Explore our sister journals here.

Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Editorial Policies

Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

JMIR Research Protocols (JRP, ISSN 1929-0748) publishes peer-reviewed, openly accessible research ideas and grant proposals, study and trial protocols, reports of ongoing research, current methods and approaches (Preliminary results from pilot studies, early results, and formative research should now be published in JMIR Formative Research). While the original focus was on the design of medical and health-related research and technology innovations, JMIR Research Protocols publishes research protocols, proposals, and methods in all areas of medical and health research.

  • JRP publishes protocols and grant proposals in all areas of medicine (and their peer-review reports, if available) including wet lab methods
  • JRP is fully open access, with full-text articles deposited in PubMed Central
  • JRP publishes research protocols, grant proposals, and early reports of ongoing and planned work that encourages collaboration and early feedback, and reduces duplication of effort
  • JRP will be a valuable resource for researchers who want to learn about current research methodologies and how to write a winning grant proposal
  • JRP creates an early scientific record for researchers who have developed novel methodologies, software, innovations or elaborate protocols
  • JRP facilitates subsequent publication of results demonstrating that the methodology has already been reviewed, and reduces the effort of writing up the results, as the protocol can be easily referenced
  • JRP demonstrates to reviewers of subsequent results papers that authors followed and adhered to carefully developed and described a priori methods
  • In an effort to make research more reproducible and to avoid problems such as switched outcomes, many journals now require publication of research protocols (even for non-RCTs)
  • Studies whose protocols or grant proposals have been accepted in JRP are "in principle accepted" for subsequent publication of results in other JMIR journals as long as authors adhere to their original protocol, regardless of study results (even if they are negative), reducing publication bias in medicine
  • Published protocols will receive a Registered Report Identifier which will facilitate publication of the subsequent results paper; see What is a Registered Report?
  • Authors publishing their protocols in JRP will receive a 20% discount on the article processing fee if they publish their results in another journal of the JMIR journal family (for example, JMIR for ehealth studies, i-JMR for others)

For more information on why to publish protocols or proposals see our Knowledge Base article Why should I publish my protocol or grant proposal?

JMIR Research Protocols received a Journal Impact Factor of 1.5 according to the latest release of the Journal Citation Reports from Clarivate, 2025.

With a CiteScore of 2.4, JMIR Research Protocols ranks in the 66th percentile (#211 of 636) as a Q2 journal in the field of General Medicine, according to Scopus data.

JMIR Research Protocols is indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), MEDLINE, Sherpa Romeo, DOAJ, Scopus, Web of Science(WoS)/ESCI, and EBSCO.

Section Policies

Editorial

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

RCTs - Protocols/Proposals (eHealth)

Use this section for RCTs which are not peer-reviewed. In your cover letter and the protocol itself, clarify if the RCT is funded/ongoing, or not funded.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

RCTs - Protocols/Proposals (non-eHealth)

Use this section for RCTs which are not peer-reviewed. In your cover letter and the protocol itself, clarify if the RCT is funded/ongoing, or not funded.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

RCTs - Protocols/Proposals (funded, already peer-reviewed, eHealth)

Please upload reviewer comments and confirmation of grant funding. Papers submitted with the original peer review reports will not be externally reviewed to allow for a rapid editorial decision. These papers are eligible for a discounted publication fee.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

RCTs - Protocols/Proposals (funded, already peer-reviewed, non-eHealth)

Please upload reviewer comments and confirmation of grant funding. Papers submitted with the original peer review reports will not be externally reviewed to allow for a rapid editorial decision. These papers are eligible for a discounted publication fee.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

RCTs - Pilots/Feasibility Studies (eHealth)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

RCTs - Pilots/Feasibility Studies (non-eHealth)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Systematic Review Protocols (funded)

Systematic Review Protocols should ideally be following the standards and structure of Cochrane Review Protocols. Note that the protocol must be unpublished - simultaneous publication in the Cochrane Library is not permitted. Include any available peer-review reports as Multimedia Appendix (to be published) or supplementary files (for editors' eyes only). Please upload reviewer comments and confirmation of grant funding. Papers submitted with the original peer review reports will not be externally reviewed to allow for a rapid editorial decision. These papers are eligible for a discounted publication fee.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Systematic Review Protocols

