期刊名称：ARCHIVES OF NEUROLOGY
 期刊简介(About the journal)
投稿须知(Instructions to Authors)
编辑部信息(Editorial Board)
About the journal
Mission Statement: The mission of the Archives of Neurology is to publish scientific information primarily important for those physicians caring for people with neurologic disorders but also for those interested in the structure and function of the normal and diseased nervous system. These specific aims are (1) to make timely publication of original research of the nervous system, (2) to record observations of single patients or groups of patients that will provide new information and insights, (3) to report more basic research that is pertinent to the understanding of disease, (4) to introduce topics of practice, ethics, teaching, and history that are useful, (5) to provide a forum for discussion on topics that may be controversial in this field. This information will be published only after extensive peer review so that originality, clarity, and precision are insured.
Instructions to Authors
Electronic Submission
Manuscripts should be submitted via our online submission and review system (http://manuscripts.archneurol.com). Print mail address and telephone and fax numbers of the corresponding author also should be included on the title page of the manuscript. Signed authorship forms should be sent by regular mail or fax. Manuscripts submitted through our online system should not also be submitted by mail or e-mail. Manuscripts submitted by regular mail will not be reviewed and will not be returned. Authors will be notified by e-mail to resubmit electronically. If authors do not receive an acknowledgment e-mail notificiation within 2 days, they should notify the Archives office via e-mail or telephone.
To ensure that the electronic submission is usable, please adhere to the following guidelines when submitting your manuscript electronically.
Text: Save the text in Microsoft Word.
Tables: Tables can be submitted as separate files or inserted at the end of the manuscript file. Make certain that each item in the table is in its own table cell. Do not use paragraph returns (to start new rows) or tabs (to start new columns).
Figures: Please refer to the Instructions in Technical Requirements for Figures for guidelines at submission and acceptance.
Editorial Office Contact Information
Roger N. Rosenberg, MD, Chief Editor, Department of Neurology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX 75390-9108.
TOP
Archives Express
Archives Express provides rapid peer review and publication of original research of major clinical or public health importance. All such manuscripts must be screened and approved for Archives Express. Authors who wish to have manuscripts considered for Archives Express should indicate it in their cover letter. (See the editorial in the September 2000 issue.)
TOP
Categories of Articles
Original Contributions. Randomized trials, intervention studies, studies of screening and diagnostic tests, cohort studies, cost-effectiveness analyses, case-control studies, and surveys with high response rates. Registered trials should include the registry and the registration number. Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study setting and time period, patients or participants with inclusion and exclusion criteria, or data sources and how these were selected for the study); the essential features of any interventions; the main outcome measures; the main results of the study; a “Comment” section placing the results in the context of published literature; and the conclusions. Maximum length: 3000 words, excluding tables, figure legends, and references. A total word count should be provided with each manuscript (including the abstracts, all text, tables, figure legends, and references).
Neurological Reviews. Systematic, critical assessments of literature and data sources pertaining to clinical or basic science topics, emphasizing factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention. All articles and data sources reviewed should include information about the specific type of study or analysis, population, intervention, exposure, and test or outcomes. All articles or data sources should be selected systematically for inclusion in the review and critically evaluated, and the selection process should be described in the paper. Meta-analyses also will be considered as reviews. Maximum length: 3000 words (including the abstracts, all text, tables, figure legends, and references).
Clinical Trials. Clinical trial manuscripts are of interest to the Archives of Neurology and submission of them is encouraged. Randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trials are preferred that relate to the broad diversity of human neurological disease. Open-labeled studies that are controlled will be considered. Anecdotal case reports or small collections of patients that are not compared carefully with a control population of subjects will not be considered. Indicate in the letter of submission with your data that (1) you have had access to all data; your corporate sponsor has not been restrictive of any data; (2) you have had the right to publish all data; your corporate sponsor has not been restrictive of publishing any data; (3) you have obtained statistical analyses of your data separate from any statistical analyses done by your corporate sponsor. The word count for a clinical trial paper is 3000 words, including the abstract, all text, tables, figure legends, and references. Provide word counts for each section and for the total number of words. Please follow the Electronic Submission guidelines. Send a signed copyright form for each author. For further information about clinical trials, see Trial Registration.
