The Milbank Quarterly is devoted to scholarly analysis of significant issues in health and health care policy. It presents original research, synthesis, policy analysis, and commentary from academicians, clinicians, and policymakers. The in-depth, multidisciplinary approach of the journal permits contributors to explore fully the social origins of health in our society and to examine in detail the implications of different health policies. Contributions are published from a broad array of disciplines, including history, law, medicine, epidemiology, bioethics, and the full array of social science and health services research disciplines. Topics addressed in The Milbank Quarterly include (but are not limited to) the impact of social factors on health, disease prevention, allocation of health resources, legal and ethical issues in health policy, health care management, historical analysis of health policies, and the organization and financing of health care.
Manuscript Submissions
Submissions should be sent electronically to the Quarterly. Please email Word (ideally) or Word Perfect files of the manuscript to: quarterly@milbank.org.
The editor, Bradford H. Gray, PhD, will make an initial determination about the suitability of the manuscript for the Quarterly. Manuscripts that are potentially suitable will be subject to blind peer review regarding scholarly soundness and substantive significance. The length of submitted material ordinarily should not exceed thirty pages, including references and abstract. Longer papers will be considered on occasion, but additional length must be justified by the corresponding author. (The “corresponding author” is the author responsible for negotiations and the author to whom correspondence should be sent.)
For the convenience of reviewers, manuscripts that are systematic reviews should be accompanied by the protocol according to which the authors conducted the review. unless that information is provided in the body of the manuscript.
The length of submitted material ordinarily should not exceed thirty pages, including the abstract and references. Longer papers will be considered on occasion, but additional length must be justified by the corresponding author.
Questions about the submission process may be directed to Tara Lantz, publications assistant, at tlantz@milbank.org.
Specifications for Manuscripts
Before submitting your manuscript, please be sure you have prepared it according to the following instructions.
Formatting
All text, including tables, lists, and references, must be typed double-spaced in the same typeface throughout. All pages must be numbered consecutively.
Title Pages
On the title page include the names, academic degrees, and affiliations of all authors, as well as any acknowledgments. List the authors in the order their names are to appear on the title page. Also provide the complete address, telephone number, and email address of the corresponding author.
To facilitate blind review, include a second title page with only the manuscript title. In addition, please eliminate any internal information (including acknowledgment of funding sources and self-identifications in citations) that reveals authorship.
Structured Abstract
Manuscripts must normally include a structured abstract of up to 250 to 300 words using the following headings:
Context: The abstract should begin by explaining the article's background, objectives, and salience for policy and research.
Methods: Describe the procedures used to obtain and analyze data and/or research materials.
Findings: Summarize the results of your analyses.
Conclusions: Summarize the implications of the findings for policy, practice, and further research.
Keywords
The structured abstract should be accompanied by up to four keywords for indexing. Keywords used by MEDLINE/PubMed's MeSH system are preferred because they facilitate searches (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=mesh), but terms not in MeSH may be used when MeSH terminology is not adequate.
Artwork
Tables and figures should be explicitly mentioned in text and be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals (e.g., Table 1, Table 2, Figure 1, Figure 2). Tables and figures should be self-explanatory and include a title; each figure should have a separate legend. Be sure to obtain permission from the publisher to reprint any art from other sources.
References
All sources used in preparing your manuscript should be properly acknowledged. In the text, cite the author's surname and year of publication within parentheses, e.g., (Blake 1983). For two or three authors, write out the surnames, followed by the date, e.g., (Blake and Jones 1986; Blake, Jones, and Aspinall 1989). (Note that a semicolon separates references.) When there are more than three surnames, write out the first one, followed by “et al.” and the year. If there are two or more references with the same initial name and date, add letters to follow the year, e.g., (Johnson et al. 2004a; Johnson et al. 2004b). The dates for multiple citations by the same author(s) should be separated by commas, e.g., (Retchin and Brown 1990, 1991, 1993a, 1993b). The Quarterly discourages the use of footnotes except when citing legal sources.
