Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

  • The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
  • The submission file is in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, or RTF document file format.
  • Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
  • The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
  • The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.

Author Guidelines

Preparing Your Paper

All article types should be accompanied by a title page (first page of the manuscript) containing the following information:

  1. The title of the paper
  2. A short title not exceeding 80 characters for use as a running head
  3. Name of authors
  • Name of institutions at which the research was conducted
  • Name, address and email address of the corresponding author

Research articles

  • Should be around 1500-3000 words, written with the following elements in the order of: title page, abstract, key words, main text – introduction methods, results, discussion, conclusion, acknowledgement, declaration of interests, references, tables with caption (on individual pages), figures with caption (on individual pages), supplementary file (if required).
  • Articles should contain a structured abstract of up to 400 words written with the following elements in the order of: introduction, methods, results, discussion, conclusion.
  • Articles should contain between 3 and 10 keywords.
  • Main text will have an upper limit of 4 tables or figures in total.
  • Additional information about study methods, results, tables and figures may be included in a supplementary file.

Review articles

  • Should be around 1500-2000 words, written with the following elements in the order of title page, abstract, key words, main text – introduction methods, results, discussion, conclusion, acknowledgement, declaration of interests, references, tables with caption (on individual pages), figures with caption (on individual pages), supplementary file (if required).
  • Articles should contain a structured abstract of up to 400 words written with the following elements in the order of: introduction, methods, results, discussion, conclusion.
  • Articles should contain between 3 and 10 keywords.
  • Main text will have an upper limit of 4 tables or figures in total.
  • Additional information about study methods, results, tables and figures may be included in a supplementary file.

Industry perspectives

The Journal accepts manuscripts reporting sustainable initiatives and research from industries relevant to sustainable dermatology and skin care. The following article types are invited:

  • Research articles
  • Case studies

Case studies

  • Should be no more than 1000 words, written with the following elements in the order of title page, abstract, key words, main text – introduction methods, results, discussion, conclusion, acknowledgement, declaration of interests, references, tables with caption (on individual pages), figures with caption (on individual pages), supplementary file (if required)
  • Articles should contain a structured abstract of up to 400 words written with the following elements in the order of: introduction, methods, results, discussion, conclusion
  • Articles should contain between 3 and 10 keywords
  • Main text will have an upper limit of 4 tables or figures in total
  • Additional information about study methods, results, tables and figures may be included in a supplementary file.

Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor will be a brief communication on a topic relevant to the Journal.

  • Should be no more than 500 words, written with the following elements in the order of title page, main text, acknowledgement, declaration of interests, references, tables with caption (on individual pages), figures with caption (on individual pages).
  • Abstracts and supplementary file are not permitted.
  • Main text will have an upper limit of 2 tables or figures in total.

Due to the volume of letters submitted to the Editor it is not always possible to provide feedback on every submission.

Peer Review Process

Sustainable Dermatology in Practice has an editorial board, and its members cover a wide range of disciplines within dermatology and public administration. All the members of the board have an established track record in academic publication and health service experiences.

All articles submitted are peer reviewed.

Initially the articles are reviewed by a member of the editorial board. Manuscripts that fall outside the scope of the Journal, do not conform to Journal house style or of insufficient quality may be rejected at this stage.

Manuscripts are then sent to selected external peer reviewers (Letters to the Editor may be accepted or rejected by an editor without external peer review). Each article is peer reviewed by at least two reviewers and each reviewer will submit their review including comments and a recommendation whether to accept for publication, reject or to request revisions to the articles.

The process for Peer Review is as follows:

  1. Submission of Paper

The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal. In virtually all cases this should be via our online platform.

  1. Editorial Office Assessment

The editorial board checks the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point.

  1. Appraisal by the Editor

The lead Editor checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.

  1. Editor Assigns an Associate Editor

Most Issues of JMER have Associate Editors who handle the peer review. If they do, they would be assigned at this stage.

  1. Invitation to Reviewers

The handling editor sends invitations to individuals they believe would be appropriate reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the minimum number of two reviewers per article is confirmed.

  1. Response to Invitations

Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers.

  1. Review is Conducted

The reviewer sets time aside to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

  1. Journal Evaluates the Reviews

The handling editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.

  1. The Decision is Communicated

The author receives a decision email including any relevant reviewer comments. The Journal operates a single blind review process the author will not see the personal details of the reviewer.

  1. Next Steps

If accepted, the paper is sent to production. If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the handling editor should include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the handling editor.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate gold open access under a CC-BY-NC licence to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Author Publication Charges

There are no charges for authors to publish their work in the journal. Please note the journal publishes article texts, tables, figures and illustrations in black and white colour only.

Self-Archiving and Institutional Repositories

UBP offers a publishing model that enables wide access to academic research, global readership for our authors and ensures the long-term preservation of published content. As a result, we permit authors to archive their contributions to this Journal. This can be either via authors' own websites, or via their institution’s or funding body’s online repository or archive In addition, all published articles are archived by UBP at a number of repositories including LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, PKP and The British Library.

Abstracting and Indexing Information

  • Crossref

Licensing

Content is available on Open Access basis under the following license: CC Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (for more information visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)