About the Journal

About the Journal

About ASIDE Internal Medicine

Vision and Mission

ASIDE Internal Medicine is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal committed to advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in healthcare through scholarly publication. As part of the ASIDE Journals portfolio, the journal reflects these values in all activities and publications.

Our mission is to advance internal medicine by promoting innovative research, informed practice, and transformative ideas that prioritize health equity. We serve as a platform for voices historically underrepresented in medical research, offering insights that challenge traditional narratives and promote a more inclusive healthcare environment.

Scope

ASIDE Internal Medicine publishes original research, reviews, clinical case reports, and commentary across all subspecialties of internal medicine, including cardiology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, nephrology, pulmonology, rheumatology, infectious diseases, hospital medicine, and geriatrics. We particularly value work that addresses the social determinants of health, provides innovative care for underserved populations, and employs interdisciplinary approaches to complex issues.

Publication Frequency

ASIDE Internal Medicine is published quarterly (four issues per year). Each issue contains peer-reviewed original research articles, reviews, case reports, and other scholarly content in the field of internal medicine.

Accepted articles may be published online before assignment to a regular issue. The online publication date represents the official first publication date. When articles are later assigned to a regular issue, the article record is updated with the final volume, issue, and pagination or article identifier. The DOI remains unchanged.

Readership

Our readers include physicians, medical researchers, healthcare professionals, policy makers, and educators dedicated to building a healthcare system that serves everyone. With a global reach, the journal invites submissions worldwide to foster a diverse dialogue on internal medicine.

Open Access & Licensing Policy

ASIDE Internal Medicine provides immediate open access to all content. The full text of every article is freely available to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to without delay, with no embargo and no registration requirement.

Unless otherwise indicated, all articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (legal code). This license permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, including commercial use, provided appropriate credit is given to the original authors and the source, a link to the license is provided, and changes are indicated.

Authors retain copyright to their work and grant the publisher a non-exclusive right of first publication under the above license. The copyright holder and license are clearly displayed on each article’s HTML page and PDF.

Content (e.g., images, figures, data) not covered by CC BY 4.0 is identified by a credit line noting the different terms. Permission may be required for uses beyond those allowed by the stated license.

The journal charges no submission or publication fees (no APCs).

Editorial Process

We uphold a rigorous peer-review process managed by an international editorial board committed to advancing medical science and upholding fairness, diversity, and inclusiveness in academic publishing.

ASIDE Internal Medicine maintains editorial independence by not accepting any form of advertising.

Direct Marketing Policy

ASIDE Internal Medicine may occasionally send targeted calls for papers or informational messages to researchers whose expertise aligns with the journal’s aims and scope. Any outreach conducted on behalf of the journal is appropriate, well-targeted, and unobtrusive. All information about the journal and publisher is truthful and not misleading.

We do not guarantee acceptance, indexing, or publication outcomes in any communication, and we do not request or require payment as a condition of submission. Messages clearly identify the journal and publisher, the article types sought, relevant deadlines, and link to our policies. Recipients can opt out at any time, and we promptly honor unsubscribe requests. We do not buy third-party email lists; contact details are gathered from publicly available academic sources or prior voluntary interactions. Outreach practices comply with applicable regulations (e.g., CAN-SPAM/GDPR).

Peer Review Policy (Double-Blind)

1. Introduction to Peer Review

1.1 What is Peer Review? Peer review is the process by which independent experts evaluate submitted manuscripts for originality, scientific validity, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Peer review helps editors make informed publication decisions and helps authors improve the quality of their work.

1.2 Purpose at ASIDE Internal Medicine The purpose of peer review at ASIDE Internal Medicine is to ensure that published content is scientifically sound, clinically relevant, ethically conducted, clearly reported, and meaningful to the field of internal medicine.

2. Type of Peer Review

2.1 Double-Blind Peer Review ASIDE Internal Medicine uses a double-blind peer-review process. Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous during the review process to minimize bias related to identity, affiliation, seniority, nationality, gender, institutional reputation, or other non-scientific factors.

3. Double-Blind Peer-Review Process

3.1 Manuscript Submission

  • Authors submit manuscripts through the journal’s online submission system.
  • Authors are responsible for ensuring that the manuscript file, figures, tables, supplementary files, and acknowledgments do not contain identifying information that could compromise double-blind review.
  • Author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, funding details, and conflict-of-interest statements should be submitted separately when required by the submission system.

