Authors

BMJ Quality & Safety adheres to the highest standards concerning its editorial policies on publication ethics, scientific misconduct, consent and peer review criteria. To view all BMJ Journal policies please refer to the BMJ Author Hub policies page.

BMJ Quality & Safety is a Plan S compliant Transformative Journal. Transformative Journals are one of the compliance routes offered by cOAlition S funders, such as Wellcome, WHO and UKRI. Find out more about Transformative Journals and Plan S compliance on our Author Hub.

Articles are published under an exclusive licence or non-exclusive licence for UK Crown employees or where BMJ has agreed CC BY applies. For US Federal Government officers or employees acting as part of their official duties, the terms are as stated in accordance with our licence terms. Authors or their employers retain copyright. Open access articles can be reused under the terms of the relevant Creative Commons licence to facilitate reuse of the content; please refer to the BMJ Quality & Safety Author Licence for the applicable Creative Commons licences. More information on copyright and authors’ rights.

When publishing in BMJ Quality & Safety, authors choose between three licence types – exclusive licence granted to BMJ, CC-BY-NC and CC-BY (Creative Commons open access licences require payment of an article processing charge). As an author you may wish to post your article in an institutional or subject repository, or on a scientific social sharing network. You may also link your published article to your preprint (if applicable). What you can do with your article, without seeking permission, depends on the licence you have chosen and the version of your article. Please refer to the BMJ author self archiving and permissions policies page for more information.

Preprints foster openness, accessibility and collaboration by allowing authors to make their findings immediately available to the research community and receive feedback on an article before it is submitted to a journal for formal publication. BMJ fully supports and encourages the archiving of preprints in any recognised, not-for-profit server such as medRxiv. BMJ does not consider the posting of an article in a dedicated preprint repository to be prior publication.

Preprints are reports of work that have not been peer-reviewed; Preprints should therefore not be used to guide clinical practice, health-related behaviour or health policy. For more information, please refer to our Preprint policy page.

BMJ and the Health Foundation are committed to ensuring that all good quality research is published. Our article transfer service helps authors find the best journal for their research while providing an easy and smooth publication process. As part of this service, once authors agree to transfer their manuscript all versions, supplementary files and peer reviewer comments are automatically transferred; without the need to resubmit or reformat. Authors who submit to the BMJ Quality & Safety and are rejected will be offered the option of transferring to BMJ Open Quality.

BMJ Open Quality is the open access companion journal to BMJ Quality & Safety. It is indexed by PubMed Central, DOAJ, Google Scholar, Scopus, and covers all content in healthcare improvement work. The journal publishes original articles considered by peer reviewers to be coherent and technically sound, ensuring that the latest research is disseminated rapidly to a global audience. Find out more about BMJ Open Quality. Please note that the article transfer service does not guarantee acceptance but you should receive a quicker initial decision on your manuscript. Contact the Article Transfer Service Manager for more information or assistance.

Please read this section carefully before submitting your paper. BMJ Quality & Safety operates triple-anonymised peer review which requires authors to submit an anonymous version of their manuscript file. The manuscript file should be anonymous and should NOT include:

• Any author names (including file path in the document footer)
• Author institution details
• Author contact details
• Acknowledgements
• Competing interests (if declared)
• Ethics approval statements that refer to your institution

Please ensure that tracked changes are switched off if previously used. The file will automatically be converted to PDF once uploaded through the submission system and will be available to the reviewers.

If the file is not completely anonymised, your manuscript may be returned to you. If you have any questions about triple anonymised review please do not hesitate to contact the info.bmjqs@bmj.com. Please do NOT remove, redact or in any way anonymise references in the manuscript, including to citations your own previous work. We realize that an astute reviewer will be able to figure out who you are if you refer to your previous work, but reviewers often need to see citations supporting statements in your manuscript, especially ones that relate to the methods or help interpret your findings. For more details on the peer review process, please consult the BMJ Author Hub – the peer review process.

