Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript as a whole which includes technical aspects of research, formatting errors, content (word count etc), repetition of information, reference citing (Repetition, order, number and old reference), ethical and confidentiality issues in manuscript. In addition the reviewer should evaluate the manuscript under the following guidelines.
Text for original articles should not exceed 5000 words and manuscript should be under following headings starting from Title page, Structured abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgement and References.
Structured Abstract: Should not exceed 250 words and use following subheadings: Objectives, Study design, Place & duration, Methodology, Results, Conclusion and Key words (3 to 7). The abstract shall not contain data not presented in the manuscript.
Introduction: Should contain brief review of the topic with strictly relevant references and historical background and the rationale and the objectives of the study shall be mentioned at the end.
Methodology: Should be started with study design as well as place and duration of the study (day/month/year). It should clearly state inclusion and exclusion criteria of the subjects. The methods and the apparatus used should be identified (with manufacturer’s name and address in the parenthesis), and procedures described in sufficient detail to make a clear understanding of methodology to the readers. Well-established methods shall be cited with references. Statistical tools used for analysis of results shall also be mentioned with enough detail to enable the readers or researchers to verify the reported findings. Subheading and numbering in different criteria’s should be avoided as far as possible unless essentially required and written in paragraph form.
Results: Important findings must be narrated in the text with tables and explained in logical sequence in percentages as well as numeric’s [e.g. 23.37 % (n=32) or 23.37%, n=32]. Only important observations should be emphasized in precise manner and there should be no repetitions. Table number should be mentioned in text while describing its findings. Tables, Bar graphs or Pie diagrams should not be more than five and lengthy tables containing irrelevant information’s are not allowed. Also note that whether result’s data is according to objective of study or not.
Discussion: The findings should be compared with already existing national and international literature supported with references. It shall emphasize the new and important aspects, implications and any limitations of the study. The discussion should be crisp, to the point keeping in view the aims and objective of the study. It should be noted that whether discussion is directed towards objective or not and last paragraph is reaching towards conclusion.
Conclusion/ Recommendations: Should be specific and directed towards the objectives of study, relevant with the title of manuscripts and in author’s own interpretation. It should not contain repetition of results or linked to other studies.
If author(s) want(s) to present appropriate recommendations or suggestions, these may be included after conclusion section under separate heading.
Acknowledgements: Persons who have contributed intellectually or technically to the paper but whose contributions do not justify authorship may be named and their function or contribution shall be clearly described. For example “scientific advisor”, “Critical review of study proposal”, “data collection” or “participation in the clinical trial”. Such persons must have permitted to be named.
References: List must be numbered serially in the order in which the references appear in the text and typed double-spaced on separate sheets. References should be latest (preferably last 10 year) national and international, up to 20-25, cited in Vancouver’s style in conformation the “Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals” (http://www.icmje.org).
Example: References citations to periodicals should include, in the following order: names of the first 6 authors (then et al), title, journal, year, volume, and pages e.g.
· Richards D. Little evidence to support the use of editorial peer review to ensure quality of published research. Avid Based Dent. 2007; 8(3): 88-9
Journal abbreviations must follow the style used in Cumulated index Medicos. Book references shall include, in the following order: names of the first 6 authors, chapter title, editor(s) book title, volume (if any), edition (if any), city, publisher, year and pages of citation (if any); for example:
· Sherry S. Detection of thrombi. In: Strauss HE, Pitt B, James AE, editors. Cardiovascular nuclear medicine. St. Louis: Mosby; 1974.p.273-85.
Meanwhile, reference to chapter in book shall be given in following order:
· Ansel HJ. Normal pancreatic duct. In: Stewart ET, Vennes JA, Geenan JE, eds. Atlas of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. St.Louis: CV Mosby, 1977:43-7
Illustrations: All figures, tables, graphs or pie diagrams should be labeled appropriately according to the data contain and numbered properly. If a figure has been taken from previously copyrighted material, the legend must give full credit to the original source and reference should be given about the source in manuscript. Also make a note if confidentiality is not maintained.
Tables & Graphs: Shall be self-explanatory and should be numbered in the order of their mention in the text and should not be more than five in number. Provide a brief title for each table/graph along with number in Roman numerals (i.e. I, II) at the top for table and at the bottom for graphs. Abbreviations shall be defined in a footnote at the end of the table. In addition, if any material in a table or a table itself has been taken from previously copyright material, a double-spaced footnote must give full credit to the original source along with reference number.
Measurements: All measurements should be in international standard metric units.
Only those case reports which are original and likely to significantly influence medical practice preferably with original figures or illustrations etc are considered for publication. It should include a detailed analysis of the case and a review of the available literature. Case report text should not be more than 1500 words containing not more than 20 latest references. It should be written under following subheadings in sequence: title page, brief non structured abstract, Key words, introduction, case report, discussion, conclusion and references. It is better to put original pictures of patient (with findings); procedure, X-ray, US etc and they should be anonymised according to standard guidelines.
Substantive reviews of biomedical topics will be considered for publication. Some current issue or topic should be thoroughly reviewed covering all aspect in brief. It should be written under the heading Title Page, Abstract (250 words), Keywords (3 to 7), introduction, Review (author can use appropriate headings and subheadings), Conclusion, Acknowledgments and References. It should not be more than 4000 words and maximum of 40 latest national and international references are allowed. The reviewer may also comment whether the author is competent enough regarding knowledge, qualification and experience to write this review.
It should be a brief, substantial commentary on special subjects limited to 2000 words (including references and tables). The language should be crispy and precise. The comments or opinions should be precise not broad based.
LETTER TO EDITOR
Should comprise of brief description or notes to the Editor regarding recently published material or information of timely interest. It should not be longer than 500 words including 5 to 7 references and can be one table or figure.
It should not be more than 1000 words excluding structured abstract of 100-150 words with 3-4 key words and one table or figure. Communication regarding a research study should be written in plain text (without heading) but containing brief methodology, results and discussion in separate paragraphs and references (up to 10.) short communication regarding some topic review should comprise of non-structured abstract, discussion and references.
Reviewer should identify any breach in ethics or confidentiality in research/preparation of manuscript and can point out that informed consent needs to be obtained when applicable. When reporting experiments of human subjects, it should be clearly indicated whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional or regional) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, revised in 1983. Patient’s names, initials or hospital numbers, especially in illustrative material should not be used.
Conflict of Interest
The reviewer should point out if they consider any conflict of interest or authors needs to make any disclosure, associations that might be construed as a conflict of interest (stock ownership, consultancies, etc.)