Submission & Approval Process Guidelines for Existing Publications Content

All publications are reviewed on a five-year basis by CPAG and the responsible volunteer group to ensure content is relevant and up to date. CPAG issues a position whether the content should be retained as is, amended, or archived. Ultimately, the staff communicates CPAG’s final decision to the author, proposal sponsors such as the volunteer group chair and board liaison.

For publications that need to be updated prior to their next review cycle, proposals must be submitted to CPAG for review and approval via the Content Proposal Form. Proposals for updates to existing content are not reviewed by the Board. AIHA staff may consult with the project leader regarding issues with content (i.e., vague statements, unclear references, potentially controversial material, and poor writing).

For EXISTING Position Statements:

STEP 1: All proposals to update EXISTING position statements are initially reviewed by CPAG.

STEP 2: After CPAG's initial review, the proposal is sent to the Board for final review and approval.

STEP 3: Once the position statement has been updated, CPAG reviews the document and recommends the final draft to the Board.

STEP 4: The final document must be reviewed and approved by the Board prior to publication.

NOTE: Updated content will be available via the AIHA webpage, while archived content will not be visible. To see a list of archived documents, click here. To request access to an archived document, click here. Volunteer group leadership may request staff for access to archived data. Archived content is not considered existing content, therefore, proposed projects to update archived content are regarded as new projects.

Peer Review Process

Peer reviewer plays a critical role in the development of AIHA publications. Peer reviewers are subject matter experts on the topic covered by the document, but they do not contribute to the document's development except by providing feedback to authors for improving the quality and validity of the research presented in the manuscript.

Peer reviewers are determined by the volunteers that develop the content. The project leader lists the names of the peer reviewers and selects the peer review level when completing the content proposal form. Once a publication has been approved for development, the manuscript must go through the formal peer-review process prior to publication. Depending on the nature of the content that the author submits, the level of necessary peer review will vary. There are three peer review levels:

Level 1: Content requires peer review by independent members (non-authors) of the originating volunteer group. This content may be described as:

  • Narrow in technical or scientific scope
  • Covered entirely under the expertise of the originating AIHA committee
  • Little or no controversy surrounding the subject matter

Level 2: Content requires peer review by independent reviewers (non-authors) from several technical volunteer groups. This content may be described as:

  • Moderately broad in technical or scientific scope
  • Relating to the expertise and interest of several AIHA committees
  • Encompassing science policy issues amenable to broadly different interpretations and thus subject to potential controversy within the scientific community and AIHA

Level 3: Content requires peer review by multiple technical volunteer groups and selected independent outside experts. This content may be described as:

    • Broad in technical or scientific scope and affecting many disciplines
    • Directly concerning important non-AIHA stakeholders
    • Having the potential to generate intense controversy within and outside of AIHA
    • Having the potential to engage media attention or impact public policy

    For more information on the peer review process, please review the following documents:

    We ensure that no authors will be discriminated against based on the content they provide to improve worker health. We also understand some topics may be more sensitive than others. The fact remains that, if a topic is relevant to worker health and safety, we should craft informational content relevant to it that focuses on science rather than any political, economic, or social goal.

    Ready to submit your idea?

    Please check out the AIHA University before submitting a proposal to avoid proposing a product that we already offer. You may want to contact us about product viability prior to submitting a proposal as we know our market and can help you focus your proposal.