Author Guidelines

Sections

1. SUBMISSION
2. AIMS AND SCOPE
3. MANUSCRIPT CATEGORIES AND REQUIREMENTS
4. PREPARING THE SUBMISSION
5. EDITORIAL POLICIES AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
6. AUTHOR LICENCING
7. PUBLICATION PROCESS AFTER ACCEPTANCE
8. POST PUBLICATION
9. EDITORIAL OFFICE CONTACT DETAILS

1. SUBMISSION

Authors should kindly note that submission implies that the content has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere except as a brief abstract in the proceedings of a scientific meeting or symposium.

New submissions should be made via the Research Exchange submission portal. Should your manuscript proceed to the revision stage, you will be directed to make your revisions via the same submission portal. You may check the status of your submission at anytime by logging on to submission.wiley.com and clicking the “My Submissions” button. For technical help with the submission system, please review our FAQs or contact submissionhelp@wiley.com.

2. AIMS AND SCOPE

The Australian Journal of Rural Health publishes Australian, New Zealand and international articles in the field of rural health. It facilitates the formation of interdisciplinary networks, so that rural health professionals can form a cohesive group and work together for the advancement of rural practice, in all health disciplines. The Journal aims to establish a national and international reputation for the quality of its scholarly discourse and its value to rural health professionals. All articles, unless otherwise identified, are peer reviewed by at least two researchers expert in the field of the submitted paper.

'Rural health is an important and dynamic concern in Australia and around the world. The Australian Journal of Rural Health provides a wonderful mix of practical and academic medical, nursing and other health articles. This provides interesting and useful reading for those in rural practice and those involved in rural health care education, planning and development internationally. I look forward to each issue.'

James T. B. Rourke, MD, CCFP(EM), MCISc, FCFP, FAAFP, Rural Family Physician, Goderich, Ontario, Canada.

3. MANUSCRIPT CATEGORIES AND REQUIREMENTS

1. Review Papers

a. Systematic review and meta-analysis review papers

Word limit: 5,000 words maximum (excluding abstract and references)
Abstract: No more than 250 words; must be structured using the headings: Introduction, Objective, Design, Findings, Discussion, Conclusion.
Two boxed lists: Must include ‘What this paper adds’ & ‘What is already known on this subject’
References: Maximum of 50 references
Figures/Tables: Total of no more than 6 figures and tables
Description: These papers should report research where the evidence is found in published research papers, preferably from the peer-reviewed literature. Reviews may adopt systematic review methodology of sets of quantitative, or qualitative, or qualitative and quantitative papers. The reviews should address a clear and important question of relevance for rural health and should have a clear method that includes both search strategies and a clear description of the analyses performed. Reviews should be up to date and there should be enough evidence in the method for the reader to replicate the search and the analysis. There are a number of published papers that describe publication guidelines for reviews such as PRISMA and STARLITE, and outline how to systematically review qualitative research papers. For guidance you may wish to consult equator-network.org, which provides information on a wide range of publication guidelines. We aim to publish one review paper in each edition of the Aust J of Rural Health.

It is strongly recommended you follow the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. You are advised to complete and submit the PRISMA checklist with your article submission as these are the guidelines reviewers will use when reviewing your paper.

b. Narrative review papers and other types of review papers

Word limit: 5,000 words maximum (excluding abstract and references)
Abstract: No more than 250 words; must be structured using the headings: Introduction, Objective, Design, Findings, Discussion, Conclusion.
Two boxed lists: Must include ‘What this paper adds’ & ‘What is already known on this subject’
References: Maximum of 50 references
Figures/Tables: Total of no more than 6 figures and tables

The journal welcomes and accepts other forms of review papers such as narrative and state-of-the-art reviews, but you must be clear on the type of review you are submitting and adhere to the methodological and format guidelines for that type of review. These are the guidelines reviewers will use when evaluating your paper. We strongly recommend you access articles and guidelines describing the different types of reviews. The following articles are suggested: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x

2. Original Research

a. Standard Reports

Quantitative

Word limit: 4,000 words maximum (excluding abstract, boxed lists and references)
Abstract: Maximum 250 words; must be structured using the headings: Objective, Methods, Design, Setting, Participants, Main outcome measures, Results, Conclusions.
Two boxed lists: Must include ‘What this paper adds’ & ‘What is already known on this subject’
References: Maximum of 40 references
Figures/Tables: Total of no more than 6 figures and tables
Description: These papers should report original research relevant to rural health in a way that is accessible to readers of a general journal. They should follow the IMRaD style (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion). We know that people don’t read long papers unless they’re very interested in the subject, so please try to make your paper concise and make every word count. Think hard about what really needs to be in the paper to get your message across and what can be left out. The secret of readability is short words, short sentences, short paragraphs and white space .