References should be listed at the end of the article, alphabetically (chronologically, with the earliest year first for a particular author), and unnumbered. Itemize all authors; do not use “et al.” The citations must be complete and unabbreviated, as in the following examples:
- Andersen RM, Rice TH, Kominski GF. Changing the U.S. Health Care System: Key Issues in Health Services Policy and Management. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Brown LD. The More Things Stay the Same the More They Change: The Odd Interplay between Government and Ideology in the Recent Political History of the U.S. Health-Care System. In: Stevens RA, Rosenberg CE, Burns LR, editors. History and Health Policy in the United States: Putting the Past Back. Vol. 32. Piscataway, N.J.: Rutgers University Press; 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, Bate P, Kyriakidou O. Diffusion of Innovations in Service Organizations: Systematic Review and Recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly. 2004;82(4):581–629. doi: 10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lewis G. Chicago: 2007. Interview by Sam Gunderson. May 17. [Google Scholar]
- U.S. Census Bureau. Statistical Abstract of the United States 2007: sec. 3, Health and Nutrition. 2007. [accessed October 3, 2007]. Available at http://www.census.gov/compendia/ statab/
Policies on Authorship, Conflict of Interest, Prior Dissemination, and Assignment of Copyright
When the manuscript is submitted and in order for external review to occur, the corresponding author must submit forms signed by each author indicating that he or she has read and complied with the Quarterly's policies regarding (1) authorship; (2) financial support and potential conflicts of interest; (3) prior dissemination; and (4) copyright transfer. The policies are described below. The required forms are available at the Milbank Memorial Fund's website: http://www.milbank.org.
Forms may be sent by mail or fax to:
Tara Lantz
Publications Assistant
Milbank Memorial Fund
645 Madison Avenue
15th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Phone: 212-355-8400
Fax: 212-355-8599
Authorship
Each author of a manuscript submitted to The Milbank Quarterly must accept responsibility for the manuscript's content and must have (1) made substantial contributions to the design of the project, data acquisition, or analyses and interpretation of data and/or (2) made substantial contributions to the drafting of, or critical revisions to, the manuscript.
Accepted manuscripts are copyedited according to Quarterly style and returned to the corresponding author for approval. Authors are responsible for all statements made in their work, including changes made by the copy editor and authorized by the corresponding author. The corresponding author will also be sent PDF page proofs for review.
Financial Support and Potential Conflicts of Interest
When a manuscript is submitted, all authors of the manuscript must disclose to the editor in the submission letter any potential conflicts of interest or situations that could give the appearance of a conflict of interest, resulting from authors' financial, personal, or professional affiliations as well as any direct financial support for the work reported in the manuscript. This information will be published in conjunction with the manuscript and, except for the authors' names and employers, will be made available to reviewers during the peer review. (Similarly, persons invited to review manuscripts submitted to The Milbank Quarterly must disclose to the editor any conflicts of interest that could bias their evaluation of the manuscript.)
A potential conflict of interest exists when an author has relationships with organizations or involvements in activities that could inappropriately influence his or her research or presentation of results and conclusions, whether or not such influence occurs. The most important potential conflicts of interest are financial relationships of an author and/or a member of his or her immediate family or household with organizations that have a pecuniary interest in any data or findings reported in the manuscript. Such relationships include, but are not limited to, a role in the governance of an organization, employment, paid or voluntary consultation or expert testimony, stock ownership, and receipt of honoraria or other financial support.
Prior Dissemination
The policy of The Milbank Quarterly is to consider for publication only original work that has not previously been published. Below is guidance on this issue.
There are legitimate reasons why research may be disseminated before submission to a journal. Active communication among researchers about preliminary findings or the circulation of draft reports for discussion and critique contributes to the eventual quality of published work. In addition, organizations that support or carry out research have an understandable interest in disseminating their work. These reasons for dissemination must be balanced against two considerations. The first is the value of the peer review process. The rule against prior publication is intended to increase the credibility of published research. Papers are often improved during the peer review process, with findings, conclusions, and recommendations sometimes changed in response to reviewers' comments. The public and policymakers might be confused or misled if there are multiple versions of a paper in the public domain. Second, journal space is limited, and both time and expense are involved in the evaluation, publication, and distribution of journal articles. The Milbank Quarterly must make difficult choices about what to include; there is less value in publishing papers that have already been disseminated to their target audiences.
Below, we discuss several types of dissemination and provide guidelines with respect to the prior publication question. This discussion is essentially an elaboration of two rules, the first emphasizing previous dissemination of the material, the second stressing disclosure.
Rule One: If the material in a paper has already been disseminated to the Quarterly's audience, particularly in a format that appears to be a final product, then it is unlikely that a second version will be worth publishing in the journal.
Rule Two: It is the responsibility of authors to let the editor know at the time of submission if a paper's contents have been previously disseminated in any manner so that the editor can determine whether to proceed with the review process.
Previous Presentation at Meetings
Presentation of a paper at conferences or seminars does not constitute prior publication and does not jeopardize the possibility of publication.
Working Papers
Dissemination of “working papers” to a limited audience will not ordinarily jeopardize publication. Working paper series are used by many organizations as a means of enabling researchers to obtain critiques from fellow researchers. Working papers covered by this policy are those that are released by the author or an organization rather than by a publisher, are not advertised to the public, and are marked as drafts that are subject to future revision.
