Original Research

Reports research on any aspect of healthcare simulation and any research design. Original research includes empirical research (any research paradigm) and systematic reviews (meta-analyses, scoping, narrative, integrative etc.). Please note the following guidelines.

• Word limits are flexible, we propose <3000 words for quantitative or mixed methods research and <5000 words for qualitative research.
• Prefer <5 tables/figures and <50 references.
• Research will usually follow the IMRaD style: Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion. However, it is important to consider reporting guidelines for your chosen research design/systematic review type. See the Equator Network. https://www.equator-network.org/.
• For simulation-based educational activities, please see Cheng et al (2016) for reporting guidelines https://advancesinsimulation.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41077-016-0025-y.
• Up to 8 key words.
• Vancouver referencing style.
• Please also include up to 5 bullet points on “What this study adds”.
• Structured abstract <350 words. For abstracts of original articles please provide the following headings: Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion (IMRaD). The abstract should be complete, accurate and written in the past tense.

Protocols

Publishing study protocols enables researchers, funding bodies and others to stay up to date in their fields by providing exposure to research activity that may not otherwise be widely publicised. Publishing protocols can also increase transparency in research and minimize unnecessary duplication of research.

Protocols of completed studies will not be considered for publication. Research studies nearing completion may be considered but dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Please communicate with the editor-in-chief.

Please note the following guidelines.

• Research will usually include introduction and methods with detailed reporting of the study design including the ethical issues.
• It is important to consider reporting guidelines for your chosen research design/systematic review type. See the Equator Network. https://www.equator-network.org/. See The SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items for Randomized Trials. See The PRISMA-P (Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols) especially Tables 1 & 2.
• For simulation-based educational activities, please see Cheng et al (2016) for reporting guidelines of the intervention. https://advancesinsimulation.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41077-016-0025-y
• We welcome patient and public involvement in research and encourage all submissions to consider the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP2). See doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j3453
• Word limits are flexible, we propose <4000 words
• Prefer <5 tables/figures and <50 references.
• Up to 8 key words
• Vancouver referencing style

Practice Guidelines

These manuscripts are designed to translate healthcare simulation research to simulation practice. They may take the form of evidence-based tips/approaches/strategies enabling readers to apply research in practice.

• Word limits: Flexible although <2000 words.
• Prefer <2 tables/figures and <30 references.
• Abstracts should be <150 words and written in past tense.
• Up to 8 key words.
• Vancouver referencing style.

Essays

Reports practice, theory, innovation and more from arts, philosophy, technology, clinical sciences, health policy, governance and how they inform healthcare simulation.

• Word limits: Flexible although <5000 words.
• Prefer <5 tables/figures and <50 references.
• Abstracts should be <150 words and written in past tense.
• Up to 8 key words.
• Vancouver referencing style.
• Please also include up to 5 bullet points on “What this essay adds”.

Debate

Debate articles in which a healthcare simulation issue is presented with a pro and a contra argument. These may appear as one article (<3000 words) or as two articles with separate authors (pro <1500 words and contra <1500 words).

• An abstract < 200 words and written in the past tense clearly positioning the argument/s.
• <15 references for each argument.
• Vancouver referencing style.

Perspectives

Perspectives on text (poetry, short story etc.) or art works (painting, cartoon, photograph etc.) on any aspect of healthcare simulation and/or research. This article type also includes book reviews - fiction or reference works – that inform healthcare simulation.

• Word limits are flexible although <800 words.
• Artworks.
• Prefer <2 tables/figures and <5 references.
• Vancouver referencing style.

Key Concepts

One page overviews/summaries of key concepts in healthcare simulation. Concepts may address practices, policies, governance, research designs etc that are important to the healthcare simulation community. The overview/summary is intended to provide readers with an orientation to contemporary thinking about the focus of the concept. The overview/summary is presented as an infographic (containing text and image/figure). The concept must be evidence-based. Authors are invited to upload the infographic with images. The design team may recommend changes.

• Infographic.
• Must fit on one portrait page of the journal.
• Bullet pointed text.
• Vancouver referencing style.

Letters

Letters about contemporary healthcare simulation issues or in response to published articles. Letters are peer reviewed and addressed to the Editor-in-Chief.

• Word limits: Flexible although <600 words.
• Prefer <2 tables/figures and <5 references.
• Vancouver referencing style.

Short Reports on Simulation Innovations Supplement (SRSIS) 

The SRSI supplement is a platform to share innovations with the healthcare simulation community as part of the International Journal of Healthcare Simulation (JoHS). (https://www.JoHS.org.uk/) The SRSI Supplement will accept short reports of innovative ideas transformed into practice to fill a gap/problem/challenge in your practice. This may include the development of simulators, simulation design, assessment methods, or quality improvement projects. Successes and failures are welcome since they both offer learning opportunities. Reports that share innovations that did not work or have any impact will be selected only if they show substantial effort to find gaps in education and training and develop a solution to address the same.

We anticipate that the innovations have not been conceived as research projects but are simply really good ideas that our community will benefit from reading. They may be pilot or other preliminary work. They likely will not require human research ethics/institutional research board approval, so think carefully about the nature of the data you present.

The supplement will be published bi-annually (July & January). The manuscript submission deadline for the July Issue is March 31, and for the January issue is October 31.

There will be no author charge for publications.

Structure of accepted reports

We recommend the following structure for submissions. However, you may have reason to deviate from the structure (Please include your reason in the letter to the Supplements Editors) Editors – Dr Rami Ahmed and Dr Asit Misra).

• Introduction: What was the background or context for your innovation? Why was this innovation needed?
• Innovation: What did you do? (Describe the development process)
• Evaluation: How did you measure the impact of the innovation?
• Outcomes: What did you find? Any preliminary data or supporting evidence?
• What’s next? What research is needed? How might this innovation be relevant in other settings? 

Manuscript submission guidelines for authors

1. Cover Letter (follow the submission guidelines of JoHS).
2. Title page (follow the submission guidelines of JoHS)
3. Manuscript length 800 words
4. Title not more than 10 words
5. No abstract required
6. Manuscript structure

• • Introduction: What was the background or context for your innovation? Why was this innovation needed?
  • Innovation: What did you do? (Describe the development process)
  • Evaluation: How did you measure the impact of the innovation?
  • Outcomes: What did you find? Any preliminary data or supporting evidence?
  • What’s next? What research is needed? How might this innovation be relevant in other settings
  • Up to 5 references for this supplement (follow the submission guidelines of JoHS)
  • Up to 2 tables/figures for this supplement (follow the submission guidelines of JoHS)
  • Authorship: No more than 8 authors for this supplement. All authors must have made a substantive contribution to the innovation.

In order to meet publication deadlines, we share this timeline. Authors must be available in these time frames to complete their tasks.

Timeline for March 31 submissions

April 1-13: Editors reviewing innovations submissions including initial “reject” decisions

April 14-30: Innovations manuscripts sent to reviewers

May 2-14: Editors consider reviewer reports and decisions made are “accept” or “recommend minor revisions” or “reject”

May 15-30: Decisions communicated to authors and “minor revisions” are required

Timeline for October 31 submissions

November 1-13: Editors reviewing innovations submissions including initial “reject” decisions

November 14-31: Innovations manuscripts sent to reviewers

December 2-14: Editors consider reviewer reports and decisions made are “accept” or “recommend minor revisions” or “reject”

December 15-30: Decisions communicated to authors and “minor revisions” are required