Use this section to submit systematic review protocols where no external peer-reviews are available. Please clarify in the article and cover letter if this is an ongoing or completed review, or if it is just at the idea/seeking funding stage.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Grant Proposals (eHealth, funded)

Please upload reviewer comments and confirmation of grant funding. Papers submitted with the original peer review reports will not be externally reviewed to allow for a rapid editorial decision. These papers are eligible for a discounted publication fee.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Grant Proposals (funded, non-ehealth)

Please upload reviewer comments and confirmation of grant funding. Papers submitted with the original peer review reports will not be externally reviewed to allow for a rapid editorial decision. These papers are eligible for a discounted publication fee.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Proposals (eHealth)

For (currently unfunded) grant proposals, please attach any available peer-review reports, and funding notices. Please indicate whether these can/should be published alongside the article by either uploading them as Multimedia Appendix, or as suppl documents for editors' only.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Proposals (non-eHealth)

For (currently unfunded) grant proposals, please attach any available peer-review reports, and funding notices. Please indicate whether these can/should be published alongside the article by either uploading them as Multimedia Appendix, or as suppl documents for editors' only.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Non-Randomized Studies (funded, eHealth)

Please upload reviewer comments and confirmation of grant funding. Papers submitted with the original peer review reports will not be externally reviewed to allow for a rapid editorial decision. These papers are eligible for a discounted publication fee.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Non-randomized Protocols and Methods (ehealth)

Use this sections for non-randomized study protocols where no external peer-review reports are available.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Non-Randomized Studies (funded, non-eHealth)

Please upload reviewer comments and confirmation of grant funding. Papers submitted with the original peer review reports will not be externally reviewed to allow for a rapid editorial decision. These papers are eligible for a discounted publication fee.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Early Reports

Early reports from ongoing studies.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Formative Studies and eHealth/mHealth Development

Formative studies such as usability studies, reports on technology development etc.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Non-Randomized Study Protocols and Methods (Non-eHealth)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Research Priorities Setting

Editors
  • Gunther Eysenbach, Editor/Publisher, JMIR Publications Inc.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Development of Instruments and Surveys

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Usage Data and Process Outcomes in eHealth Trials

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Methods and Feasibility Studies

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Wet Lab Protocols and Methods

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Bioinformatics Methods and Algorithms

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Statistical Methods

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Hypotheses

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Corrigenda and Addenda

Note that while we do not charge to correct errata that are the responsibility of the publisher, we charge a $190 fee for discretionary corrigenda and addenda (please submit a correction under that section, if it is the authors' responsibility/decision to correct or add information to a already published article).
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

CIHR funded proposals with peer-review reports (Canada)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

NIH funded proposals with peer-review reports (USA)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

MRC funded proposals with peer-review reports (UK)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

NHS funded proposals with peer-review reports (UK)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

NHMRC/ARC funded proposals with peer-review reports (Australia)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Call for Participation, Notices, Announcements, Communications on Ongoing/Planned Research

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Participatory Research Protocols and Proposals

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Business Modelling

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Discretionary Corrigenda

For corrigenda that are discretionary and a result of author-oversight (e.g. corrections in the affiliation etc) we charge a $190 processing fee to make changes in the original paper and publish an erratum. To request a correction, please submit a correction statement (text similar to http://www.jmir.org/2015/3/e76/) as new submission from your author homepage.
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Search Strategies and Retrieval for Systematic Reviews

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Qualitative Methods

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Research in Mouse Models

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Scoping Review Protocols (Funded with Peer-Review-Reports)

Please upload reviewer comments and confirmation of grant funding. Papers submitted with the original peer review reports will not be externally reviewed to allow for a rapid editorial decision. These papers are eligible for a discounted publication fee.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Scoping Review Protocols

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

CIHR eHIPP (eHealth Innovations Partnership Program) Funded Proposals - Youth Mental Health

Submission to this section is open for investigators who have been funded in the eHIPP program http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/48614.html
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

CIHR eHIPP (eHealth Innovations Partnership Program) Funded Proposals - Seniors

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

NIH mHealth - funded projects

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Personal Narratives and Viewpoints on Research Projects

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

SSHRC funded proposals with peer-review reports (Canada)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Theme Issue (2018): Adolescent Medicine Trials Network for HIV/AIDS Interventions (ATN)

Guest Editors:

Ian Holloway, Brian Mustanski, Audrey Pettifor, Rebecca Schnall, Susannah Allison