During submission, authors can choose to have their article published open access for 4,080 GBP (exclusive of VAT for UK and EU authors). Publishing open access has multiple benefits including wider reach, faster impact and increased citation and usage. There are no submission, page or colour figure charges.

If authors choose to publish their article open access, an APC waiver may be available. Before applying for an APC waiver please consider: (1) Does your institution have an open access agreement with BMJ? If it does, then this may cover all or part of the APC for your article. Check BMJ’s open access agreements page to find out whether your institution is a member and what discounts you may be entitled to. (2) Have you received funding from a funder with an open access mandate or policy that covers paying APCs? If so, BMJ expects that the APC will be paid in full. If neither (1) nor (2) above apply then consider (3) Are all the authors of your article based in low-income countries*? If so, you are eligible to apply for a full or partial waiver from BMJ. Visit our author hub to learn more about our waivers policy and how to request one. Please note that regardless of the funding situation, authors can still choose to publish with us at no cost, and articles will be made available to our subscribers. *This list is reviewed annually and is based upon HINARI Core Offer Groups A and B, and the World Bank Country and Lending Groups.

BMJ Quality & Safety adheres to BMJ’s Tier 3 data policy. We strongly encourage that data generated by your research that supports your article be made available as soon as possible, wherever legally and ethically possible. All research articles must contain a Data Availability Statement. For more information and FAQs, please see BMJ’s full Data Sharing Policy page.<

BMJ Quality & Safety mandates ORCID iDs for the submitting author at the time of article submission; co-authors and reviewers are strongly encouraged to also connect their ScholarOne accounts to ORCID. We strongly believe that the increased use and integration of ORCID iDs will be beneficial for the whole research community. Please find more information about ORCID and BMJ’s policy on our Author Hub.

A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in BMJ Quality & Safety; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed. Find out more about responses and how to submit a response.

Please review the below article type specifications including the required article lengths, illustrations, table limits and reference counts. The word count excludes the title page, abstract, tables, acknowledgements, contributions and references. Manuscripts should be as succinct as possible. Please read the section on triple-anonymised peer review carefully before submitting your manuscript to BMJ Quality & Safety. For further support when making your submission please refer to the resources available on the BMJ Author Hub. Here you will find information on writing and formatting your research through to the peer review process. You may also wish to use the language editing and translation services provided by BMJ Author Services. For research articles of any type, authors are recommended to look at the EQUATOR network to identify any reporting guidelines that are relevant to their article. Particular guidelines that might be relevant to papers submitted to BMJ Q&S include the various SQUIRE (quality improvement reports), STROBE (observational studies), COREQ (for interviews and focus groups), SUNDAE (patient decision aids), and the specific CONSORT statement extensions for different types of randomised controlled trials commonly seen in improvement science (cluster RTCs, stepped wedge trials, pilot and feasibility trials, and others). For statistical reporting in any paper, we recommend that authors examine the SAMPL guidelines for statistical reporting. The principles described in these guidelines will help authors determine what to describe in their statistical analysis section as well as how to report their statistical results. There is additional guidance for some frequently used specific types of analysis.

Original Articles report research and studies relevant to quality of health care. They may cover any aspect, from clinical or therapeutic intervention, to promotion, to prevention. They should usually present evidence indicating that problems of quality of practice may exist, or suggest indications for changes in practice, or contribute towards defining standards or developing measures of outcome. Alternatively, they should contribute to developing approaches to measuring quality of care in routine practice. The journal is interprofessional and welcomes articles from anyone whose work is relevant, including health professionals, managers, practitioners, researchers, policy makers, or information technologists. Research reviews that systematically synthesise evidence (e.g. Systematic reviews, Meta-analysis, Scoping reviews, Mixed methods reviews, etc) should be submitted as Systematic reviews. Research checklists should be uploaded during the submission process. Guidance and forms are available from EQUATOR. If these are not applicable to your research please state the reason in your cover letter.

