Focus and Scope
Social Medicine is an international, open-access, peer-reviewed academic forum for the development and promotion of Social Medicine. The journal is written with the inventive, engaged and critical vision that animated the founders of Social Medicine. To make this vision a reality we:
1. Act as a forum for research and teaching concerning the ways in which social factors not only influence health and disease but are in turn altered by health and disease.
2. Support the WHO Alma Ata goals of Health for All and the holistic vision of health contained in the WHO charter.
3. Produce materials that are scientifically sound, intellectually honest, free of commercial bias and clearly written and presented.
4. Organize the journal in a way that reflects and supports the diverse international community working in the field of social medicine. To realize the goals of “Health for All” we must have a journal that includes the voices of all.
Peer Review Process
1. Articles in Social Medicine are peer-reviewed.
2. Social Medicine seeks to promote publications by authors who have been under-represented in academic medicine. We ask peer reviewers to make specific suggestions for the improvement of manuscripts. In doing so it may be helpful to refer authors to materials published at http://www.scidev.net/ms/sci_comm/.
3. The final decision on publication is made by the editors.
4. Reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of all manuscripts.
5. Reviewers and authors are expected to declare any conflicts of interest concerning manuscripts.
Social Medicine is published quarterly in March, June, September and December
Open Access Policy
Social Medicine is available free to all readers.
This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...
Materials contained on this website are intended for medical professionals and are provided on an "as is" basis without warranty of any kind, express or implied.
The Social Medicine Publishing Group and the journal's editors cannot warrant the accuracy of authors' statements. We rely on our authors for the accuracy of the information presented, and to describe generally accepted practices. Readers should be aware that professionals in the field may have different opinions. Because of this fact and also because of regular advances in medical research, we strongly recommend that readers independently verify any information they chose to rely on. Ultimately it is the readers' responsibility to make their own professional judgments.
The description of or reference to a product or publication does not imply endorsement of that product or publication.
Opinions posted on this website are those of individuals posting them and not necessarily the views of the Social Medicine Publishing Group or the Department of Family and Social Medicine.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Social Medicine Publishing Group and the Department of Family and Social Medicine and its editors are not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, products liability or otherwise) whether they be direct or indirect, special, incidental or consequential, resulting from the application of the information contained on this website.
Social Medicine and Medicina Social are prepared by a staff of volunteers. If you would like to help out with the work of the journal - reviewing, copy-editing, translation, lay-out and proof-reading, please write to Matt Anderson at: email@example.com.
The journal's ISSN is 1557-7112
Criteria for Peer Reviewers
1.Does the paper contribute to the goals of the journal as outlined
in our Mission Statement?
2. If the paper is published will it contribute to scientific
understanding or health activism?
3. Does the paper speak to an international audience?
4. Is the paper well written and clear?
5. If the paper reports on original research, is it methodologically
sound? Are the statistical methods adequately described and
appropriate? Are conclusions supported by the data presented in the
Acknowledgment of Peer Reviewers
We wish to thank the following individuals who have provided peer reviews in 2015:
Mr. Benjamin Langer
We wish to thank the following individuals who have provided peer reviews in 2014:
Dr. Ramin Asgary
Dr. Jalil Safaei Boroojeny
Dr. Iris Borowy
Dr. Linnea Capps
Dr. Rafael Carreras
Ms. Elise Ann Geist Meyers
Dr. Jasmine Gideon
Dr. Daniel Goldberg
Dr. Nuria Homedes
Dr. Anuj Kapilashrami
Mr. Benjamin Palafox
Dr. Clyde Schechter
Dr. Donald T. Simeon
Mr. Benjamin Stoner-Duncan
Dr. Scott Stonington
Dr. Hui Xiang