3.2 Initial Editorial Screening

  • Before external peer review, all submissions undergo initial editorial screening by the editorial office or handling editor.
  • This screening assesses journal scope, article type, completeness, formatting, adherence to author guidelines, ethical documentation, reporting-guideline compliance, plagiarism or similarity concerns, and overall suitability for peer review.
  • The journal may use similarity-checking software to assist editorial screening. Similarity reports are reviewed by editors in context, and decisions are based on the nature, source, and extent of overlap rather than a numerical score alone.
  • Manuscripts may be returned to authors for technical correction before review.
  • Manuscripts may be rejected without external peer review if they are outside the journal’s scope, incomplete, ethically non-compliant, scientifically unsuitable, or unlikely to meet the journal’s editorial standards.

3.3 Reviewer Selection

  • Editors invite reviewers based on relevant subject-matter expertise, methodological knowledge, publication or peer-review experience, prior review quality, and absence of known conflicts of interest.
  • All research articles, review articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, case reports, brief reports, and clinical images that proceed beyond initial editorial screening are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers under a double-blind peer-review process, unless explicitly stated otherwise for a specific article type.
  • Editors may invite additional reviewers when specialist expertise, statistical review, methodological review, or further independent assessment is required.
  • Editorial materials, letters, commentaries, corrections, and other non-research content may be reviewed internally or externally at the discretion of the editors.

3.4 Conducting the Review

  • Reviewers evaluate manuscripts for originality, clinical or scientific significance, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, appropriateness of statistical analysis, clarity of presentation, validity of conclusions, quality of figures and tables, and relevance to internal medicine.
  • Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, objective, evidence-based comments that help authors improve the manuscript and assist editors in decision-making.
  • Reviewers may provide confidential comments to the editor when necessary.
  • Reviewer confidentiality is mandatory. Reviewers must not share, copy, distribute, cite, or use manuscript content before publication.
  • Reviewers must declare any potential conflict of interest and decline the review invitation when a conflict may affect impartiality.

3.5 Reviewer Recommendations

  • Reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revision, major revision, rejection, or another decision category available in the journal’s submission system.
  • Reviewer recommendations are advisory. Final editorial decisions are made by the handling editor, section editor, or Editor-in-Chief, as appropriate.

3.6 Editorial Decision-Making

  • Editors consider reviewer comments, methodological quality, ethical compliance, novelty, clinical relevance, reporting quality, and alignment with the journal’s scope when making decisions.
  • Editors are not required to follow the numerical majority of reviewer recommendations if the content of the reviews supports a different decision.
  • Possible editorial decisions include accept, minor revision, major revision, reject with invitation to resubmit, or reject.

3.7 Handling Conflicting Reviews

  • When reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the handling editor evaluates the substance and quality of the reviews.
  • The editor may request clarification from reviewers, invite an additional independent reviewer, consult a section editor, seek statistical or methodological review, or make an editorial decision based on the strength of the evidence provided.
  • Final decisions are made by the editor and are not based solely on the number of favorable or unfavorable reviewer recommendations.

3.8 Revision and Re-Review

  • Authors invited to revise a manuscript must submit a revised manuscript and a point-by-point response addressing reviewer and editor comments.
  • Authors should clearly identify changes made in the revised manuscript when requested by the editorial office.
  • Revised manuscripts may be assessed by the handling editor, returned to the original reviewers, or sent to additional reviewers when necessary.
  • Additional revision rounds may be requested until the editor determines that the concerns have been adequately addressed or that the manuscript is unsuitable for publication.

3.9 Acceptance and Publication

  • Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout, author proofing, metadata preparation, and final publication.
  • Acceptance does not remove the journal’s right to correct errors, request clarifications, or address ethical concerns identified before or after publication.

4. Why Double-Blind Peer Review?

Double-blind peer review is used to promote fairness and impartiality by focusing evaluation on the academic content, scientific merit, methodological quality, and clinical relevance of the manuscript rather than on the identity or institutional affiliation of the authors or reviewers.

5. Ensuring Integrity and Fairness

  • All participants in the peer-review process are expected to act with confidentiality, professionalism, objectivity, and respect.
  • Attempts to circumvent anonymity, identify reviewers, identify authors during blinded review, manipulate reviewer selection, or interfere with the editorial process should be reported to the editorial office and will be addressed seriously.
  • The journal may take corrective action when peer-review integrity is compromised, including reassignment of editors, additional independent review, rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the nature and timing of the concern.

