Start Submission Become a Reviewer

Editorial Policies

Peer Review Process

Despite the journal's rapid turnaround time from submission to initial decision, the peer review process for TOHM is detailed and rigorous as explained below.

Receipt of all manuscripts will immediately be electronically acknowledged by the journal editorial office, and authors have the ability on the journal website to track the progress of their submission through the peer review process. All submitted manuscripts are reviewed initially by a TOHM editor. Manuscripts that are unsuitable (e.g., absence of a message that is important to the readers of the journal) are rejected promptly. The remaining articles (>90%) are sent to experts for peer review. All submissions are evaluated by at least two such anonymous reviewers; the number of peer reviewers per manuscript ranges from 2 to 5 depending on the complexity of the topic (the average number is 3). Manuscripts that have made it through the first round of review generally received an additional 1-2 rounds of review. All reviewers are carefully selected from the editorial board and from a database of several hundred peer reviewers who are not on the editorial board. All reviewers are assigned directly by the Editor-in-Chief rather than associate editors or staff.

Authors are required to provide the names of at least three suitable peer reviewers, although this does not guarantee that one of these reviewers will be asked to serve as a reviewer. Peer reviewer identities are kept confidential, but author identities are made known to reviewers. The existence of a manuscript under review is not revealed to anyone other than peer reviewers and editorial staff. Reviews and decisions on manuscripts in which the editor is a co-author are managed independently by another editor.

If the submission is considered meritorious based on its originality and quality, authors are asked to revise their papers in response to the reviewers' comments. The revised papers are then re-reviewed for content. The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief. In all matters concerning the publication of articles, the decision of the Editor-in-Chief will be final.

After acceptance, proofs will be sent to the corresponding author who should read them carefully for errors. A corrected copy must be returned to the Publisher within 48 hours of receipt.

Ethical Principles

A.  General Statement:

TOHM adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct as well as the COPE Guidelines.

B. Consent-Ethical Standards:

For human studies, consent must be obtained from the patient or relatives. Studies should be performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki (1964). Authors must verify that written consent has been obtained when details that could lead to the identification of a patient are given. Principles of laboratory animal care need to be followed for animal experiments.

TOHM requires authors to register all clinical trials in a public registry at or before the time of first patient enrollment. Clinical trials may be registered in any public registry, though TOHM suggests utilizing those recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The ICMJE recommends registering with any of the primary registries listed within the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), or via ClinicalTrials.gov, a registry provided by the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Authors must include the trial registration number within manuscripts submitted to the journal. Registration numbers should be referenced (1) within the Methods section and (2) the first time an acronym is used to refer to the trial within the body of the manuscript. 

More information can be found on the ICMJE's Clinical Trial Registration page.

C. Patient Anonymity and Informed Consent:

It is the author’s responsibility to ensure that a patient’s anonymity be carefully protected and to verify that any experimental investigation with human subjects reported in the manuscript was performed with informed consent and following all the guidelines for experimental investigation with human subjects required by the institution(s) with which all the authors are affiliated.

D. Policy Regarding Inappropriate Submissions and Publications:

The editors, members of the editorial board, and publisher's staff at TOHM take their responsibility seriously to assure that the highest ethical publishing standards are maintained by assisting in safeguarding the medical scientific literature against fraudulent publications. Examples of fraud in scientific research include (but are not limited to):

1) The submission of duplicate publications using similar data (i.e., attesting that work submitted is original when, in fact, it was submitted to or accepted by another journal);

2) Falsification of data, copyright, or information regarding conflict of interest;

3) Submission of work from other sources that was not done by the author and is presented as a new and original (plagiarism);

4) Authorship (allowing one's name to appear as an author or adding an author to a manuscript) without substantial input or without having agreed to submission of the manuscript.

The above examples are not meant to be a comprehensive list of fraudulent publication practices. Rather, they should provide adequate basis for careful consideration of avoidable conflicts and editorial scrutiny regarding inappropriate preparation and submission of manuscripts.

If there are questions as to any issues regarding inappropriate submission, the Editor should be consulted prior to the submission. If a submitted or published manuscript is discovered or suspected to be inappropriate, the authors will be asked for a written explanation. If the rationale provided by the authors remains unsatisfactory in the judgment of the editors, the manuscript will be rejected or retracted. Retractions become a matter of public record and are registered in Pub Med. The provost (or equivalent) of the authors' academic institutions will be informed of inappropriate submissions or publications, and the authors will not be allowed to subsequently submit their research to TOHM.

