Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Monday, March 11, 2019 at 4:00 PM to 4:30 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

A new general medical journal for the 21st centrury, focusing on innovation in health and medical research

Latest Submissions Open for Peer Review

A new feature on the JMIR website, open peer review articles, allows JMIR users to sign themselves up as peer reviewers for specific articles currently considered by the Journal (in addition to author- and editor-selected reviewers). The list below shows recently submitted articles where submitting authors have not opted-out of the open peer-review experiment and where the editor has not made a decision yet. (Note that this feature is for reviewing specific articles - if you just want to sign up as reviewer (and wait for the editor to contact you if articles match your interests), please sign up as reviewer using your profile).
To assign yourself to an article as reviewer, you must have a user account on this site (if you don't have one, register for a free account here) and be logged in (please verify that your email address in your profile is correct). Add yourself as a peer reviewer to any article by clicking the '+Peer-review Me!+' link under each article. Full instructions on how to complete your review will be sent to you via email shortly after. Do not sign up as peer-reviewer if you have any conflicts of interest (note that we will treat any attempts by authors to sign up as reviewer under a false identity as scientific misconduct and reserve the right to promptly reject the article and inform the host institution).
The standard turnaround time for reviews is currently 2 weeks, and the general aim is to give constructive feedback to the authors and/or to prevent publication of uninteresting or fatally flawed articles. Reviewers will be acknowledged by name if the article is published, but remain anonymous if the article is declined.

The abstracts on this page are unpublished studies - please do not cite them (yet). If you wish to cite them/wish to see them published, write your opinion in the form of a peer-review!

Tip: Include the RSS feed of the JMIR submissions on this page on your iGoogle homepage, blog, or desktop RSS reader to stay informed about current submissions!

JMIR Submissions under Open Peer Review

↑ Grab this Headline Animator


If you follow us on Twitter, we will also announce new submissions under open peer-review there.


Titles/Abstracts of Articles Currently Open for Review


Titles/Abstracts of Articles Currently Open for Review:

  • Background: Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been used to manage many inflammatory skin conditions. Nevertheless, retinopathy remains its most significant adverse effect. The American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) recommends baseline ophthalmologic screening in the first year of HCQ treatment. However, a recent study found an inadequate awareness of the recommendations. Furthermore, limited data are available regarding the implementation of the recommendations among dermatologists. Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess dermatologists’ adherence to recommendations pertaining to their current practice regarding HCQ toxicity detection. Methods: A self-administrated questionnaire was distributed between February 2, 2018, to May 4, 2018 among members of the Saudi Society of Dermatology. The questionnaire was designed by Shulman et al. Consisted of demographics-related questions and questions pertaining to each physician’s routine practice about the follow-up of HCQ-treated patients. Results: A total of 76 dermatologists completed the questionnaire. We achieved a response rate of 62.54%. More than half (43 [56.6%]) were male. Furthermore, more than half (41 [53.9%]) reported treating 1-3 patients with HCQ during the last year.Furthermore, two-thirds (47 [61.8%]) reported screening patients before initiating HCQ treatment. Regarding follow-up recommendations, 45 (59.2%) reported “yearly after starting treatment” for no-risk patients, while 72 (94.7%) reported “yearly within 5 years of treatment” for at-risk patients. Data were considered significant at P < 0.05. All analysis was performed by using SPSS, version 20 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). Conclusions: Saudi dermatologists are not well informed about some aspects of the latest recommendations regarding screening for HCQ toxicity in terms of tests, follow-up timing, cessation of the drug, and causative agents. Therefore, we recommend conducting more studies in Saudi Arabia to determine the adherence of more physicians to the AAO recommendations. Furthermore, patient education regarding HCQ toxicity and increasing patient awareness is recommended for effective and safe HCQ use.

  • Title: A new treatment modality to reduce acute tonsillitis healing time

    Date Submitted: May 29, 2019
    Open Peer Review Period: Jun 3, 2019 - Jul 29, 2019

    Background: Acute tonsillitis is the most common reason for ear, nose and throat services. The infectious factors of tonsillitis are shown in detail in the studies. in the treatment of acute tonsillitis, supportive therapies are mostly used. As antibiotic therapy; Penicillin V if allergy is given Erythromycin-estolate. Objective: The aim of this study is to accelerate the clinical recovery by providing parenteral treatment and daily cleaning of tonsillar lesions in patients who were admitted to the otolaryngology because of acute tonsillitis. Methods: Patients in the age range 15-60 are included the study. The patients were divided into two groups. To the 1st group i.v. With the combination of ampicillin + sulbactam and i.v clindamycin, the tonsillar membrane was cleaned daily.21 In the second group only i.v. In combination with ampicillin + sulbactam and i.v clindamycin combination. Results: Patients who received antibiotherapy and debridement had clinical improvement at 90% on day 2 and 95% on 5 days. Only patients receiving antibiotics had a clinical improvement of 65% at day 5 and 75% at day 7. The recovery time of both groups was statistically significant. (P <0.05) Conclusions: The solution and technique used in this clinical study showed that patients with acute tonsillitis could recover in a very short time without any complications.

  • Public Response to Privatization of Healthcare Services in Saudi Arabia on Twitter

    Date Submitted: May 26, 2019
    Open Peer Review Period: May 29, 2019 - Jul 24, 2019

    Background: The Saudi government has been providing free medical care for all Saudis in public healthcare facilities, with the Ministry of Health being the major financing, operating, and supervising body. In July 2017, the Saudi government approved privatization of healthcare services. Objective: This study aimed to assess public reactions to this reform that have been shared on Twitter. Methods: All tweets that contained the hashtag “خصخصة_الصحة#” [i.e., #Healthcare_Privatization] between 9th and 16th July 2017 were collected. Manual content analysis of the tweets was carried out to identify sentiments, types of sources of the tweets and the general theme of each tweet. Association between the types of sources and sentiments delivered was tested using chi-square test. Results: Out of 12,430 tweets collected, 2,119 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Most tweets delivered neutral or undetermined sentiments [37.4%], followed by positive [35.2%] and then negative [27.4%] sentiments. Each tweet has been assigned to one out of nine themes that best fits. The most common theme of the tweets was ‘supportive and explanatory’ [24.6%] then ‘unsupportive and/or expecting failure’ [16.3%]. The majority of contributors were members of the public [85.1%] and the clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers [10.1%]. There was a significant association between the type of the source and the sentiments delivered 2 [6, N = 1740] = 82.1, P-value <0.0001] Conclusions: Our study has shown that Twitter data represents a possible rich source of information to be studied by decision makers to evaluate public responses to major reforms in healthcare systems worldwide. Studying such data provides an insight into common concerns and misunderstandings to be addressed.