As appropriate, papers should adhere to the following guidelines:

CONSORT guidelines for reports of randomised trials and cluster randomised trials
STROBE statement for observational studies (cohort, case–control, or cross-sectional designs)
STARD guidelines for studies of diagnostic accuracy

Qualitative

Word limit: 5,000 words maximum (excluding abstract, boxed lists and references)
Abstract: Maximum 250 words; must be structured using the headings: Objective, Setting, Participants, Design, Results, Conclusion.
Two boxed lists: Must include ‘What this paper adds’ & ‘What is already known on this subject’
References: Maximum of 40 references
Figures/Tables: Total of no more than 6 figures and tables
Description: These papers should report original research relevant to rural health in a way that is accessible to readers of a general journal. They should follow the COREQ guidelines for qualitative studies. It is often difficult to summarise qualitative data concisely, so please try to make your paper concise and make every word count. Think hard about what really needs to be in the paper to get your message across and what can be left out. This is particularly pertinent to the inclusion of illustrative quotes from transcripts. The secret of readability is short words, short sentences, short paragraphs and white space.

You are strongly encouraged to complete and submit the COREQ checklist as these guidelines will be sent to the reviewers of your paper.

b. Short Reports

For research at early or pilot study stage or research with a small number of participants or small datasets, you might consider submitting a short quantitative or qualitative research report. The format required is the same as for standard reports, however, the word, references and figure limits are reduced.

Word limit: 1,500 words maximum (excluding abstract, boxed lists and references)
Abstract: Maximum 200 words; must be structured using the headings: Objective, Methods, Design, Setting, Participants, Main outcome measures, Results, Conclusions
Two boxed lists: Must include ‘What this paper adds’ & ‘What is already known on this subject’
References: Maximum of 20 references
Figures/Tables: Total of no more than 3 figures and tables
Description: These papers should report original research relevant to rural health in a way that is accessible to readers of a general journal. They should follow the IMRaD style (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion). We know that people don’t read long papers unless they’re very interested in the subject, so please try to make your paper concise and make every word count. Think hard about what really needs to be in the paper to get your message across and what can be left out. The secret of readability is short words, short sentences, short paragraphs and white space.

As appropriate, papers should adhere to the following guidelines:

CONSORT guidelines for reports of randomised trials and cluster randomised trials
STROBE statement for observational studies (cohort, case–control, or cross-sectional designs)
STARD guidelines for studies of diagnostic accuracy

3. Policy analysis

Word limit: 4,000 words maximum (excluding abstract, boxed lists and references)
Abstract: Maximum 250 words. It should summarise the: Aims, Context, Sources, Approach and Conclusions.
Two boxed lists: Must include ‘What this paper adds’ & ‘What is already known on this subject’
References: Maximum of 40 references
Figures/Tables: Total of no more than 6 figures and tables
Description: The AJRH readership includes policymakers, consumers, carers, service managers and health professionals of all disciplines. Authors are advised to keep this readership in mind when writing their article. The paper should comprise (but not necessarily be limited to) the following elements:

Introduction and background
This should state the purpose of the paper. Normally introductions include a short, relevant literature review, and pertinent background context and information.
Outline of the project or issue
What was the methodological approach: what was done, how and why?
Observations and outcomes
The main findings of the analysis should be highlighted and critically discussed.
Discussion
What is the significance of the findings? How does this articulate with existing research, policy and practice? What are the limitations of the analysis? What are the implications for research, policy and practice?
Conclusion
The conclusion contains a brief summary of the major findings or the conclusion from the policy analysis. Do not include new information, nor summarise the manuscript, do not reiterate the abstract.
Presentation
Note: It is not necessary to use the subheadings above, as they are a guide only. However, the text should be broken up under subheadings that provide a logical structure for your work and argument. Articles should present a balanced view of the findings and evidence. They should not selectively analyse or cite evidence that supports a particular view.
Contributors and sources
Please provide a 100–150 word supplementary paragraph (excluded from the word count) to explain the article’s background and the authors’ background. It should include the relevant experience, background and expertise of each author and his or her contribution to the paper.