Editors
  • Susannah Allison, NIMH/NIH
  • Ian Holloway, University of California, Los Angeles
  • Brian Mustanski, Department of Medical Social Sciences Feinberg School of Medicine Northwestern University
  • Audrey Pettifor
  • Rebecca Schnall, Columbia University
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Connected Health Conference 2017

20% discount on the APF for presenters at the Boston Connected Health Conference

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Impact Report and/or Citation Analysis of Existing/Ongoing Projects

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Formative Studies and Development Reports (non-ehealth)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Letters to the Editor

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Expression of Concern

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

JMIR Research Protocols is a peer-reviewed journal. We realize that feedback from reviewers will often not lead to changes in funded grant proposals or protocols because the research is already underway or the protocol cannot be changed by the time of publication. In these cases we ask reviewers to check the manuscript mainly for comprehensibility and to comment on omissions or questions which the authors should add to the Discussion section, addressing reviewer concerns or comments there. Authors submitting already peer-reviewed material (e.g. grant proposals, IRB approvals, etc) are strongly advised to upload these external reviews or evidence for approval of the protocol/grant proposal as supplementary files, as this may speed up the peer-review process. Manuscripts that are already peer-reviewed also benefit from an article processing fee discount.

When we receive a manuscript, the Managing Editor and/or Assistant Editor and/or the Section Editor will first decide whether the manuscript meets the formal criteria specified in the Instructions for Authors and whether it fits within the scope of the journal. When in doubt, the editor will consult other members of the Editorial Board. Manuscripts are then assigned to a section editor, who sends it to 2-4 external experts for peer review. Authors are required to suggest at least 2 peer-reviewers (who do not have an conflict of interest) during the submission process.

Peer reviewing is a single-blind process as the reviewers are aware of the names of the authors. Review feedback is anonymous when shared with the authors during the review process. Reviewers for JMIR journals will not stay anonymous as their names appear at the end of the published article. Authors and reviewers should not contact each other directly to discuss manuscripts or reviews.

Speed of Peer-Review

The Internet is a fast-moving field and we acknowledge the need of our authors to communicate their findings rapidly. We therefore aim to be extremely fast (but still thorough and rigorous) in our peer-review process. For example, the paper "Factors Associated with Intended Use of a Web Site Among Family Practice Patients" (J Med Internet Res 2001;3(2):e17) was reviewed, edited, type-set and published within only 16 days. Including the two weeks time authors needed to revise their article, from first submission to final publication less than 1 month passed. (note that current turnaround times needed to review and edit papers vary, and primarily depend on the quality of the paper upon first submission!). Normally we can not give any guarantees on the speed of peer-review or publication - except if a paper has been submitted under the fast-track scheme, where we guarantee an editorial decision within 20 working days (4 weeks) and publication of the article within 4 weeks after acceptance. We aim for an average decision time of 2 months after submission for papers sent out for peer-review. There will however always be outliers (papers which are more difficult to evaluate)

Current statistics on turnaround time show that on average it takes 50 days to make an initial decision (29 days for fast-tracked papers). (see 1.4 on the stats page)

Criteria for Selection of Manuscripts

Manuscripts should meet the following criteria: the study conducted is ethical (see below); the material is original; the writing is clear; the study methods are appropriate; the data are valid; the conclusions are reasonable and supported by the data; the information is important; and the topic is interesting for our readership. It is recognized that many submissions will describe websites and other Internet-based services. The Editorial Board strongly recommends that authors of such submissions make efforts to evaluate and if possible quantify the impact of these services. Submissions containing evaluations are more likely to be accepted than those containing descriptions of services alone, unless the service includes significant innovation. More descriptive papers - ideally with an evaluation plan - can be submitted to JMIR Res Protoc. Formative research, feasibility and pilot studies should be submitted to JMIR Formative Res (see also Publication Strategy article in our Knowledge Base).

Ethical Issues

Internet-based research raises novel questions of ethics and human dignity (see for example KB article on Ethics in Social Media Research). If human subjects are involved, informed consent, protection of privacy and other human rights are further criteria against which the manuscript will be judged. Papers describing investigations on human subjects must include a statement that the study was approved by the institutional review board, in accordance with all applicable regulations, and that informed consent was obtained after the nature and possible consequences of the studies were explained. JMIR is also encouraging articles devoted to the ethics of Internet-based research. In addition, as mentioned in the conflict of interest article, we will ask authors to disclose any competing interests in relation to their work.

