Non peer-reviewed law pub or rewrite for peer-reviewed

[avgn]

I'm at the point on a project now where I'm thinking of where to publish. The piece is interdisciplinary (kinda) and examines health law and policy (more law than policy). I'm mentored at the law school so naturally we are thinking of law journals. Thing is, there are no peer-reviewed journals in the legal field. Law reviews are edited by the school's best law students, often with professor consultation as to which articles to accept. Sometimes there's no consultation and the students make the decision. This is the status quo and these articles are considered 100% academic articles. People complain about the system a lot but it is what it is.

Never thought a law review would be a problem until I realized recently on ERAS I might have to mark this as a non-peer-reviewed pub. (Thank you SDN!) This is a sole author publication, pretty significant and I've worked very hard. We're confident we can place into a top general review and are all but guaranteed in a top specialized review at home. Are non peer-reviewed pubs weighed against severely? I'd hate to bust my balls and place into a competitive journal but then have PDs/docs not in the know discount it heavily just because of the way the legal academia works.

The alternative would be to adapt the piece (i.e., reframe argument, adapt the writing style) for a peer-reviewed health policy journal like Health Affairs, Milbank, JHPPL. This is no small feat since legal writing is very, er, "different" from the kind of pieces those journals take so I'd have to seek out another mentor to help on that front. These journals are also more recognized by the medical field and indexed by PubMed. But it takes much longer to publish and I fear my piece does not address the issues they debate.

TL;DR: To maximize the utility of a very strong health law/policy research piece, should I submit to a non peer-reviewed law journal (as the field's status quo) or substantively change the piece to submit to a more recognized (at least in medicine) peer-reviewed policy journal?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[avgn]

I feel like @Law2Doc could help out a noob at this point in time 🤔

 

[IslandStyle808]

Just an opinion. Peer-reviewed policy journal if possible. I have a family member who is a lawyer and tried to submit to a local journal. There was not much critique of her article and a lot of the corrections were done by herself. It didn't give me a good impression of the law journal publications.

Try and shoot for a public health journal since it encompasses a great breath of population health issues. I would trust these type of journals over law journals any day of the week.

 

[avgn]

Just an opinion. Peer-reviewed policy journal if possible. I have a family member who is a lawyer and tried to submit to a local journal. There was not much critique of her article and a lot of the corrections were done by herself. It didn't give me a good impression of the law journal publications.

Try and shoot for a public health journal since it encompasses a great breath of population health issues. I would trust these type of journals over law journals any day of the week.

Thanks, but no PH editor would even reach the third sentence of my abstract. I don't want to give too much detail but my piece has nothing to do with most topics that places like AJPH publish on. JLME would be the best peer-reviewed fit actually I think.

Yes there are plenty of podunk journals that are dying to have whatever content they can get their hands on, particularly if it's a boring ass subject but I would never submit to them. The top reviews out there have very involved editors who check every single citation claim (mine has around 150 currently) and make substantive edits after it's accepted for publication.

The trouble is, you see, to the uninitiated it would seem there is no differentiation in the market but there really is and it's quite significant. Would I ever be able to (or need to) make the distinction if published?

 

[IslandStyle808]

Thanks, but no PH editor would even reach the third sentence of my abstract. I don't want to give too much detail but my piece has nothing to do with most topics that places like AJPH publish on. JLME would be the best peer-reviewed fit actually I think.

Yes there are plenty of podunk journals that are dying to have whatever content they can get their hands on, particularly if it's a boring ass subject but I would never submit to them. The top reviews out there have very involved editors who check every single citation claim (mine has around 150 currently) and make substantive edits after it's accepted for publication.

The trouble is, you see, to the uninitiated it would seem there is no differentiation in the market but there really is and it's quite significant. Would I ever be able to (or need to) make the distinction if published?

