Perspective

1. The 'Perspective' section of the Journal of Health Services Research and Policy (JHSRP) is a short essay, of around 2000 words (and up to 30 references), reviewing either a single, fundamental concept in current use in the arena, or in a cluster of related concepts.

2. The aim of JHSRP is to raise the level of academic and policy debate. The 'Perspective' section contributes towards this, by offering brief, provocative but scholarly reviews of some of the prevalent ideas used in analysis and policy discourse.

3. The problem which it tackles is this: all academics and policy-makers live in a world of sedimented jargon; a rich morass of concepts, slogans and clichés. A few we can define precisely, many we can only vaguely remember, most we have never properly learned but have picked up from seminars, odd bits of reading and from conversation in bars. In a multidisciplinary area, such as HSR and health policy, where each of us must sometimes draw on several different disciplines, our individual understanding of the conceptual stew can be even more tenuous. This difficulty is made even greater by the considerable distance at which all of us operate from our home base. Medical statisticians get cut off from statistics, public health doctors lose contact with clinical medicine and epidemiology, social scientists can become remote from a good deal of the work of their parent disciplines.

4. We need, therefore, to improve our conceptual grasp, both of our own particular area and of the more general health policy arena in which we work. To this end, 'Perspective' recruits leading scholars to produce concise, readable, wide-ranging and informative reviews of some of the basic concepts in the field.

5. In reviewing a concept, authors might consider:

6. We have chosen an essay format to allow our contributors as much flexibility as possible. Each essay will, obviously, be a personal view. However, it is important that the review is not too narrowly focused and that several of the core topics in the list above are touched upon. In particular, the origins, scientific adequacy, popularity and policy implications of the idea should all be considered, though contributors are free to vary the balance between these.

7. The concept chosen for analysis can be an old idea that is mostly taken for granted, or a new phrase that has become widely fashionable. In either case, what is important is that the underlying disciplinary roots of the idea are exposed. New terms that sweep across the arena commonly rest on old ideas from particular disciplines. The aim of the section is to consider the academic base, not simply to compile lists of contemporary jargon or poke fun at the latest cliché.

8. Essays can be either destructive or constructive. Constructive reviews are generally preferred, but sometimes a wholly destructive review is just what is needed. Likewise, although the essays must always be scholarly, there is room, on occasion, for polemic as well as for judicious review. Each essay will be written in language intelligible to those outside the writer's own discipline.

9. The commissioning editor will work with the authors to ensure that 'Perspective' achieves and maintains a high, and reasonably uniform, standard, focus and tone. A detailed first draft should be produced at least one month before the deadline for final submission, so that the editor can check on the standard and provide comments before revision. Acceptance of the essay and final editing are the responsibility of the co-editors of the Journal.

Nick Black
Nicholas Mays
January 2009