4. Commentary

Word limit: 2,500 words maximum (excluding abstract, boxed lists and references)
Abstract: 250 words. It should summarise the:  Aims, Context, Approach, and Conclusion
Two boxed lists: Not required
References: Maximum of 25 references
Figures/Tables: Total of no more than 3 figures and tables
Description: Commentaries are scholarly articles about issues of relevance to rural health. They should present a logically argued, coherent communication about a rural health issue. They must be critical in nature, refer to the peer-reviewed and other literature and include discussion of the implications on new policies, legislation or directions. They can also provide commentary or describe advances in rural health practice, research or service delivery. They should always be supported by peer-reviewed scholarship, government or college reports or professional guidelines or statements.

Commentary papers can take one of three forms:

1. Current issues pertinent to rural health
2. A response to a recently published Aust J of Rural Health article
3. Current debates and controversies. (The journal particularly welcomes dual articles on a topic in which the two papers present an opposing view.)

Presentation
The text should be broken up under subheadings that provide a logical narrative structure. Articles can present a particular argument and view. However, the argument should be evidence-based and refer to policy, research and peer-reviewed literature to support the view presented.
The citations and references should use the Vancouver style.
Contributors and sources
We ask for a 100–150 word supplementary paragraph (excluded from the word count) to explain the article’s background. It should include the relevant background and expertise of each author and outline their contribution to the paper.

5. Quality improvement report

Word limit: 2,000 words maximum (excluding abstract and references)
Abstract: Maximum 200 words; must be structured using the headings: Problem, Setting, Key measures for improvement, Strategies for change, Effects of change, Lessons learnt.
Two boxed lists: Must include ‘What this paper adds’ & ‘What is already known on this subject’
References: Maximum of 20 references
Figures/Tables: Total of no more than 4 figures and tables
Description: We welcome interesting and important descriptive reports on how people try to change and improve health services. Such reports do not contain original science and do not fit easily into the standard IMRaD format for research papers. As such, we recommend you consult the SQUIRE standards for quality improvement project reporting. Quality Improvement Reports are to be structured in accord with the SQUIRE standards.

• Introduction. Why did you start? Problem description. Available knowledge. Rationale. Specific aims.
• Method. What did you do? Context. Intervention(s). Study of the intervention(s). Measures. Analysis. Ethical considerations.
• Results. What did you find?
• Discussion. What does it mean? Summary. Interpretation. Limitations. Conclusions.
• Other information. Funding.

Note. We strongly recommend that you consult and follow the SQUIRE 2.0 guidelines and check your paper against the SQUIRE checklist before submission. These are the standards reviewers will use to evaluate your paper. Failure to conform to this structure may result in rejection or a request to revise and rewrite your paper.

6. Practice insights

Word limit: 1,000 words maximum (excluding references if any cited)
Abstract: Not required
References: Maximum of 10 references
Figures/Tables: Total of no more than 1 figure or table
Description: With the journal’s multi-professional readership in mind, if you have something that would help others to improve practice, or make life easier, how about writing about it and letting the rest of us know? If you know of a colleague who could do this, persuade them to share it with us all.

7. Letter to editor

Word limit: 1,000 words maximum (excluding references)
Abstract: Not required
References: Maximum of 10 references, including the related AJRH article
Figures/Tables: Not relevant

Letters should:
• Relate to rural health issues, or
• Relate to recent articles published in the Aust J of Rural Health
• Be signed by all the authors
• Be accompanied by each author’s current appointment and full address, and a phone number and email address for the corresponding author
Please note that letters will be edited and may be shortened. Unpublished letters may be sent to the author of the article to which they refer.