I see what you mean, you are wondering if PDs understand the differences between such journals or would they just be thrown into one category. Not sure what they would do when they encounter a journal they don't know about in a field they don't know about. Maybe also talk with your faculty to see what journals outside of usual medicine ones they would commonly read, this may give other ideas of where to publish (if you do decide on other journals outside JLME). Sorry I couldn't help you more.

 

[Montisumo]

I would definitely try for peer reviewed if at all possible. Without knowing the content or context I cannot help with journal selection. One note, I'm not sure an adcom would care so much about the journal tier so long as it's peer reviewed. But residency programs are a diff story.

 

[Law2Doc]

In medicine they view your publications in two categories: peer reviewed medical publication, and everything else. You are generally supposed to divide publications up on your CV this way as well. And to the extent you apply for grants in an academic career they only want to look at peer reviewed stuff. So while you certainly get an extra line on your CV with a law publication, you won't get nearly the same mileage. You could have a ton of law journal, public policy and trade journal articles but suspect your CV would be regarded as stronger in medicine if you could swap that for one peer reviewed. But it doesn't even stop there -- even among peer reviewed articles some academic places parse among publications based on the journal's impact factor when in comes to decisions on academic tenure and the like. So hold out for something peer reviewed in medicine if you can get it. If not, it still makes the CV but without the same cache.

 

[avgn]

Awesome, this matches what I thought. I'm not gunning for academia though, just want a good return for my work. Does "peer-reviewed in medicine" count journals like Health Affairs?

Man I really need an MD mentor, got to stop hanging out with these profs who can't help on this end of things 🙁

 

[Amba]

In medicine they view your publications in two categories: peer reviewed medical publication, and everything else. You are generally supposed to divide publications up on your CV this way as well. And to the extent you apply for grants in an academic career they only want to look at peer reviewed stuff. So while you certainly get an extra line on your CV with a law publication, you won't get nearly the same mileage. You could have a ton of law journal, public policy and trade journal articles but suspect your CV would be regarded as stronger in medicine if you could swap that for one peer reviewed. But it doesn't even stop there -- even among peer reviewed articles some academic places parse among publications based on the journal's impact factor when in comes to decisions on academic tenure and the like. So hold out for something peer reviewed in medicine if you can get it. If not, it still makes the CV but without the same cache.

Agreed. IIRC the OP is an entering MS1 and hasn't even started med school yet. I understand wanting a return on time investment, but in all honestly it doesn't matter at all. Publish it where you can and get it off your plate. Plenty of time to get some medically-related research on the CV.

 

[Law2Doc]

Agreed. IIRC the OP is an entering MS1 and hasn't even started med school yet. I understand wanting a return on time investment, but in all honestly it doesn't matter at all. Publish it where you can and get it off your plate. Plenty of time to get some medically-related research on the CV.

Well it's still going to make the CV either way, and in a pool where many don't even have any publications, a law journal article still looks like an accomplishment. But if there's the realistic option for a peer reviewed medical publication definitely go for that.

 

[avgn]

Agreed. IIRC the OP is an entering MS1 and hasn't even started med school yet. I understand wanting a return on time investment, but in all honestly it doesn't matter at all. Publish it where you can and get it off your plate. Plenty of time to get some medically-related research on the CV.

Well it's still going to make the CV either way, and in a pool where many don't even have any publications, a law journal article still looks like an accomplishment. But if there's the realistic option for a peer reviewed medical publication definitely go for that.

Fair enough, thanks for the honesty. I'll probably just do the law journals and finish this project off. It's what I originally wanted anyway, to "get this off my plate" and open up capacity in school. Then switch gears later on. Getting tired of legalese and footnote masturbation anyway

 

[Goro]

I have one SDN advisee who was accepted into a Really Good School and had no science-related publications, but had authored a number of health policy papers.

Well it's still going to make the CV either way, and in a pool where many don't even have any publications, a law journal article still looks like an accomplishment. But if there's the realistic option for a peer reviewed medical publication definitely go for that.