For more information on JMIR Publications' ethics policies, please visit our Knowledge Base (KB), here.

Publication Frequency

This journal publishes articles continuously, i.e. articles are published online as soon as they are available (peer-reviewed and copy-edited).

Open Access Policy

All journals published by JMIR Publications provide immediate open access to their content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge and accelerates research. Copyright is retained by the authors, and articles can be freely used and distributed by others. Articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published by JMIR Publications, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information (authors, title, journal, volume/issue, and article ID), a link to the original publication (URL), and this copyright and license information (“Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution cc-by 4.0”) must be included.

Please do not contact the publisher for “reprint permission” requests because, by default, this permission has already been given by authors (under the condition of attribution of the original source), and the publisher does NOT own the copyright for the material published. The authors retain the copyright, unless stated otherwise.

Author Self-Archiving

In JMIR Research Protocols, authors keep the copyright of their material and are allowed to self-archive their work as HTML or Word file in institutional repositories and on the web, or to republish it for example as a book chapter (note that publication in another scholarly journal - while possible from a copyright point of view - is generally considered duplicate publication and scientific misconduct). In all cases of republication or self-archiving, the original source (citation) should be provided, including the link to the original JMIR Research Protocols article on researchprotocols.org, and a note should be included that the work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY 2.0.

Editorial Board

Editor-in-Chief

Amy Schwartz, MSc, PhD, Scientific Editor at JMIR Publications, Ontario, Canada

Submissions are accepted via our web-based submission system.

Surya Nedunchezhiyan, Managing Editor

Editorial Board Members

Associate Editors

Elisavet Andrikopoulou, PhD

Senior Lecturer in Computer Science, University of Portsmouth, UK

Dr Elisavet Andrikopoulou is a Senior Lecturer in Computer Science at the University of Portsmouth, UK. Her work focuses on health informatics, evaluation, and data visualisation. Her PhD evaluated mhealth for people with long-term conditions. She advocates for interdisciplinary research and equitable access to knowledge, fostering collaboration across academic, healthcare, and industry sectors. Dr Andrikopoulou serves as Publication Officer for the European Federation for Medical Informatics (EFMI) and as Publications and Communications Lead for the Faculty of Health and Care at the British Computing Society (BCS).

Sundas P. Khan, MD

Quantitative Methodologist, Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, USA

Dr. Khan is a Quantitative Methodologist at the Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness, and Safety, a joint research lab between Michael E. DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center and Baylor College of Medicine.  After completing her medical degree, Dr. Khan joined the Institute of Health System Science at Northwell Health in Manhasset, New York and managed research studies in evidence-based medicine, usability testing, and health information technology. Dr. Khan gained experience in coordinating, planning, and supporting the development of research projects. She especially took the time to understand the field of usability testing and served as a content expert on multiple federally funded projects and authored manuscripts on the topic. In addition, Dr. Khan has presented abstracts and led workshops on usability testing at national conferences. Her research expertise lies in implementation of evidence-based medicine, adaptive clinical decision support, and developing electronic tools for patients and providers based on user-centered design.

Giusy Rita Maria La Rosa, DDS, PhD

Research fellow, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Department of General Surgery and Surgical Medical Specialties, University of Catania, Catania, Italy

Giusy Rita Maria La Rosa graduated in Dentistry and obtained her PhD in Basic and Applied Biomedical Science in 2021. She is currently a postdoctoral research fellow at the University of Catania. Her main interests are dentistry, oral health, and tobacco harm reduction, focusing on methods of synthesizing scientific evidence, with a primary interest in systematic reviews and scoping reviews.

Advisors

Arun Keepanasseril, MDS, MSc

Project Manager, Assistant Clinical Professor (Adjunct), Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Canada

Arun Keepanasseril MDS, MSc (eHealth) serves as an Assistant Clinical Professor (Adjunct) in the Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. He is also the Project Manager and investigator for Canadian Bleeding Disorder Registry, Canada’s national registry for persons with bleeding disorders, especially the Hemophilias. His main research interest is knowledge translation, patient reported outcomes and usage of individual patient data databases especially for real world effectiveness studies. He is a member of McMaster Rare Bleeding Disorder Research Group and a co-investigator of WAPPS-Hemo (Web Available Population Pharmacokinetics Service for Hemophilia), a web-based solution for simplified estimation of individual factor concentrate pharmacokinetics in Hemophilia and collaborator for Patient Reported Outcomes, Burdens, and Experiences (PROBE), a patient reported outcome tool that measures the impact of hemophilia on daily life.