 

4. PREPARATION OF THE MANUSCRIPT

Be concise
We know that people don’t read long papers unless they’re very interested in the subject, so please try to make your paper concise and make every word count. Think hard about what really needs to be in the paper to get your message across and what can be left out. The secret of readability is short words, short sentences, short paragraphs and white space.

Format and Style

• The main text file should be prepared using Microsoft Word, using 1.5 line spacing.
• Manuscripts should follow the style of the Vancouver agreement detailed in the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ revised ‘Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication’, as presented at https://www.icmje.org/. The journal uses Australian spelling and authors should therefore follow the latest edition of the Macquarie Dictionary.
•  Use s-spellings: minimise, organisation, capitalisation.
• All measurements must be given in SI units as outlined in the latest edition of Units, Symbols and Abbreviations: A Guide for Medical and Scientific Editors and Authors (Royal Society of Medicine Press, London).
• Abbreviations should be used sparingly and only where they help the reader by reducing repetition of long, technical terms. Initially use the word in full, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses. Thereafter use the abbreviation.
• Drugs should be referred to by their generic names, rather than brand names.

Capitalisation
Please use correct style for capitalisation. Guidelines can be found in the Australian Government Style Manual 2020

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and other First Nations Peoples - Terminology
The correct and respectful use of language is always important. This is particularly the case when referring to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities. Before submitting your article, ensure your use of language is culturally appropriate. We recommend checking the AIATSIS guidelines before submitting a paper. All authors submitting articles relating to Indigenous and/or First Nation peoples’ health should complete and upload the NHMRC CREATE Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Quality Appraisal Tool on submission.

Parts of the Manuscript
The manuscript should be submitted in separate files: title page; main text file; figures.

Title page
The title page should contain:

I. A short informative title that contains the major key words. The title should not contain abbreviations
II. The full names of all contributing authors; each author’s name should be followed by that author’s single highest abbreviated qualification (e.g., PhD)
III. The author’s institutional affiliations at which the work was carried out
IV. The full postal and email address, plus telephone number, of the author to whom correspondence about the manuscript should be sent
V. In keeping with the latest guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, each author’s contribution to the paper should be described (see below Author Contributions: CRediT)
VI. A disclosure statement e.g., funding of research, or, if research has been previously published in part or in full elsewhere. (For details on what to include in the disclosure statement, refer to the section ‘Disclosure’ below.)
VII. Acknowledgements and
VIII. Any conflict of interest.

The present address of any author, if different from that where the work was carried out, should be supplied in a footnote.

For details on how to quantify each author’s contribution, refer to the section ‘Authorship and Acknowledgments’ below.

Acknowledgements: The source of financial grants and other funding should be acknowledged, including a frank declaration of the authors’ industry links and affiliations. The contribution of colleagues or institutions should also be acknowledged. Thanks to anonymous reviewers are not appropriate.

Main text

Manuscripts can be uploaded either as a single document (containing the main text, tables and figures), or with figures and tables provided as separate files. Should your manuscript reach revision stage, figures and tables must be provided as separate files. The main manuscript file can be submitted in Microsoft Word (.doc or .docx) or LaTex (.tex) format.

If submitting your manuscript file in LaTex format via Research Exchange, select the file designation “Main Document – LaTeX .tex File” on upload. When submitting a Latex Main Document, you must also provide a PDF version of the manuscript for Peer Review. Please upload this file as “Main Document - LaTeX PDF.” All supporting files that are referred to in the Latex Main Document should be uploaded as a “LaTeX Supplementary File.”

Your main document file should include:

• A short informative title containing the major key words. The title should not contain abbreviations
• The full names of the authors with institutional affiliations where the work was conducted, with a footnote for the author’s present address if different from where the work was conducted;
• Acknowledgments;
• Abstract structured (intro/methods/results/conclusion) or unstructured
• Up to seven keywords;
• Practitioner Points (optional) Authors will need to provide no more than 3 ‘key points’, written with the practitioner in mind, that summarize the key messages of their paper to be published with their article.
• Main body: formatted as introduction, materials & methods, results, discussion, conclusion
• References;
• Tables (each table complete with title and footnotes);
• Figures: Figure legends must be added beneath each individual image during upload AND as a complete list in the text.

