Abstract
A consecutive series of 500 papers submitted to the ‘Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry’ is evaluated to provide information on Journal publication procedures, to assess the Journal peer review process and to examine factors associated with the outcome of submissions. While the majority of submissions was by psychiatrists and psychologists, the highest acceptance rates were for papers presented by psychiatric registrars and by psychiatrists. Of the submissions for which a final decision had been made, 50% were accepted for publication and very few papers were accepted without revision. Regional differences in submission rates were noted and, more importantly, regional differences in acceptance rates were quantified. A subsidiary analysis suggested that the latter differences reflected a general pattern and were not peculiar to, or a reflection of, Journal policy.