2026 is a pivotal year for the Medical Journal of Australia (MJA), marking a significant shift in its approach and appearance. Over the past year, we've been hard at work, contemplating how to best position the journal for the future. This process has involved considering both the journal's visual presentation and the management of its editorial processes.
As with any journal, the MJA's editorial team sets its priorities and values, and we must carefully balance these with our capabilities to produce a diverse range of content that appeals to a wide audience of practitioners, researchers, and policymakers within the Australian health system. We recognize the immense responsibility and power we hold as journal editors, and we aim to provide authors with a collaborative and constructive peer review process, ensuring their work and careers are respected and valued.
However, the intricate workings of a journal can make it challenging to balance speed and efficiency with detailed processes. In the three years since I became Editor-in-Chief, submissions have increased significantly, with a notable rise in international submissions, now accounting for almost a third of all papers. This growth presents a challenge for the MJA and other selective journals: how to efficiently identify and publish high-quality papers that align with our scope.
In my experience, submissions can be categorized into four distinct groups. The first group comprises papers that, regardless of quality, are not relevant to Australian healthcare due to their non-Australian focus or pre-clinical nature. Some of these papers bear the hallmarks of paper mills, and I would encourage authors to carefully consider the value of submitting such papers to the MJA, as they will not be published.
The second group consists of papers that may have some relevance to Australian healthcare but do not meet our qualitative criteria as high-priority content. These criteria are outlined in our author and reviewer guidelines and include topics related to high disease burden, public health interest, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led research, and immediate impact on clinical practice or policy in Australia.
The third group includes papers that meet our qualitative criteria but have fundamental issues in their design or write-up that require significant input from the journal to address. These issues could range from research studies lacking rigor to ethical concerns, poor reporting, or limited access to underlying data. For non-research manuscripts, a common limitation is a lack of grounding in previous work, making assessment challenging.
The final group comprises papers that align with our criteria and are well-reported or written, with no obvious issues that would prevent publication. These are the papers we send for peer review, and if no substantial issues arise, they will eventually be published.
So, how does this categorization relate to the strategic changes we've implemented in 2025? Understanding our workflow has been crucial in planning efficient process management for the journal's future. One significant change is the reorganization of our in-house team, which now includes five part-time Associate Editors working alongside the Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor, and Senior Editors. By recruiting these Associate Editors, we aim to expand our reach within the Australian research and healthcare communities and build capacity in editorial processes. Over time, we hope to develop a substantial cohort of clinicians and medical academics with editorial experience.
As a result, we will be more selective about which papers we send for external peer review, aiming to reduce the burden on reviewers while still providing valuable feedback to authors. For papers rejected without peer review, we intend to make these decisions swiftly.
We've also made changes to our post-review processes and the time around acceptance. Our team has been reorganized to include a Managing Editor and a Publishing Project Editor, and while we will continue to edit papers for typos and inconsistencies, we will not undertake major structural edits after acceptance. Instead, we will work closely with authors pre-acceptance to minimize changes required post-acceptance, ensuring a quicker turnaround for published papers.
Additionally, we will be making changes to the appearance of individual articles and the journal as a whole, as well as the publishing cadence. This change is already underway with a new PDF format, and articles are now published continuously rather than tied to specific issues. Compiled issues will appear monthly instead of 22 times a year, starting with the first issue of 2026. In mid-2026, our websites will undergo a complete redesign to enhance display and functionality.
All these changes have been meticulously planned, and we hope they will positively impact authors and readers. We welcome your feedback and look forward to continuing our mission of providing high-quality evidence and insights to support advances in Australian healthcare and health equity.