Commentary in Neurology. This section features position papers in support of, and opposed to, a controversial neurological issue, including disease nosology, mechanism of disease, specific diagnostic procedures, therapies, and related subjects. Each position paper should not exceed 3000 words and should have fewer than 30 references. Presubmission inquiries for this section should be sent to the section editor, E. S. Roach, MD: esroach@earthlink.net .
Images in Neurology. This feature is intended to provide a visual image of an interesting and unique neurological observation. Images of patients along with photomicrographs of tissues, MRIs (magnetic resonance images), CTs (computed tomography), PET (positron emission tomography) scans, SPECT (single-photon emission tomography) scans, angiograms, and other diagnostic visual procedures would be appropriate. A 500-word description (including all text, tables, figure legends, and references) of the clinical issue, the patient’s neurological findings, and the image should be included. There should be no more than 2 images and 4 references.
Observations. Short reports or original studies or evaluations or unique, first-time reports or clinical cases (individual or a series). Maximum length: 2000 words (including the abstract, all text, tables, figure legends, and references). A total word count should be provided with each manuscript.
Letters to the Editor. Letters discussing a recent Archives of Neurology article are welcome. Letters should be received within 4 weeks of the article’s publication and should not exceed 400 words (including all text, tables, figure legends, and references). The Archives also offers the Research Letter. It is intended to provide a means to communicate short original research in a highly focused manner. Important, fast-breaking research that lends itself to a short communication and that can be reviewed rapidly is our objective. Papers should not exceed 600 words of text and should have fewer than 6 references. A single table or figure may be included. In general, Research Letters should be divided into the following sections: an introduction (with no heading), Methods, Results, and Comment. Research Letters should be double spaced and a word count should be provided with each letter.
TOP
Editorial Policies for Authors
Authorship Responsibility, Criteria, and Contributions; Financial Disclosure; Copyright Transfer; and Acknowledgment Statement. Authors are required to identify each author’s contribution to the work described in the manuscript. In the cover letter include (1) statement on authorship responsibility, (2) statement on financial disclosure, and 1 of the 2 statements on copyright or federal employment. Each of these 3 statements must be read and signed by all authors. The corresponding author must sign (3) the acknowledgment statement. (See the Authorship Form.)
Group Authorship. If authorship is attributed to a group (either solely or in addition to 1 or more individual authors), all members of the group must meet the full criteria and requirements for authorship described in the form at the end of these instructions. If that is not the case, a group must designate 1 or more individuals as authors or members of a writing group who meet full authorship criteria and requirements and who will take responsibility for the group, in which case the other group members are not authors, but may be listed in an acknowledgment(Flanagin A, Fontanarosa PB, DeAngelis CD. Authorship for research groups. JAMA. 2002;288[24]:3166-3168).
Conflict of Interest. A conflict of interest may exist when an author (or the author’s institution or employer) has financial or personal relationships that could inappropriately influence (or bias) the author’s decisions, work, or manuscript. All authors are required to report potential conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests relevant to the subject of their manuscript, in their cover letter and on Archives of Neurology’s financial disclosure form or in an attachment to the form. Authors without relevant financial interests in the manuscript should indicate no such interest (DeAngelis CD, Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A. Reporting financial conflicts of interest between investigators and research sponsors. JAMA. 2001;286[1]:89-91).
Authors are required to report detailed information regarding all financial and material support for the research and work, including but not limited to grant support, funding sources, and provision of equipment and supplies. Each author also is required to sign and submit the following financial disclosure statement: “I certify that all my affiliations with or financial involvement, within the past 5 years and foreseeable future (eg, employment; consultancies; honoraria; speakers bureau; stock ownership or options; expert testimony; grants; patents filed, received, pending, or in preparation; royalties; or donation of medical equipment) with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript are completely disclosed.”