6. Editor-Authored Manuscripts and Conflicts of Interest

6.1 Editorial Recusal

  • Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, editorial board members, journal staff, or individuals with a close institutional, professional, financial, or personal relationship to an editor are handled by an independent editor with no relevant conflict of interest.
  • The submitting editor or conflicted editor is excluded from reviewer selection, reviewer communication, access to reviewer identities, editorial discussion, and final decision-making for that manuscript.
  • Another qualified editor with no authorship role or relevant conflict will manage the peer-review process to ensure independent and unbiased evaluation.

6.2 Editorial Access and Decision-Making

  • Editors or editorial board members who are authors of a manuscript will not have access to the peer-review process for their own manuscript.
  • They will not influence reviewer selection, reviewer comments, editorial recommendations, or the final decision.
  • All editorial decisions for editor-authored manuscripts are made independently by non-conflicted editors.

6.3 Disclosure of Conflicts

  • Editors, reviewers, and authors are required to disclose relevant conflicts of interest.
  • If a conflict of interest is identified after submission or during review, the journal may reassign editorial handling, seek additional independent review, request further disclosure, or take other corrective action as appropriate.

7. Review Timelines

  • The journal aims to complete the initial editorial screening within 7–10 days of submission.
  • External reviewers are generally asked to complete reviews within 14–21 days.
  • Timelines may vary depending on article complexity, reviewer availability, the need for additional expert review, statistical review, methodological review, or author revision time.
  • The journal prioritizes quality, fairness, and integrity of peer review over speed of decision-making.

8. Appeals and Complaints

  • Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a reasoned response that identifies specific concerns regarding the review process, factual errors, or misinterpretation of the manuscript.
  • Appeals are assessed by an editor who was not involved in the original decision whenever possible.
  • The journal may uphold the original decision, request further review, or issue a revised decision.
  • Concerns about peer-review integrity, reviewer conduct, editorial conflicts, or procedural irregularities may be submitted to the editorial office and will be handled in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policies.

9. Confidentiality

  • Manuscripts under review are confidential documents.
  • Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose manuscript content, reviewer identities, review comments, editorial discussions, or decisions to unauthorized individuals.
  • Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal, professional, or financial advantage.

10. Conclusion

The peer-review process at ASIDE Internal Medicine is designed to uphold scientific integrity, editorial independence, ethical publishing, and publication quality. Through double-blind peer review, independent expert evaluation, conflict-of-interest management, and transparent editorial procedures, the journal aims to publish reliable and clinically meaningful scholarship in internal medicine.

Ethical Standards

Introduction

ASIDE Internal Medicine follows the principles and recommendations of COPE, ICMJE, OASPA, and the Think. Check. Submit. initiative to ensure integrity, transparency, and fairness. This section clarifies expected ethical behavior for authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher.

Research involving human participants must include a statement confirming approval by an appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board, or a clear explanation of exemption. Research involving animals must include approval by the relevant institutional or regulatory body. Manuscripts involving identifiable patient information, images, or case details must include a statement confirming that appropriate informed consent for publication was obtained.

Clinical trials must be registered in a publicly accessible clinical trial registry before participant enrollment, in accordance with ICMJE recommendations. The trial registration number and registry name must be reported in the manuscript.

The journal follows COPE guidance for corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, and post-publication updates. Published articles may be corrected when errors affect interpretation and may be retracted when findings are unreliable because of misconduct, major error, plagiarism, duplicate publication, unethical research, or other serious concerns.

1. Editorial Standards

  • Integrity: We follow COPE and ICMJE guidance to maintain the scholarly record.
  • Fair Play: Manuscripts are evaluated for intellectual content without regard to authors’ personal attributes or beliefs.
  • Confidentiality: Editorial information is disclosed only to parties directly involved in the editorial process.

2. Duties of Reviewers

  • Contribution: Reviews assist editorial decisions and help authors improve their work.
  • Promptness: Reviewers who are unqualified or unavailable promptly notify the editor.
  • Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review are confidential.
  • Objectivity: Reviews should be evidence-based and free of personal criticism.
  • Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must decline when conflicts exist.

3. Duties of Authors

Required Article Statements: Manuscripts must include applicable statements on ethics approval, informed consent, conflicts of interest, funding, author contributions, data availability, clinical trial registration, and use of artificial intelligence or language-editing tools when relevant.