Word count: 3000-4000 words Title: to include some indication of the study design Structured abstract: typically 250-300 words in length. We will allow up to 400 words additional length reflects adherence to recommended elements from reporting guidelines (e.g., CONSORT) Tables/Illustrations: up to 5 tables or illustrations Appendices: Those that present additional methodological details or other relevant materials that may be of interest to readers can also be included with the intention of aiding peer reviewers or providing them as online material for interested readers. Please include the key messages of your article after your abstract using the following headings. This section should be no more than 3-5 sentences and should be distinct from the abstract; be succinct, specific and accurate.

• What is already known on this topic – summarise the state of scientific knowledge on this subject before you did your study and why this study needed to be done
• What this study adds – summarise what we now know as a result of this study that we did not know before
• How this study might affect research, practice or policy – summarise the implications of this study

This will be published as a summary box after the abstract in the final published article.

This series covers widely known topics, tools or concepts that are also commonly misunderstood or misapplied. The launch editorial describes the idea behind the series and provides examples. Past articles in the series include:

• Anhoj J, Hellesoe AB. The problem with red, amber, green: the need to avoid distraction by random variation in organisational performance measures.
• Card AJ. The problem with ‘5 whys’
• Macrae C. The problem with incident reporting
• Peerally MF, Carr S, Waring J, Dixon-Woods M. The problem with root cause analysis
• Reed JE, Card AJ. The problem with Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles

Word count: 1000-2000 words Tables/Figs: Typically no more than 2 References: Typically fewer than 23 Must include a series of bullet points at the end of the article explaining what it adds to the area of knowledge We previously had recommended to authors that they contact us before writing any potential manuscript for this series in order to vet the topic. We wanted to avoid having authors prepare a paper which, if it did not work out with us, might have no other likely home. However, for the majority of suggested topics, even if they do not quite work for this series, they could work as a Viewpoint. So, if you are unsure if your topic fits this series, simply submit it as a viewpoint and just mention in your cover letter that you had wondered about its suitability for ‘The problem with…’ series. We will never reject or review unfavourably any manuscript simply because it might have been better pitched as a different article type. If a Viewpoint receives favourable reviews but we think it would work better for ‘The problem with’ series, we will simply say so in a decision letter inviting revision.

Essays presenting a perspective or viewpoint on (controversial) issues related to patient safety or healthcare quality. These should add a new argument to a debate or present a new perspective, as well as appropriately draw on the existing international literature.

Word count: up to 2000 words Tables/Figs: no more than 2 References: fewer than 20

This article type includes all research reviews that systematically synthesise evidence (e.g. Systematic reviews, Meta-analysis, Scoping reviews, Mixed methods reviews, etc). They articles should conform to the same guidelines outlined above for Original research. Please include the research type in your title to make the nature of your study clear.

Word count: 3000-4000 words or fewer Structured abstract: typically 250-300 words in length. We will allow up to 400 words additional length reflects adherence to recommended elements from reporting guidelines (e.g., PRISMA) ​ Tables/Figs: up to 5 Detailed search strategies and other supplementary materials will be considered for inclusion as online-only appendices. Please include the key messages of your article after your abstract using the following headings. This section should be no more than 3-5 sentences and should be distinct from the abstract; be succinct, specific and accurate.

• What is already known on this topic – summarise the state of scientific knowledge on this subject before you did your study and why this study needed to be done
• What this study adds – summarise what we now know as a result of this study that we did not know before
• How this study might affect research, practice or policy – summarise the implications of this study

This will be published as a summary box after the abstract in the final published article.

We will consider narrative reviews of general topic areas within patient safety , as opposed to structured, systematic reviews that address the effectiveness of specific interventions. E.g., an overview of the state of the science in teamwork training or assessments of patient safety culture. Narrative reviews can also address methodological topics, such as the use of ethnographic methods in patient safety research or a primer on run charts. Research reviews that systematically synthesise evidence (e.g. Systematic reviews, Meta-analysis, Scoping reviews, Mixed methods reviews, etc) are classified by the journal as Systematic reviews and must be submitted as such.