Authors are expected to provide detailed information about any relevant financial interests or financial conflicts within the past 5 years and for the foreseeable future, particularly those present at the time the research was conducted and up to the time of publication, as well as other financial interests, such as relevant filed or pending patents or patent applications in preparation, that represent potential future financial gain. Although many universities and other institutions and organizations have established policies and thresholds for reporting financial interests and other conflicts of interest, Archives of Neurology requires complete disclosure of all relevant financial relationships and potential financial conflicts of interest, regardless of amount or value. If authors are uncertain about what might constitute a potential financial conflict of interest, they should err on the side of full disclosure and should contact the editorial office if they have questions or concerns. In addition, authors who have no relevant financial interests are asked to provide a statement indicating that they have no financial interests related to the material in the manuscript.
This information is for the editorial office and is not shared with peer reviewers. However, for all accepted manuscripts, each author’s disclosures of relevant financial interests and declarations of no relevant financial interests will be published. Decisions about whether financial information provided by authors should be published, and thereby disclosed to readers, are usually straightforward. Although editors are willing to discuss disclosure of specific financial information with authors, Archives of Neurology’s policy is one of complete disclosure of all relevant financial interests.
The policy requesting disclosure of conflicts of interest applies for all manuscript submissions, including letters to the editor and book reviews.
Funding/Support and Role of Sponsor. All financial and material support for the research and the work should be clearly and completely identified in an acknowledgment. The role of the funding organization or sponsor in each of the following should be specified: “design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript” (DeAngelis CD, Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A. Reporting financial conflicts of interest and relationships between investigators and research sponsors. JAMA. 2001;286[1]:89-91).
Data Access and Responsibility. For clinical trials sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, authors must state in their letter of submission that (1) they have had full access to all the data, (2) they have the right to publish all the data, and (3) they have had the right to obtain independent statistical analyses of the data. For any report containing original data, at least 1 author (eg, the principal investigator) should indicate that he or she “takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis” (DeAngelis CD, Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A. Reporting financial conflicts of interest and relationships between investigators and research sponsors. JAMA. 2001;286[1]:89-91). For industry-sponsored studies, the data analysis should be conducted by statisticians at an academic center, rather than only by statisticians employed by the company sponsoring the research. Manuscripts containing statistical evaluations should include the name and affiliation of the statistical reviewer.
Duplicate/Previous Publication or Submission. Manuscripts are received with the understanding that they are not under simultaneous consideration by another publication.
Reporting Race/Ethnicity. If race and/or ethnicity is reported, indicate who classified individuals as to race/ethnicity, the classifications, and whether the options were defined by the investigator or the participant. Explain why race and/or ethnicity was assessed in the study (Winker M. Measuring race and ethnicity: why and how? JAMA. 2004;292[13]:1612-1613).
Informed Consent. For experimental investigations of human or animal subjects, state in the “Methods” section of the manuscript that an appropriate institutional review board approved the project. For those investigators who do not have formal ethics review committees (institutional or regional), the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki should be followed. For investigations of human subjects, state in the “Methods” section the manner in which informed consent was obtained from the subjects. A letter of consent must accompany all photographs of patients in which a possibility of identification exists. It is not sufficient to cover the eyes to mask identity.
Patient Descriptions, Photographs, and Pedigrees. Include a signed statement of informed consent to publish (in print and online) patient descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees from all persons (parents or legal guardians for minors) who can be identified in such written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees. Refer to patients by number (or, in anecdotal reports, by fictitious given names). Real names or intials should not be used in the text, tables, or illustrations. (See Patient Consent Form.)