Peter Giacobbi Jr., PhD

Associate Professor, West Virginia University, USA

Peter Giacobbi Jr's research focus includes complementary and alternative medicine, behavioral medicine, and public health surveillance. Dr. Giacobbi's work has focused primarily on behavioral interventions designed to increase exercise behavior. More recently, he has focused on multi-behavior interventions intended to simultaneously address multiple chronic disease risk factors.

Staff Scientific Editor

Javad Sarvestan, MSc, PhD

Past Editorial Board Members

Filip Drozd, PhD, Senior Researcher, National Network for Infant Mental Health, Regional Centre for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, Norway

Allan McDougall, MA, PhD, Research Associate, Research Unit of the Royal College of Physicians & Surgeons of Canada, Canada

Ilaria Montagni, PhD, Junior Researcher, Centre de Recherche Inserm, Université de Bordeaux, France

Han Wu, MS, BE, Senior Scientific Programmer, New Jersey Medical School, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey, USA

Join the Editorial Board

How can I apply to become an editorial board member?

We are currently looking to expand our Editorial Board. To apply to be an Editorial Board Member/Associate Editor, please apply using the form linked in this article. You should hold a PhD (or similar higher degree), have a publication track record (h-index>8), and ideally have some academic editing experience. 

Indexing and Impact Factor

JMIR Research Protocols (JRP, ISSN 1929-0748) is a sister journal of the Journal of Medical Internet Research, the leading eHealth journal.

JMIR Research Protocols is indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), MEDLINE, Sherpa Romeo, DOAJ, Scopus, Web of Science(WoS)/ESCI, and EBSCO.

JMIR Research Protocols received a Journal Impact Factor of 1.5 according to the latest release of the Journal Citation Reports from Clarivate, 2025.

With a CiteScore of 2.4 (2024), JMIR Research Protocolsis a Q2 journal in the field of General Medicine, according to Scopus data.

Editor-in-Chief

Amy Schwartz, MSc, Ph.D., Scientific Editor at JMIR Publications, Ontario, Canada

Peer Review Process

When we receive a manuscript, an assessment will be made to ensure the manuscript meets the formal criteria specified in the Instructions for Authors and that it fits within the scope of the journal. When in doubt, the editor will consult with other members of the Editorial Board. Manuscripts are then assigned to an Associate Editor and sent to 2-4 external experts for peer-review. The Associate Editor makes editorial decisions on the peer-reviewed manuscript; the final decision on acceptance rests with the Editor-in-Chief. Authors are required to suggest at least 2 peer-reviewers (who do not have a conflict of interest) during the submission process. 

JMIR Publications follows a single-blind model during the review process. Reviewers are aware of the names of the authors to avoid any potential conflict of interest when accepting the review invitation. Reviewers for JMIR Publications journals will not remain anonymous. Their names will appear at the end of the published article. Authors and reviewers should not contact each other directly to discuss manuscripts or reviews.

Speed of Peer-Review

Internet-based research is a fast-moving field and JMIR Publications recognizes the need of our authors to communicate their findings rapidly. Our aim to facilitate a rapid, thorough, and rigorous peer-review process.

It is important to note that current turnaround times for reviewing and editing papers vary as these are primarily dependent on the quality of the paper upon first submission. With the exception of papers submitted under the fast-track process, in which we guarantee an editorial decision within 20 business days (4 weeks excluding weekends and public holidays) and publication of the article within 4 weeks after acceptance, JMIR Publications is not able to guarantee the speed of peer-review or publication. We aim for an average decision time of two months after submission for papers sent out for peer-review. There will however always be exceptions (papers that are more difficult to evaluate).

Funded Pathway

JMIR Research Protocols offers a 50% discount off the APF on proposals and protocols if they are grant funded and have undergone prior peer-review. Provision of these peer review reports allow for an expedited editorial decision based on the already provided and validated grant funding agency peer-review reports. For more information, see: When is a grant proposal or protocol eligible for the 50% discount on the APF?