  • Reporting Standards: Present accurate work and objective discussion of significance.
  • Data Access & Retention: Provide data for editorial review and public access when requested.
  • Originality & Citation: Submit original work with proper citation of sources.
  • Redundant/Concurrent Publication: Do not publish substantially similar work elsewhere.
  • Authorship: Limit authorship to those with significant contributions.
  • Disclosures: Authors must declare financial or substantive conflicts of interest that could influence the results, interpretation, or reporting of the work.
  • Funding Disclosure: All manuscripts must include a funding statement identifying all sources of financial support or stating that no specific funding was received. The role of any funder in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or publication decision must be disclosed.

4. Publishing Ethics Issues

  • Monitoring Ethics: The editorial board follows COPE in addressing ethics concerns and correcting the record.
  • Retractions: Confirmed misconduct will result in retraction when warranted.

Authors are encouraged to consult the principles of the Think. Check. Submit. initiative when selecting journals. For questions, contact the editorial office at [email protected].

Preservation & Archiving Policy

ASIDE Internal Medicine is committed to the long-term preservation and accessibility of its content through the following:

  • PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN): Application submitted; upon activation, all published content will be preserved automatically through the PKP PN service for OJS journals.
  • Internet Archive: All issues and article PDFs are periodically deposited or scheduled for deposit in the Internet Archive (archive.org) for long-term preservation and public access. Core journal pages are also captured periodically via the Wayback Machine.
  • Institutional & Library Repositories (Self-archiving): Authors are encouraged to deposit all versions—preprint, accepted manuscript, and version of record—without embargo, in institutional or subject repositories of their choice.
  • OAI-PMH: Metadata and content are available for harvesting via our OAI-PMH endpoint: https://asidejournals.com/index.php/internal-medicine/oai

If the journal were to cease publication, archived content will remain accessible via the Internet Archive and any preservation services active at that time, including PKP PN if activated.

Repository & Self-Archiving Policy

ASIDE Internal Medicine permits and encourages authors to deposit all versions of their articles in institutional, subject, funder, or personal repositories, and on academic profiles, without embargo:

  • Submitted version (preprint): may be shared at any time.
  • Accepted version (Author Accepted Manuscript, AAM): may be shared immediately upon acceptance.
  • Published version (Version of Record, VoR): may be shared immediately after publication.

Include a full citation and a link to the Version of Record (article page or DOI) wherever a version is deposited. Articles are published under CC BY 4.0. Journal metadata is harvestable via OAI-PMH: https://asidejournals.com/index.php/internal-medicine/oai.

Data Sharing & Reproducibility

ASIDE Internal Medicine supports open, reproducible research. All research articles must include a Data Availability Statement describing where the data, code, and materials that support the findings can be accessed, with persistent identifiers (e.g., DOIs) wherever possible. For clinical trials, authors must provide an ICMJE-compliant data sharing statement.

Underlying data (raw and processed), analysis scripts/code, protocols, and other materials necessary to reproduce the results should be shared unless restricted for ethical, legal, or proprietary reasons. Where restrictions apply, authors must explain them and provide conditions for controlled access.

Deposit datasets in a trusted repository—preferably a discipline-specific repository (e.g., genomic sequences in GenBank; functional genomics data in GEO). When no domain repository fits, use a generalist repository that issues DOIs (e.g., Zenodo, Dryad, OSF). Authors can locate suitable repositories via the re3data registry. Software/code should be in a public version-controlled repository (e.g., GitHub) and archived with a DOI (e.g., via GitHub→Zenodo integration) for citation.

Use open, non-proprietary formats where feasible (e.g., CSV/TSV, JSON, TXT, PNG/TIFF). Provide sufficient documentation/metadata to make data FAIR—Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (e.g., README files, variable dictionaries, licenses).

Human-participant data must be de-identified and shared in line with informed consent, IRB/ethics approvals, and applicable regulations. If data cannot be made public, deposit metadata and specify a controlled access mechanism or qualified point of contact in the Data Availability Statement.

Data and code should be deposited by acceptance and publicly available on publication. Include dataset and software citations (with DOIs) in the reference list and provide repository links in the Data Availability Statement.

Publisher Information

Publisher: American Society for Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity in Healthcare (ASIDE)
Registered Address: 16192 Coastal Highway, Lewes, Delaware 19958, USA
Country: United States of America
Publisher Website: https://www.asidehealthcare.org
Journals Portal: https://asidejournals.com
Publisher Contact Email: [email protected]