Clinical Trial Registration

Tremor and Other Hyperkinetic Movements requires authors to register all clinical trials in a public registry at or before the time of first patient enrollment. Clinical trials may be registered in any public registry, though TOHM suggests utilizing those recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The ICMJE recommends registering with any of the primary registries listed within the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), or via ClinicalTrials.gov, a registry provided by the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

Authors must include the trial registration number within manuscripts submitted to the journal. Registration numbers should be referenced (1) within the Methods section and (2) the first time an acronym is used to refer to the trial within the body of the manuscript.

More information can be found on the ICMJE's Clinical Trial Registration page.

[TBC] Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are asked to provide comment on the below topics and guidelines:

  • Content: Does the article fit within the scope of the journal? Is the submission original, relevant and rigorous? Is the author’s depth of understanding of the issues researched adequate? Are the sources and references adequate? Has the existing knowledge base been explored and built upon? Are the chosen methodologies appropriate and have they and the evidential base been appropriately used? Does the conclusion reflect the argument in the main body text and bring something new to the debate?
  • Structure and argument: Does the abstract summarise the arguments in a succinct and accurate way? Is the manuscript logically structured and do the arguments flow coherently? Is there enough reference to methodology in the introduction and are the arguments fully evidenced and substantiated? Does the introduction signpost the arguments in the logical way and does the conclusion adequately summarise them?
  • Figures/tables: Does the author’s use of tables, charts, figures or maps illustrate the arguments and support the evidential base? Is the quality of the formatting and presentation adequate?
  • Formatting: Does the submitted file adhere to the general author guidelines listed for the journal? Are the citations and references formatted to house-style?
  • Language: Is the text well written and jargon free? Please comment on the quality of English and need for grammatical improvement.
  • Data availability: Has data used in the study been adequately described and made available? Is the data curated in a usable format? Is there a 'Data Availability' statement providing information on how to access the data?

Prior Publication

The journal is happy to accept submissions of papers that have been loaded onto preprint servers or personal websites, have been presented at conferences, or other informal communication channels. These formats will not be deemed prior publication. The journal accepts papers that have been published within formal conference proceedings, provided that the paper provides substantially more data, analysis and/or discussion than the original conference paper. Authors must retain copyright to such postings. Authors are encouraged to link any prior posting of their paper to the final published version within the journal if it is editorially accepted.


Preprint Policy

The journal allows authors to deposit draft versions of their paper into a suitable preprint server, on condition that the author agrees to the below:

  • The author retains copyright to the preprint and developed works from it, and is permitted to submit to the journal.
  • The author declares that a preprint is available within the cover letter presented during submission. This must include a link to the location of the preprint.
  • The author acknowledges that having a preprint publicly available means that the journal cannot guarantee the anonymity of the author during the review process, even if they anonymise the submitted files (see review policy).
  • Should the submission be published, the authors are expected to update the information associated with the preprint version to show that a final version has been published in the journal, including the DOI linking directly to the publication.

ORCID

The journal strongly recommends that all authors submitting a paper register an account with Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier (ORCID). Registration provides a unique and persistent digital identifier for the account that enables accurate attribution and improves the discoverability of published papers, ensuring that the correct author receives the correct credit for their work. As the ORCID remains the same throughout the lifetime of the account, changes of name, affiliation, or research area do not effect the discoverability of an author's past work and aid correspondence with colleagues.

The journal encourages all corresponding authors to include an ORCID within their submitting author data whilst co-authors are recommended to include one. ORCID numbers should be added to the author data upon submission and will be published alongside the submitted paper, should it be accepted.

Reproducibility

Open Data

Tremor and Other Hyperkinetic Movements honors the principles of replication and extension of work inherent in the scientific endeavor by requesting that authors make available to others the materials and data supporting the conclusions of the paper, along with the associated protocols and computer codes necessary to understand and assess the work. In the spirit of open access we encourage our authors to make every reasonable effort to meet reader requests for protocols, materials, data and computer codes, following publication of the manuscript. 

Authors may choose to share data sets and computer codes via public repositories. Repositories accepting data and codes for deposit often generate unique identifiers for theses objects, such as a DOI, which may be used when citing datasets and codes in the paper and including them in the reference list. Where possible, cite these items using linkable, permanent URIs. 

During the review and publication process, including after publication, the editors reserve the right to request any of this information. Refusal to honor these requests may negatively affect the publication schedule or result in revocation of acceptance.

Repositories recommended by TOHM:

Neuroscience Information Framework: NIF is the largest searchable collection of neuroscience data, the largest catalog of biomedical resources, and the largest ontology for neuroscience on the web.

Dryad: Data Dryad is a multidisciplinary repository where data underlying scholarly publications is made discoverable, accessible, understandable, freely reusable, and citable for all users. 

