MDM Article Categories
Medical Decision Making publishes original research articles, reviews, tutorials, brief reports, technical notes, letters to the editor, essays, case studies, editorials, and clinical or policy rounds. MDM does not consider previously published articles for publication (see Journal Policies and Manuscript Submission for more information.) Descriptions of these article categories are provided below and include guidelines for manuscript word count. Word count is based on the body text of the manuscript, excluding the abstract, acknowledgments, figure legends, and references. Although exceptions to word-limit recommendations are granted by the editor on occasion, manuscript acceptance is more likely when authors stay within these guidelines. These limits do not apply to supplemental material that can be published in a Web-only format, however. Authors should indicate which materials (if any) in their submission may be published in Web-only format (e.g., methodologic appendices, certain figures, evidence tables).
Original research articles (3,000-5,000 words, <4,500 strongly preferred).
Reviews (<5,000 words, <4,500 words strongly preferred). MDM considers systematic reviews as well as informal, narrative reviews. Note: MDM expects that all reviews include at least some degree of integration, synthesis, and interpretation of the reviewed studies. We consider a review that simply reports and categorizes what was done (e.g., many scoping reviews) to be incomplete.
Tutorials (1,500-5,000 words, brevity appreciated). Authors are strongly encouraged to consult with the Editor-in-Chief before submitting a tutorial. Prospective authors should provide an outline of the tutorial with an estimated word count. MDM is interested in tutorials about all types of cutting edge methods used in medical decision making, e.g., techniques and software for advanced mathematical, statistical, and economic modeling. Authors are encouraged to include hyperlinks to online materials that can be used in the tutorial.
Brief reports (<1,500 words). Brief reports describe preliminary or limited results of original research—ideally illustrating a new methodologic approach or a new feature of an established methodology.
Technical notes (<1,500 words). Technical notes describe and propose an approach to a methodologic issue that is part of a larger model or analysis.
Editorials (<1,200 words, ≤10 references). The journal regularly publishes editorials, which are considered as a result of a presubmission inquiry (consult with the Editor-in-Chief) or invitation only.
Letters to the editor (<1,200 words, shorter preferred). Letters in response to articles published in MDM or MDM P&P within the last year will be considered. Not all letters are published, and letters containing defamatory, libelous, or malicious statements will not be published.
MDM P&P Article Categories
MDM Policy & Practice publishes original research articles, reviews, case studies, letters to the editor, and editorials. MDM P&P does not consider previously published articles for publication (see Journal Policies and Manuscript Submission for more information.) Descriptions of these article categories are provided below and include guidelines for manuscript word count. Word count is based on the body text of the manuscript, excluding the abstract, acknowledgments, figure legends, and references. Although exceptions to word-limit recommendations are granted by the editor on occasion, manuscript acceptance is more likely when authors stay within these guidelines. These limits do not apply to supplemental material that can be published in a Web-only format, however. Authors should indicate which materials (if any) in their submission may be published in Web-only format (e.g., methodologic appendices, certain figures, evidence tables).
Original research articles (<5,000 words, brevity appreciated). Original research articles in MDM P&P describe studies of decision making focused on clinical or policy applications.
Reviews (<5,000 words, brevity appreciated). MDM P&P considers systematic reviews as well as informal, narrative reviews addressing research questions relating to applications of medical decision making. Note: MDM P&P expects that systematic reviews include at least some degree of integration, synthesis, and interpretation of the reviewed studies. We consider a systematic review that simply reports and categorizes what was done to be incomplete.
Explainers (1,000-4,000 words, shorter preferred). Authors are strongly encouraged to consult with the Editor-in-Chief before submitting a explainer. Explainer articles highlight the relevance and applicability of MDM techniques to solving the practical problems of real-world situations. Explainers should be written for a broad audience that might include practicing clinicians, policymakers, journalists, and/or patients as appropriate to the topic. Prospective authors should provide an outline of the explainer with an estimated word count.
Brief reports (<1,500 words). Brief reports describe preliminary or limited results of original research that nonetheless have implications for policy and/or practice.
Editorials (<1,200 words, ≤10 references). The journal publishes editorials, which are considered as a result of a presubmission inquiry (consult with the Editor-in-Chief) or invitation only. Editorials are not subject to an article publication charge (APC).
Letters to the editor (<1,200 words, shorter preferred). Letters in response to articles published in MDM or MDM P&P within the last year will be considered. Not all letters are published, and letters containing defamatory, libelous, or malicious statements will not be published. Letters to the editor are not subject to an article publication charge (APC).
Case studies (3,000-5,000 words). Case studies can illustrate the application of a decision model or decision support application to an actual patient or patient group. They can also speak to the role of a specific decision model, cost-effectiveness analysis, or other type of mathematical model in an actual policy decision, including, for example, a clinical practice guideline or a national coverage policy decision. The ideal modeling case study includes detailed information about the problem addressed, collaboration among modelers and decision makers in framing questions, the development and results of the model, and how the model influenced (or failed to influence) a decision. A similar level of detail and structure would be expected for case studies reporting other types of decision support interventions.
Authorship (both journals)
Both Medical Decision Making and MDM Policy & Practice generally follow the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship guidelines (briefly summarized below).
Papers should only be submitted for consideration once consent is given by all contributing authors. Those submitting papers should carefully check that all those whose work contributed to the paper are acknowledged as contributing authors.
The list of authors should include all those who can legitimately claim authorship. This is all those who:
- Made a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
- Drafted the article or reviewed it critically for important intellectual content; AND
- Gave final approval of the version to be published; AND
- Agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Authors should meet the conditions of all of the points above, and all who meet the four criteria above should be identified as authors. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship, although all contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgments section.
When a large, multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript, and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors.
Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technology: At submission, authors should disclose if they used artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies (such as Large Language Models [LLMs], chatbots, or image creators) in the production of submitted work. Authors who use such technology should describe, in both the cover letter and the submitted work in the appropriate section if applicable, how they used it. For example, if AI was used for writing assistance, describe this in the acknowledgment section. If AI was used for data collection, analysis, or figure generation, authors should describe this use in the methods. Chatbots (such as ChatGPT), AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be listed as authors (or cited as authors) because they cannot be responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the work, and these responsibilities are required for authorship. The authors are responsible for any submitted material that included the use of AI-assisted technologies. Authors should carefully review and edit the result because AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. Authors should be able to assert that there is no plagiarism in their paper, including in text and images produced by the AI.