Submission Guidlines for Authors
The New England Journal of Homeopathy invites the submission of articles, essays, case studies, research and correspondence that relate to classical homeopathy. The purpose of our journal is to provide an educational forum for practitioners of classical homeopathy which is appealing and relevant in both appearance and content. We look forward to receiving your submission.
These guidelines are offered as a way to support your work and to set broad parameters for submission to this publication. Please do not hesitate to call us if you have questions or concerns about an article you are thinking about writing. We are happy to talk over article ideas with willing writers.
We have readers from all over the globe who vary widely in practice experience, homeopathic philosophy and access to homeopathic education. Because of this, we aim to provide a reading culture which is equally varied, while staying within the (debatable!) confines of classical homeopathy. We send all articles out for peer review, so that we might be able to offer you comments and feedback on content and style, from the field, before we choose to publish. This is done by volunteers who will not know who has written the article. Articles may be sent back for major revisions, when applicable.
Some of the different subject areas found in our journal (i.e.Cases and Beyond the Remedy) require a few further guidelines which are listed here, after general house-keeping guidelines which are relevant for all submissions.
For all articles:
1. Italicize all remedies and spell out remedy names completely (i.e. Natrum muriaticum, not Nat. Mur. The first word in a two word Latin named remedy is capitalized, the second is not.)
2. If you do not yet write well, please have someone do your first-round editing. Poorly written pieces will be sent back before peer review for a rewrite.
3. Submit all pieces on disk with a double spaced hard copy.
4. Include a brief bio on yourself: 2-3 lines only.
5. Use appropriate references, acknowledgments and credits when necessary for books, periodicals, teachers, and computer programs.
6. Include a working title (we many or may not choose to use it).
7. Do not submit your article simultaneously to other publications.
8. If you have been trained to do case analysis or materia medica study through the Understanding of Analysis through Cycles and Segments, as taught by Paul Herscu, please include this thinking in your article.
For cases:
Not all of these suggestions will be relevant for your case, but please read them through for ideas. (*for all cases)
*1. There must be at least one year follow-up for all chronic cases, and appropriate follow-up for acute cases.
*2. Include written release from patient or patient’s parent if patient is a minor. Change identifying information as necessary, but still provide that release. Please contact us if you need a sample release.
*3. For chronic cases, we are interested in your thought processes during case taking and case analysis and those which reflect your thoughts about the case over long term follow-up. We are less interested in the ‘ta-dah’ cases, which ultimately don’t teach much. Feel free to elaborate on the how and why you managed the case as you did. Let readers see your shortcomings, what didn’t work and why and how you were able to turn a case around.
For acute cases it is not necessary to elaborate so, but do discuss your differential diagnosis in terms of allopathic diagnosis if relevant, as well as the remedy selection.
If you use other modalities simultaneously, describe these in detail: diet, botanical medicine, therapeutic nutrition, etc. Most readers are curious as to how other people actually practice in the larger scheme of things.
*4. If you are presenting a case of an unusual pathology, please describe briefly the pathophysiology and usual prognosis.
*5. Include the approaches a patient has tried before homeopathy, if relevant.
*6. Discuss the allopathic treatments which are being used simultaneously.
7. What are your thoughts about the prognosis for this patient?
8. Are there comparisons to make about other patients who have done well with this remedy? Or other patients who did/didn’t do well with this pathology?
9. Anything you would do differently?
10. Any tidbits or clinical “pearls” you care to share?
11. Any words of encouragement for other practitioners?
12. Include repertorization- why you chose those rubrics, how you actually did the repertorization.
13. Offer comparative materia medica if possible.
Beyond the remedy:
1. Briefly describe the problem in allopathic terms and the usual treatments.
2. Completely explain natural medicine regimens with accurate dosages. Use Latin and common names for all botanical preparations.
3. Give complete dosage and frequency information for vitamin, mineral, and other supplement preparations.
4. Include other at home remedies when appropriate i.e. hydrotherapy, massage etc.
5. Include information for further study.
Happy reflecting and writing,
Amy Rothenberg, ND, DHANP