EHP Today: Publishing New and Exciting Research Discoveries about How the Environment Influences Our Health

Abstract

Today, more than ever, environmental health researchers want to publish their findings in a high-impact journal that ensures reliability through peer review and makes the new knowledge accessible with the expedience provided by continuous online publication. During peer review, the EHP editorial team adds comments to the authors, directing them to correct deficiencies in reporting, accuracy, and clarity. Full details about our peer review process are available on the Author Hub ( https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/authors/peer-review).

Today, more than ever, environmental health researchers want to publish their findings in a high-impact journal that ensures reliability through peer review and makes the new knowledge accessible with the expedience provided by continuous online publication. Here at Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP), our mission is to publish the most important research findings and perspectives from across the many disciplines that comprise the environmental health sciences and to make that knowledge both accessible and understandable globally.

Evolving continually to ensure that we meet the highest standards of scholarly publishing, while meeting authors’ needs for timeliness, we are pleased to invite you to visit our updated website to learn more about what we publish and how to submit your best work to EHP.

Easy Submission

EHP’s new Author Hub ( https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/authors/hub) provides everything you need to know about how to prepare your manuscript and submit it to EHP, as well as what to expect during and after peer review.

We publish peer-reviewed content in several journal sections, including Original Research Articles, Review Articles that synthesize the state of science and evidence base across the existing literature, and Commentaries and Consensus Statements that define problems and formulate solutions relevant to the most important environmental health issues.

New submissions are evaluated first by our triage team for relevance (Is it within EHP’s scope?), scientific quality (Are there serious deficiencies in design, methods, or analyses?), and importance (Does the work contribute new information that makes an advance in the field?). As a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics, we also check each submission for text that may have been published previously and that may raise any other ethical concerns. Submissions that meet these criteria are sent to an Associate Editor for peer review. In 2018, we received 1,549 new submissions and assigned about 20% to an Associate Editor ( https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/about-ehp/editorial-boards/associate).

Helpful hint: To ensure that your manuscript adheres to contemporary standards for scientific rigor, consult established reporting guidelines specific to all study types [visit the EQUATOR Network ( https://www.equator-network.org/) to see examples]. The Author Hub also includes a list of handy author tips that highlight common pitfalls to avoid.

Rigorous Peer Review

An Associate Editor with expertise specific to the topic of the manuscript then selects qualified reviewers, who are asked to return their detailed evaluation and comments within 14 calendar days. After evaluating the reviewers’ comments, the Associate Editor recommends “Reject” or “Revise” to the Editor. About half of the submissions are sent back to the authors with guidance for revisions, and the others are rejected. During peer review, the EHP editorial team adds comments to the authors, directing them to correct deficiencies in reporting, accuracy, and clarity. Full details about our peer review process are available on the Author Hub ( https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/authors/peer-review).

The EHP Editor-in-Chief sends an acceptance message once the authors have responded to all comments and EHP requirements. The total time for peer review varies by submission, depending on the extent of revisions needed and the authors’ responsiveness to those needs, as well as on the timeliness of Associate Editors and reviewers. We continue to monitor all steps and address delays through improved tracking and regular reminders to authors, reviewers, and Associate Editors.

Real-Time Publication

When the Editor-in-Chief accepts a paper, it is sent automatically for copyediting. Authors can then expect to receive page proofs within about two weeks of acceptance. Final articles are uploaded to the EHP website within a few days of receiving authors’ final corrections. Articles are also automatically sent for indexing in PubMed and entry in PubMed Central.

Author Support after Publication

Newly published articles are listed prominently on the EHP homepage, and a monthly email alert notifies readers that a new issue is available. Be sure to sign up ( https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/action/doUpdateAlertSettings?action=addJournal&journalCode=ehp&referrer=/) on our website to receive these notifications.

Your paper may be featured in a Science Selection, a short summary article written by a professional science writer who synthesizes and comments on the key messages in selected EHP articles. We also publish Curated Collections ( https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/curated-collections) on timely topics. These Collections feature both highly cited papers from the past and recent notable papers. You might even be invited to join a Podcast ( https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/collections/podcasts/trp) to talk about the importance of your work! We use these services to help promote the discovery and use of EHP by authors and readers.

We also facilitate your own outreach efforts through our author-friendly embargo policy. We publish embargoed papers on Wednesdays at 0900 (9:00 A.M. Eastern Standard Time in the United States), and we work closely with you to choose the optimal publication date for your paper.

On behalf of the whole EHP team, we welcome author feedback at any time. Tell us what you think about today’s EHP at [email protected]nih. gov.