Personal Communications and Unpublished Data. Include a signed statement of permission from each individual identified as a source of information in a personal communication or as a source for unpublished data, and specify the date of communication and whether the communication was written or oral.
Depositing Research Manuscripts With an Approved Public Repository. All Archives Journal articles reporting original research are made freely available 12 months after publication, from 1998 forward, subject to certain conditions. The Archives Journals’ Editors and Publishers believe that the public is best served by accessing the freely available research articles on the journal site, to ensure access to the final published version, any corrections, and related Web features. However, some funding organizations require that authors of manuscripts reporting research deposit those manuscripts with an approved public repository, such as PubMed Central. Authors have the Archives Journals’ permission on the following conditions:
1. Permission is granted only for manuscripts reporting research funded by not-for-profit organizations to be deposited in not-for-profit, publicly available repositories.
2. Permission is granted to post only the manuscript reporting research that was submitted and accepted for publication but not the final, edited, formatted, and published article.
3. Authors must ensure that the posted manuscript links back to the published article on the Archives Journals Web site to provide readers with access to the final reviewed and edited version plus any corrections and letters, as well as the article-related features only available on the Archives Journals Web site.
4. Authors who submit their manuscripts to an approved public repository, such as PubMed Central, must indicate that the manuscript may not be made available to the public sooner than 12 months after publication in the Archives Journals.
If authors adhere to these requirements, they may submit the final accepted version of the manuscript to the repository, if and only if the repository ensures that the deposited manuscript will not be made available to the public during the 12-month embargo following publication in the Archives Journals.
The published article is protected by copyright at the time of publication and thereafter (see http://pubs.ama-assn.org/misc/conditions.dtl). This research access policy does not include permission to use the Archives Journal logo and trademarks. The Archives Journal article of record is the final published version; the Archives Journals assume no responsibility for earlier versions because substantive changes and corrections may occur during the post acceptance editing process. Authors may contact the Archives Journals with any questions at jama-comments@jama-archives.org .
Embargo Policy. All information regarding the content and publication date of accepted manuscripts is strictly confidential. Information contained in or about accepted articles cannot appear in print, on radio or television, or in electronic form or be released by the media until 3 pm CST on the second Monday of the month.
Unauthorized Use. Accepted manuscripts become the permanent property of the American Medical Association (AMA) and may not be published elsewhere without permission from the publisher (AMA).
TOP
Editorial Review and Publication
Cover Letter. Designate a corresponding author and provide a complete address, telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address.
Peer Review. All submitted manuscripts are reviewed initially by an editor. Manuscripts with insufficient priority for publication are rejected promptly. Other manuscripts are sent to expert consultants for peer review. Peer reviewer identities are kept confidential, but author identities are made known to reviewers. The existence of a manuscript under review is not revealed to anyone other than peer reviewers and editorial staff. Information from submitted manuscripts may be systematically collected and analyzed as part of research to improve the quality of the editorial or peer review process. Identifying information remains confidential. Reviews and decisions on manuscripts in which the editor or one of the associate editors is a coauthor are managed independently by another editor, in conjunction with a member of the editorial board.
Editing. Accepted manuscripts are copyedited according to AMA style and returned to the author for approval. The author will receive an edited typescript rather than galley proofs for approval. Authors are responsible for all statements made in their work, including changes made by the copy editor and authorized by the corresponding author.
Reprints. Reprints may be ordered when the edited typescript is sent for approval to the corresponding author (download Reprint Order Form). Reprints are shipped 3 weeks after publication. AMA does not charge a permission fee to authors who wish to use their articles or parts thereof in other books or journals. However, an author must obtain permission from AMA, as the copyright holder, for such use. To do so, send written request to Rhonda Bailey Brown, Department of Licensing and Permissions, AMA, 515 N State St, Chicago, IL 60654; fax: (312) 464-5835 (permissions@ama-assn.org ). In the permission you receive, the proper credit line will be indicated.
e-Prints. Corresponding authors who provide an e-mail address for publication will receive an electronic link that provides 25 free online accesses to the PDF view of their article.