Abstract and Keywords
Articles must have a structured abstract/summary that ensures that essential information is included in the abstract. Note that abstract and summary guidelines vary according to submission category. Check your category for specific guidelines. Generally, the structured subheadings to be used are:

Objective – give the broad aim of the study.
Design – case–control, randomised, double-anonymised etc.
Setting – primary care, outpatient clinic, tertiary referral centre.
Participants – numbers, sex, ethnic group if appropriate and clear definitions.
Interventions – delete this heading if there were none.
Main outcome measure(s) – this is often little more than a more specific restatement of the objective, and sometimes there may be multiple outcome measures. But if, for example, the objective was to determine whether drug x was effective in prophylaxis of asthma, then the main outcome measures might be peak expiratory flow measure and the presence of symptoms.
Results – give numerical data rather than vague statements that drug x produced a better response than drug y. Favour confidence intervals over P values and never give a lone P value without the numerical data on which it is based.
Conclusion – important because it is often all that people read. Make sure that it doesn’t make any claims that are not in the paper and that it reflects accurately the paper’s conclusions. The first few items – objective, design, setting – may be note-like and need not form full sentences. However, the limited data we have suggests that readers prefer reading proper narrative prose with verbs and articles, so the results and conclusion sections at least should be written properly.

Keywords – five keywords are to be supplied below the abstract and should be words that are not in the manuscript title.

'What this paper adds' boxes
Please produce two boxes offering a thumbnail sketch of what your paper adds to the literature, for readers who would like an overview without reading the whole paper. It should be divided into two sets of dot points.

1: What is already known on this subject?
In two or three dot points explain:
• What the state of scientific knowledge was in this area before you did your study and
• Why this study needed to be done.
It’s important to be as clear and specific as possible. For example you might say:
‘Numerous observational studies have suggested that tea drinking may be effective in treating depression, but until now evidence from randomised controlled trials has been lacking/the only randomised controlled trial to date was underpowered/was carried out in an unusual population/did not use internationally accepted outcome measures/used too low a dose of tea.’ or:
‘Evidence from trials of tea therapy in depression have given conflicting results. Although Sjogren and Smith conducted a systematic review in 1995, a further 15 trials have been carried out since then ...’

2: What does this study add?
In two or three dot points give a simple answer to the question, ‘What do we now know as a result of this study that we did not know before?’
For example, ‘This randomised study suggests that tea drinking has no overall benefit in depression’.
Be brief, succinct, specific, and accurate.
You might use the last dot point to summarise any implications for practice, research, policy, or public health. For example, your study might have:
Asked and answered a new question (one whose relevance has only recently become clear), contradicted a belief, dogma, or previous evidence, provided a new perspective on something that is already known, in general provided evidence of higher methodological quality for a message which is already known.

Text
Authors should use subheadings to divide the sections of their manuscript. You should use the headings suggested for the type article you are submitting. Refer to the MANUSCRIPT CATEGORIES AND REQUIREMENTS above

References
References should follow Vancouver style, meaning all references should be numbered consecutively in order of appearance and should be as complete as possible. In text citations should cite references in consecutive order using Arabic superscript numerals. Sample references follow: 

Journal article
1. King VM, Armstrong DM, Apps R, Trott JR. Numerical aspects of pontine, lateral reticular, and inferior olivary projections to two paravermal cortical zones of the cat cerebellum. J Comp Neurol 1998;390(4):537-551

Book
2. Voet D, Voet JG. Biochemistry. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1990.

Tables
Tables should be self-contained and complement, but not duplicate, information contained in the text. Tables should be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals. Each table should be presented on a separate sheet of A4 paper with a comprehensive but concise legend above the table. Tables should be double-spaced and vertical lines should not be used to separate columns. Column headings should be brief, with units of measurement in parentheses; all abbreviations should be defined in footnotes. Footnote symbols: †, ‡, §, ¶, should be used (in that order) and *, **, *** should be reserved for P-values. The table and its legend/footnotes should be understandable without reference to the text.
Figure legends
Legends should be self-explanatory. The legend should incorporate definitions of any symbols used and all abbreviations and units of measurement should be explained so that the figure and its legend are understandable without reference to the text.
Figures
All illustrations (line drawings and photographs) are classified as figures. Figures should be cited in consecutive order in the text. All figures must be supplied in electronic format. Photographs must prevent human subjects being recognised.