Internet Postings
Release via the Internet may jeopardize journal publication under some circumstances. Presentation of the work as a final report is a marker of an attempt to reach a wide audience, particularly when combined with efforts to direct traffic to the work (e.g., via links on other sites) and efforts to attract attention (e.g., press releases). In contrast, if a document is posted on the Internet only to facilitate communication among colleagues with the aim of getting feedback, and if there has been no attempt to otherwise attract the attention of journalists, the public, or the broader research community to the document, then this is unlikely to preclude journal publication.
In general, when posting on the Internet serves similar functions as presentation at professional meetings—facilitating the development of papers and the improvement of the research, influencing future revisions, and not constituting a “finished” product—it would not be considered prior publication. On the other hand, when the website posting functions as a virtual version of a conventional publication, which may even be copyrighted by the posting organization, the benefit of an additional publication in the journal will be scrutinized carefully.
In cases where there has been little to no exposure at the time that a paper is submitted to the journal, but the circumstances surrounding the posting make it likely that a high level of exposure (press coverage, etc.) might occur, then the author should remove a posting as a condition for further consideration of the manuscript.
Authors who post a paper on a website and do not want it to constitute prior publication should also post a disclosure statement such as: “This draft paper is intended for review and comments only. It is not intended for citation, quotation, or other use in any form.” This statement should be kept on the website throughout the review process and until the paper is actually accepted for publication in the journal. Once accepted, authors should post a message to the effect that “A revised final version of this paper will appear in the X issue of volume XX of The Milbank Quarterly.” Authors should also include this statement as a header or footer on every page of the paper.
Formal Reports from Foundations, Academic Institutions, Institutes, Trade Associations, and Government Agencies
The dissemination efforts of foundations, government agencies, research institutes, and other organizations that support or carry out research can complement publication in peer-reviewed journals. If publication in The Milbank Quarterly is desired, organizational publications should be timed to coincide with or follow publication of the article in The Milbank Quarterly, with appropriate copyright permissions having been obtained. This sequence ensures that any deficiencies of method or presentation noted during the peer-review process will be able to be corrected.
Formal, published reports that have gone through an editorial process, that have been intended to reach a wide audience, and that are publicized and available to any interested party (whether free or not) usually will not be considered for journal publication. A paper that is based on such a report might be considered for publication if it were sufficiently different in emphasis or intent. In such instances, the author should explain at the time of submission (or before) how the paper differs from the previously released report and why its publication would represent a distinct and important contribution beyond that version.
Media Publicity
If results reported in a working paper have become widely known as a result of media exposure (or even if the potential for widespread exposure remains during review), and that working paper is readily available to interested readers (e.g., through a website), an editorial judgment will be made whether journal publication would be appropriate. Authors can help protect their work from unwanted media exposure by making clear on working drafts, copies presented at conferences, and other versions that it is a draft that has not yet undergone peer review for publication and that findings and conclusions are subject to change. Authors should also request that any “stories” derived from interviews with the media be embargoed until the article has been published or released by the publisher (see, for example, P.B. Fontanarosa and C.D. DeAngelis, 2002, “The Importance of the Journal Embargo,” JAMA 288:748–50). Any accepted manuscript released to the media should contain the statement: “A revised final version of this paper will appear in the X issue of volume XX of The Milbank Quarterly.” Authors should check with the editor before speaking with or distributing papers to members of the media.
Importance of Disclosure
Prior to, or at the time of, submission of a paper that has been disseminated in any of the ways discussed above, authors must bring this to the attention of the editor so a determination can be made whether the paper has been disseminated too widely for publication in The Milbank Quarterly. In so doing, authors should describe in what form and how the work was previously disseminated and how the submitted manuscript differs from previously disseminated versions. The editor might be receptive to a modified version of a paper that has been widely disseminated if the submitted version has a different focus (e.g., more emphasis on methods, more sophisticated analytic approach, or a discussion of developments that have transpired since the initial dissemination). The key point is to let the editor know about any dissemination that will have, or is likely to have, occurred before the article goes through the Quarterly's peer-review and editorial processes. Authors should also include copies of other related papers that might be seen as covering the same material.
Failure to disclose prior dissemination could preclude publication in The Milbank Quarterly or, if already published, could result in a notice in the journal about the failure and may result in a retraction of the article.
Copyright Transfer
The Milbank Quarterly requires each author of an article accepted for publication to transfer copyright to the Milbank Memorial Fund, except for authors who cannot transfer copyright because they were employees of the U.S. federal government when the work described in the manuscript was conducted. Requests for permission to reprint copyrighted material are almost always honored by the Fund if the corresponding author also gives permission.
Authors will be provided with a PDF file corresponding to the published version of their article. Copyright in the article rests with the Milbank Memorial Fund. The Milbank Memorial Fund grants back to the corresponding author the right to share the PDF file with colleagues for noncommercial use.