TOP
Manuscript Checklist
- • On the title page, include a word count that includes text, title, abstract, references, tables, and figure legends.
- • On the title page, designate a corresponding author and provide a complete address, telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address.
- • Send by mail or fax statements signed by each author on authorship responsibility, criteria, and contributions; financial disclosure; and copyright transfer or federal employment.
- • Indicate general and specific contributions from each author.
- • Send by mail or fax statements signed by corresponding author that written permission has been obtained from all persons named in the acknowledgment.
- • Include research or project support/funding in an acknowledgment.
- • Double-space manuscript and leave right margins unjustified (ragged). Do not add line numbering.
- • Check all references for accuracy and completeness.
- • Put references in proper format in numerical order, making sure each is cited in sequence in the text.
- • Include a title for each table and figure—a brief, succinct phrase, preferably no longer than 10 to 15 words.
- • If a submission is accepted for publication, we will require slides or high-quality glossies of all figures (computer-generated graphics produced by high-quality laser printers are acceptable for black-and-white line art only).
- • For digitally enhanced images, indicate method of enhancement in legend; provide 3 copies of the enhanced and original images.
- • Provide an abstract that conforms with the required abstract format, if applicable.
- • Send by mail or fax written permission from each individual identified as a source of personal communication or unpublished data.
- • Send by mail or fax informed consent forms for identifiable patient descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees.
TOP
Manuscript Preparation
Manuscripts should be prepared in accordance with the AMA Manual of Style (10th ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2007) and/or the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals.
Manuscript Components. Submit the original manuscript (please see instructions under Electronic Submission). Use only 10- or 12-point font size. Ample margins of at least 2.5 cm (1 in) should be provided. Do not justify right-hand margins. Do not add line numbering. On the title page include the full names, highest academic degrees, and affiliations of all authors. If an author’s affiliation has changed since the work was done, list the new affiliation as well.
Cover Letter. Designate a corresponding author and provide a complete address, telephone, and fax numbers, and e-mail address.
Title Page. Titles should be short, specific, and clear. They should not exceed 42 characters per line, including punctuation and spaces, and should be limited to 2 lines, if possible. Do not use abbreviations in the title. The title page should include the full names and academic affiliations of all authors and the address to which requests for reprints should be sent.
Abstract. Provide a structured abstract for Original Contributions and Observations following the guidelines set forth in the Instructions for Preparing Structured Abstracts. Unstructured abstracts are required for Neurological Review and Practice of Neurology sections. The abstract replaces the summary. The remaining sections do not require an abstract.
Units of Measure. Laboratory values are expressed using conventional units of measure, with relevant Système International (SI) conversion factors expressed secondarily (in parentheses) only at first mention. Articles that contain numerous conversion factors may list them together in a paragraph at the end of the “Methods” section. In tables and figures, a conversion factor to SI units should be provided in a footnote or legend. The metric system is preferred for the expression of length, area, mass, and volume. A Conversion Table is available on the Web site for the AMA Manual of Style.
Gene Names, Symbols, and Accession Numbers. Authors describing genes or related structures in a manuscript should include the names and official symbols provided by the US National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) or the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee. Before submission of a research manuscript reporting on large genomic data sets (eg, protein or DNA sequences), the data sets should be deposited in a publicly available database, such as NCBI’s GenBank, and a complete accession number (and version number, if appropriate) must be provided in the “Methods” section or the Acknowledgments section of the manuscript.
Reproduced Material. Archives of Neurology prefers not to republish text, tables, figures, or other material from other publishers, except under rare circumstances. Please delete any such material and replace with originals.
References. List references in consecutive numerical order (not alphabetically). Once a reference is cited, all subsequent citations should be to the original number. All references must be cited in the text or tables. Unpublished data and personal communications should not be listed as references but given parenthetically in the text. Include a signed statement of permission from each individual identified as a source of information in a personal communication or as a source for unpublished data, and specify the date of communication and whether the communication was written or oral.