Although authors are encouraged to send the highest-quality figures possible, for peer-review purposes, a variety of formats, sizes, and resolutions is accepted.

Click here for the basic figure requirements for figures submitted with manuscripts for initial peer review, as well as the more detailed post-acceptance figure requirements.

Wiley Author Resources

Manuscript Preparation Tips: Wiley has a range of resources for authors preparing manuscripts for submission available here. In particular, authors may benefit from referring to Wiley’s best practice tips on Writing for Search Engine Optimisation.

Editing, Translation, and Formatting Support: Wiley Editing Services can greatly improve the chances of a manuscript being accepted. Offering expert help in English language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure preparation, Wiley Editing Services ensures that the manuscript is ready for submission.

5. EDITORIAL POLICIES AND CONTENT CONSIDERATIONS

Peer Review and Acceptance Criteria

Australian Journal of Rural Health is the official English journal of the National Rural Health Alliance Inc. and publishes papers on all aspects of rural health practice, research and education. The journal is multidisciplinary, aiming to facilitate the formation of interdisciplinary networks so that rural health professionals can form cohesive groups and work together for the advancement of rural practice, in all health disciplines. The content of the journal includes papers of the following type: Review Papers, Original Research Papers, Short Reports, Policy Analysis Papers, Commentary, Quality Improvement Reports, Practice Pointers, Letters to the Editor, Obituaries.

The Editor encourages new and inexperienced authors to contribute papers. Help and advice will be given to enable publication in this quality journal.

AJRH is participating in a pilot of the NISO Working Group on Peer Review Terminology. Standardising the terminology across journals and publishers used to describe peer review practices helps make the peer review process for articles and journals more transparent, and it will enable the community to better assess and compare peer review practices between different journals. More information can be found here.

• Identity transparency: Single anonymised
• Reviewer interacts with: Editor
• Review information published: None
• Post publication commenting: Open

The acceptance criteria for all papers concern the quality and originality of the research and its significance to our readership. Material should be up to date. Authors should have reviewed the literature and should refer to recently published material in the peer reviewed literature if it is relevant. All manuscripts are peer reviewed by two anonymous reviewers and the Editor (unless specifically stated in the case of invited commentaries or editorials). The Editorial Board reserves the right to refuse any material for publication. Final acceptance or rejection rests with the Editorial Board.

Manuscripts should be written so that they can be understood by the professional reader who is not a specialist in the particular field. Where contributions are judged as acceptable for publication on the basis of scientific content, the Editor or the Publisher reserves the right to modify typescripts to eliminate ambiguity and repetition and improve communication between the author and reader.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Principles for Publication of Research Involving Human Subjects

Before being considered for review, all research papers must show evidence of ethics committee consideration and (if applicable) approval. This should include the correspondence or approval code and number. Manuscripts must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the Declaration of Helsinki (as revised in Brazil 2013). It should also state clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent before their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects involved in the study should be omitted.

Authorship

Advice on authorship for the AJRH is summarised here . The journal adheres to the definition of authorship set up by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria: i) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; ii) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; iii) Final approval of the version to be published; and iv) Agreement 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. Contributors who do not qualify as authors should be mentioned under ‘Acknowledgements’.

Author Contributions

For all articles, the journal mandates the CRediT (Contribution Roles Taxonomy). For more information, please here.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest Statement

Authors must declare any financial support or relationships that may pose a potential conflict of interest. This includes financial arrangements authors have with a company whose product figures prominently in the submitted manuscript or with a company making a competing product. If the article is accepted for publication, a conflict of interest statement may be included in the paper if the Editor deems it appropriate. For further information on what may constitute a conflict of interest, please refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website at http://publicationethics.org/cases.

Managing submissions received from members of the Editorial Board

Members of the Editorial Board who submit manuscripts to the journal are blinded to the peer review process and excluded from editorial decision-making on their own work to minimise bias.

Best Practice Research Guidelines

Authors are encouraged to ensure their studies conform to accepted best practice guidelines, such as the:

• CONSORT guidelines for reports of randomised trials and cluster randomised trials
• STROBE statement for observational studies (cohort, case–control, or cross-sectional designs)
• PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses
• COREQ guidelines for qualitative research
• SQUIRE guidelines for quality improvement studies

These and others can be found at https://www.equator-network.org/. 