Structured Methods

As the traditional Materials and Methods section often includes insufficient detail for readers to wholly assess the research process, the journal encourages authors to publish detailed descriptions of their structured methods in open, online platforms such as protocols.io. By providing a step-by-step description of the methods used in the study, the chance of reproducibility and usability increases, whilst also allowing authors to build on their own works and gain additional credit and citations.

Open Code

If research includes the use of software code, statistical analysis or algorithms then we also recommend that authors upload the code into Code Ocean, where it will be hosted on an open, cloud-based computational reproducibility platform, providing researchers and developers with an easy way to share, validate and discover code published in academic journals.

For more information on how to incorporate open data, protocols.io or Code Ocean into a submission, please visit our reproducibility page.

Authorship

All listed authors must qualify as such, as defined in our authorship guidelines, which have been developed from the ICMJE definitions. All authors must have given permission to be listed on the submitted paper.

Competing Interests, Funding and Ethics 

To ensure transparency, all authors, reviewers and editors are required to declare any interests that could compromise, conflict or influence the validity of the publication. Competing interests guidelines can be viewed here.

In addition, authors are required to specify funding sources and detail requirements for ethical research in the submitted manuscript, ensuring that ethical approval and consent statements are detailed within the manuscript (see Author Guidelines).

Corrections and Retractions

In accordance with guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (where applicable), the Press handles different kinds of error. All articles have their proofs checked prior to publication by the author/editor, which should ensure that content errors are not present. Please contact your editorial manager if an article needs correcting.

Post-publication changes are not permitted to the publication, unless in exceptional circumstances. If an error is discovered in a published article then the publisher will assess whether a Correction paper or Retraction is required. Visit our Correction Policy page for more information.

Tremor publishes two types of corrections: errata and corrigenda. If you discover an error in your article, please reach the Editor-in-Chief at submissions@tremorjournal.org so that the editorial leadership can review your message. If it is determined that a correction to a published article is necessary, we will publish one of the following updates to the version of record based on the nature of the correction:

Errata

An erratum will be published when an error is discovered that was introduced into the paper by the publisher during the production of the article.  

Corrigenda

A corrigendum will be published when an error in an article is discovered that was introduced by the authors of the paper, or was not caught by the authors during the proof review stage. All authors are expected to carefully review their article proofs and are given the opportunity to provide feedback and corrections during this stage. If and when an author-introduced error persists into the final published version, it will be updated with a corrigendum.

All published corrections (errata and corrigenda) will include a link back to the original article that is being corrected. The abstract page of the original article will also indicate that a correction has been issued, and the version of record will be updated to fix the error.

Retractions

Retractions may occur when there is an error “...serious enough to invalidate a paper's results and conclusions” (see ICMJE’s "Corrections, Retractions, Republications and Version Control”).

We follow the Committee on Publication Ethic’s Guidelines for Retraction, which means the editorial leadership will consider retracting an article if it meets the following criteria:

  • There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error);
  • The article or a portion of the article constitutes plagiarism;
  • The article reports unethical research.
The journal will consider retraction with republication where appropriate. All retraction notifications will be published in Tremor and will link to the retracted article. Retraction notifications will be published as promptly as possible, and will clearly state the reason for the retraction.

 

Misconduct and Complaints

Allegations of misconduct will be taken with utmost seriousness, regardless of whether those involved are internal or external to the journal, or whether the submission in question is pre- or post-publication. If an allegation of misconduct is made to the journal, it must be immediately passed on to the publisher, who will follow guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) on how to address the nature of the problem. Should the matter involve allegations against a member of the journal or publishing team, an independent and objective individual(s) may be sought to lead the investigation. Where misconduct is proven or strongly suspected, the journal has an obligation to report the issue to the author's institution, who may conduct their own investigation. This applies to both research misconduct (e.g. completing research without ethical approval and consent, fabricating or falsifying data etc) and publication misconduct (e.g. manipulating the peer review process, plagiarism etc). Should an investigation conclude that misconduct or misinformation has occurred then the author, along with their institution will be notified. Should the publication record need to be corrected, the journal's correction policy will be followed.

Should an author wish to lodge a complaint against an editorial decision or the editorial process in general they should first approach the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, explaining their complaint and ask for a reasoned response. Should this not be forthcoming or adequate, the author should raise the matter with the publisher, who will investigate the nature of the complaint and act as arbiter on whether the complaint should be upheld and investigated further. This will follow guidelines set out by COPE.

Section Policies

Articles

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Brief Reports

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Case Reports

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Reviews

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Viewpoints

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Deep Brain Stimulation Case Files

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Editorials

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

New Observations Letters

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Response Letters: Type 1

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Response Letters: Type 2

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Response Letters: Author Replies

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Video Abstracts

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Conference Proceedings

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Teaching NeuroImages

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Errata

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Corrigenda

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Quick links