed here are a few recommendations for making a video clip abstract. Writers might also like to ask their institution’s press/media workplace for support.
- Movie abstracts must not keep going longer than 4 mins.
- This content and concentrate of this movie must connect straight to the scholarly research that’s been accepted for publication, and really should perhaps not stray beyond the information. We advice itself i.e. briefly outline the background/context of the study, present your research objective, outline the methods used, present the key results and then discuss the implications of the outcomes that you follow the same structure as the paper.
- The presentation and content associated with movie should really be in a mode plus in terms which is understandable and available to a basic medical market. The primary language should be English, but we welcome subtitles an additional language. Please avoid jargon that’ll not be acquainted to a broad medical audience, and never use abbreviations.
- Authors frequently talk straight into the digital digital camera and/or present a slideshow, but we enable the usage of other appropriate artistic and material that is audiosuch as for instance animations, videos, still photographs, figures, infographics). Should you want to utilize product from previously posted work or from other sources, please receive the appropriate permissions through the appropriate publisher or copyright owner.