The principal concern of Tobacco Control is to provide a forum for research, analysis, commentary, and debate on policies, programmes, and strategies that are likely to further the objectives of a comprehensive tobacco control policy.

The principal concern of Tobacco Control is to provide a forum for research, analysis, commentary, and debate on policies, programmes, and strategies that are likely to further the objectives of a comprehensive tobacco control policy. In papers submitted for review the introduction should indicate why the research reported or issues discussed are important in terms of controlling tobacco use, and the discussion section should include an analysis of how the research reported contributes to tobacco control objectives.

Papers firmly anchored to a strategic policy and programme context are more likely to be accepted for publication. As the journal seeks to reach an international readership, authors should consider whether their intended submissions address issues or themes, which are likely to be of interest to researchers working in other nations. Overly parochial issues, which contain few lessons for tobacco control policy outside a paper's local context, are unlikely to be given high priority. The manuscripts editors will generally not give high priority to:

1. Studies of smoking prevalence and its correlates . These are best suited to national journals. Few people living outside a country are interested in whether that country has 30% or 35% of smokers.
2. Knowledge, attitudes, behaviour (KAB) studies of particular population groups or health professionals. Again, these are better suited to national journals or to health professional speciality journals . Few people in other countries are likely to be interested in (for example) whether nurses in a regional hospital are interested in helping patients quit. National studies, and those taking such studies into original areas are of more interest.
3. Reports that evoke unanimous "so what?" responses from the editors. These are papers with findings that seem to hold no obvious importance for changing policy or practice in tobacco control. They often display methodological finery, but don’t take us anywhere important or interesting.
4. Opinion pieces where the opinions are unoriginal, poorly argued, naïve or disregard for important ethical issues in favour of sloganeering.
5. Papers that show the authors have never opened Tobacco Control and do not understand its primary focus on tobacco control rather than on tobacco and its use and health consequences. We are interested in such papers, but only if their authors address the implications of their findings for tobacco control.
6. Papers with glaringly obvious, fatal methodological problems.
7. Papers on subjects that require highly technical or discipline-specific language unlikely to be understood by the majority of readers.
8. Papers which are replications of already well-established findings or offer little new information.
9. Local studies where the implications for the journal's international audience are unclear.
10. Reports written for governments or local health authorities that someone thought might be given a quick make-over and submitted as a journal paper.

Please click here to view the Impact Factor.

1. Median time from submission to first decision = 6 weeks
   1. 40% of papers rejected without external peer review within 1 week
2. Time from acceptance to publication = 4 months