Data Sharing and Data Accessibility

The journal encourages authors to share the data and other artefacts supporting the results in the paper by archiving them in an appropriate public repository. Authors should include a data accessibility statement, including a link to the repository they have used, so this statement can be published alongside their paper.

Preprint Policy

Please find the Wiley preprint policy here.

This journal accepts articles previously published on preprint servers.

The Australian Journal of Rural Health will consider for review articles previously available as preprints. Authors may also post the submitted version of a manuscript to a preprint server at any time. Authors are requested to update any pre-publication versions with a link to the final published article.

Publication Ethics

This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Note this journal uses iThenticate’s CrossCheck software to detect instances of overlapping and similar text in submitted manuscripts. Read the Top 10 Publishing Ethics Tips for Authors here. Wiley’s Publication Ethics Guidelines can be found at https://authorservices.wiley.com/ethics-guidelines/index.html. 

6. AUTHOR LICENCING

If a paper is accepted for publication, the author identified as the corresponding author will receive an email prompting them to log in to Author Services, where, via the Wiley Author Licensing Service (WALS), they will be required to complete a copyright licence agreement on behalf of all authors of the paper.

Authors may choose to publish under the terms of the journal’s standard copyright agreement, or OnlineOpen under the terms of a Creative Commons Licence.

General information regarding licensing and copyright is available here. To review the Creative Commons Licence options offered under OnlineOpen, please click here. (Note that certain funders mandate a particular type of CC licence be used; to check this please click here.)

Self-Archiving Definitions and Policies: Note that the journal’s standard copyright agreement allows for self-archiving of different versions of the article under specific conditions. Please click here for more detailed information about self-archiving definitions and policies.

Open Access fees: Authors who choose to publish using OnlineOpen will be charged a fee. A list of Article Publication Charges for Wiley journals is available here.

Funder Open Access: Please click here for more information on Wiley’s compliance with specific Funder Open Access Policies.

7. PUBLICATION PROCESS AFTER ACCEPTANCE

Accepted Article Received in Production
When an accepted article is received by Wiley’s production team, the corresponding author will receive an email asking them to login or register with Wiley Author Services. The author will be asked to sign a publication licence at this point.

Proofs
Authors will receive an e-mail notification with a link and instructions for accessing HTML page proofs online. Page proofs should be carefully proofread for any copyediting or typesetting errors. Online guidelines are provided within the system. No special software is required; all common browsers are supported. Authors should also make sure that any renumbered tables, figures, or references match text citations and that figure legends correspond with text citations and actual figures. Proofs must be returned within 48 hours of receipt of the email. Return of proofs via e-mail is possible in the event that the online system cannot be used or accessed.

Early View
The journal offers rapid speed to publication via Wiley’s Early View service. Early View articles are complete full-text articles published online in advance of their publication in a printed issue. Early View articles are complete and final. They have been fully reviewed, revised and edited for publication, and the authors’ final corrections have been incorporated. Because they are in final form, no changes can be made after online publication. Early View articles are given a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), which allows the article to be cited and tracked before allocation to an issue. After print publication, the DOI remains valid and can continue to be used to cite and access the article.

8. POST PUBLICATION

Access and Sharing

When the article is published online: 

• The author receives an email alert (if requested).
• The link to the published article can be shared through social media.
• The author will have free access to the paper (after accepting the Terms & Conditions of use, they can view the article).
• The corresponding author and co-authors can nominate up to ten colleagues to receive a publication alert and free online access to the article.

Print copies of the article can now be ordered (instructions are sent at the proofing stage or are available online at www.sheridan.com/wiley/eoc).

To find out how to best promote an article, click here.

Measuring the Impact of an Article

Wiley also helps authors measure the impact of their research through specialist partnerships with Kudos and Altmetric.

9. EDITORIAL OFFICE CONTACT DETAILS

For further assistance please contact the editorial office:
Australian Journal of Rural Health
155 Cremorne Street, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia
Email: ajr.eo@wiley.com
Tel: (61) 9274 3127

Author Guidelines updated 1 March 2021