As a result of the significant disruption that is being caused by the COVID-19 pandemic we are very aware that many researchers will have difficulty in meeting the timelines associated with our peer review process during normal times. Please do let us know if you need additional time. Our systems will continue to remind you of the original timelines but we intend to be highly flexible at this time.
Announcement
Featured articles
© oonal / Getty Images / iStock
Bin it or pin it? Which professional ethical guidance on managing COVID-19 should I follow?
Judgments can and should be informed (and constrained) by guidance, and hopefully these preliminary observations on the current ethical guidance on managing COVID-19 will provide some useful pointers for time-pressed professionals.
© PeopleImages / Getty Images / iStock
How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study
A review of IRB documents found variations in the procedures between and within European countries. There were differences in submission and approval requirements, number of review rounds and total duration.
Articles
-
-
Assessment of the appropriateness of the i-CONSENT guidelines recommendations for improving understanding of the informed consent process in clinical studies
-
Advance research directives: avoiding double standards
-
Equitable data sharing in epidemics and pandemics
-
Defining ethical challenge(s) in healthcare research: a rapid review
-
Top 10 health care ethics challenges facing the public: views of Toronto bioethicists
-
Controversies and considerations regarding the termination of pregnancy for Foetal Anomalies in Islam
-
The four principles: Can they be measured and do they predict ethical decision making?
-
Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review
-
Human cloning laws, human dignity and the poverty of the policy making dialogue
Latest collections
Cross-journal article collection
Translation in healthcare: ethical, legal, and social implications
Edited by Donna Dickenson, Sandra Soo-Jin Lee, and Michael Morrison
Cross-journal article collection
Extending evidence-based medicine
Edited by Trisha Greenhalgh
Cross-journal article collection
Driving Regenerative Medicine to the Market and Clinic: An Exploration of Enablers, Impediments and Ethical-Legal Challenges
Cross-journal article collection
The Many Meanings of ‘Quality’ in Healthcare: Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Edited by Deborah Swinglehurst
Aims and scope
BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
Peer Review Taxonomy
This journal is participating in a pilot of NISO/STM's Working Group on Peer Review Taxonomy, to identify and standardize definitions and terminology in peer review practices in order to make the peer review process for articles and journals more transparent. Further information on the pilot is available here.
The following summary describes the peer review process for this journal:
- Identity transparency: Single anonymized
- Reviewer interacts with: Editor
- Review information published: Review reports. Reviewer Identities reviewer opt in. Author/reviewer communication
We welcome your feedback on this Peer Review Taxonomy Pilot. Please can you take the time to complete this short survey.
Editor
- Anne Menard, BioMed Central
Assistant Editor
- Janelle Coore, BioMed Central
Senior Editorial Board Members
Beatrice Godard, University of Montreal
Jonathan Ives, University of Bristol
Jeremy Snyder, Simon Fraser University
Black Lives Matter
A collection of books, journal articles and magazine content that amplifies Black voices and the issues raised by the Black Lives Matter movement.
Read MoreAnnouncing the launch of In Review
BMC Medical Ethics, in partnership with Research Square, is now offering In Review. Authors choosing this free optional service will be able to:
- Share their work with fellow researchers to read, comment on, and cite even before publication
- Showcase their work to funders and others with a citable DOI while it is still under review
- Track their manuscript - including seeing when reviewers are invited, and when reports are received
BMC Series Blog
-
Can Kidney Disease Affect Your Thinking?
14 October 2021
-
Highlights of the BMC Series – September 2021
11 October 2021
-
Follow
Annual Journal Metrics
-
Speed
122 days to first decision for reviewed manuscripts only
85 days to first decision for all manuscripts
235 days from submission to acceptance
16 days from acceptance to publicationCitation Impact
2.652 - 2-year Impact Factor
3.499 - 5-year Impact Factor
1.869 - Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)
1.075 - SCImago Journal Rank (SJR)Usage
1,077,136 downloads
1,135 Altmetric mentions