Word count: up to 3000 words Abstract: unstructured, approximately 275 words

Articles that aim to advance research methodology or reporting standards related to patient safety and quality improvement. These articles are distinct from Primers or How to type articles on meant to provide a useful resource for general readers (such reviews fall under the Narrative Review category above)

Word count: 3000 words or less Abstract: unstructured, approximately 275 words Please include the key messages of your article after your abstract using the following headings. This section should be no more than 3-5 sentences and should be distinct from the abstract; be succinct, specific and accurate.

• What is already known on this topic – summarise the state of scientific knowledge on this subject before you did your study and why this study needed to be done
• What this study adds – summarise what we now know as a result of this study that we did not know before
• How this study might affect research, practice or policy – summarise the implications of this study

This will be published as a summary box after the abstract in the final published article.

Shorter reports of original research or implementation efforts , similar to Research Letters in major general medical journals.

Word count: 750 words or less Abstract: unstructured, approximately 275 words Tables or Figures: no more than 2 Note: can be up to 1000 words if only 1 (or no) Table/Figure

Editorials commenting on articles published in the same issue of the journal are written or commissioned by the editors. Guidelines will be discussed in advance with invited authors.

Word count: up to 2000 words Tables or Figures: sometimes have 1 table or figure References: up to 20

Articles that describe innovative approaches to imparting trainees or practitioners with concepts or tools related to quality improvement or patient safety. Articles that report a robust evaluation can have the same format as Original Research. For shorter reports, note that the literature already contains numerous descriptions of curricula for students and trainees. To be of interest, the curriculum and, or the evaluation should include some relatively novel element.

Word count: up to 1500 words Abstract: unstructured, approximately 275 words References: up to 20

Authors should contact the editors (via info.bmjqs@bmj.com) before writing a book review.

Word Count: between 750-1000 words.

Authors of improvement reports are strongly encouraged to consult the SQUIRE guidelines(Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence ) regarding the format and content.

Word count: up to 4000 words Structured abstract: typically 250-300 words in length. Please include the key messages of your article after your abstract using the following headings. This section should be no more than 3-5 sentences and should be distinct from the abstract; be succinct, specific and accurate.

• What is already known on this topic – summarise the state of scientific knowledge on this subject before you did your study and why this study needed to be done
• What this study adds – summarise what we now know as a result of this study that we did not know before
• How this study might affect research, practice or policy – summarise the implications of this study

This will be published as a summary box after the abstract in the final published article.

We do not currently accept study protocols or pharmacovigilance studies (e.g. post-approval monitoring for adverse effects of medications). BMJ Open supports the publication of study protocols. And there are several journals with a core focus on pharmacovigilance as well as many specialty journals which also publish research identifying intrinsic side effects from medications used in that specialty. Also, we do not publish studies that seek to establish the intrinsic effectiveness of therapeutic interventions such as drugs, devices, and procedures.

BMJ are willing to consider publishing supplements to regular issues. Supplement proposals may be made at the request of:

• The journal editor, an editorial board member or a learned society may wish to organise a meeting, sponsorship may be sought and the proceedings published as a supplement.
• The journal editor, editorial board member or learned society may wish to commission a supplement on a particular theme or topic. Again, sponsorship may be sought.
• BMJ itself may have proposals for supplements where sponsorship may be necessary.
• A sponsoring organisation, often a pharmaceutical company or a charitable foundation, that wishes to arrange a meeting, the proceedings of which will be published as a supplement.

In all cases, it is vital that the journal’s integrity, independence and academic reputation is not compromised in any way.

For further information on criteria that must be fulfilled, download the supplements guidelines. When contacting us regarding a potential supplement, please include as much of the information below as possible.

• Journal in which you would like the supplement published
• Title of supplement and/or meeting on which it is based
• Date of meeting on which it is based
• Proposed table of contents with provisional article titles and proposed authors
• An indication of whether authors have agreed to participate
• Sponsor information including any relevant deadlines
• An indication of the expected length of each paper Guest Editor proposals if appropriate