References to journal articles should include (1) author(s) (list all authors and/or editors up to 6; if more than 6, list the first 3 and “et al”), (2) title, (3) journal name (as abbreviated in Index Medicus), (4) year, (5) volume number, (6) issue number, and (7) inclusive page numbers, in that order. References to books should include (1) author(s) (list all authors and/or editors up to 6; if more than 6, list the first 3 and “et al”), (2) chapter title (if any), (3) editor (if any), (4) title of book, (5) city of publication, (6) publisher, and (7) year. Volume and edition numbers, specific pages, and name of translator should be included when appropriate. The author is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the references and for their correct text citation.
Web References. Please keep a print copy of any reference to Web-only information. If the URL changes or disappears, interested readers may contact the corresponding author for a copy of the information.
Tables and Figures. Number all tables and figures in the order of their citation in the text. Include a title for each table and figure—a brief, succinct phrase, preferably no longer than 10 to 15 words.
Tables. Title all tables and number them in order of their citation in the text. See the Instructions for Table Creation.
Illustrations. Use only those illustrations that clarify and augment the text. Artwork submitted for publication may be relettered to achieve uniformity of lettering style throughout the journal. Magnification and stain should be provided when pertinent. See Technical Requirements for Figures for guidelines at submission and at acceptance.
Digital Art Submissions. See Technical Requirements for Figures for guidelines at submission and at acceptance.
Legends. Include double-spaced legends (maximum length, 40 words) on separate pages. For photomicrographs, include the type of specimen, original magnification, and stain. Include internal scale markers on electromicrographs. Indicate the method of enhancement for digitally enhanced images.
Digital Enhancement of Images. Digitally enhanced images (CT/MRI, blots, photographs, photomicrographs, ultrasound images, x-ray films, etc) must be clearly identified in the figure legends as digitally processed images.
Illustrations in full color are accepted for publication at no charge to the author if the editors believe that color will add significantly to the published manuscript.
Image Integrity. Preparation of scientific images (clinical images, radiographic images, micrographs, gels, etc) for publication must preserve the integrity of the image data. Digital adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color applied uniformly to an entire image are permissible as long as these adjustments do not selectively highlight, misrepresent, obscure, or eliminate specific elements in the original figure, including the background. Selective adjustments applied to individual elements in an image are not permissible. Individual elements may not be moved within an image field, deleted, or inserted from another image. Cropping may be used for efficient image display but must not misrepresent or alter interpretation of the image by selectively eliminating relevant visual information. Juxtaposition of elements from different parts of a single image or from different images, as in a composite, must be clearly indicated by the addition of dividing lines, borders, and/or panel labels.
When inappropriate image adjustments are detected by the JAMA and Archives Journals staff, authors will be asked for an explanation and will be requested to submit the image as originally captured prior to any adjustment, cropping, or labeling. Authors may be asked to resubmit the image prepared in accordance with the above standards. Deliberate alteration of images that results in misrepresentation of data may be reported to the author’s institution or funding agency.
Online-Only Material. Authors may submit supporting material to accompany their article for online-only publication when there is insufficient space to include the material in the print article. This material should be important to the understanding and interpretation of the report and should not repeat material in the print article. The amount of online-only material should be limited and justified. Online-only material should be original and not previously published.
Online-only material will undergo editorial and peer review with the main manuscript. If the manuscript is accepted for publication and if the online-only material is deemed appropriate for publication by the editors, it will be posted online at the time of publication of the article as additional material provided by the authors. This material will not be edited or formatted; thus, the authors are responsible for the accuracy and presentation of all such material.
Online-only material should be submitted in a single Word document with pages numbered consecutively. Each element included in the online-only material should be cited in the text of the main manuscript (eg, see eTable) and numbered in order of citation in the text (eg, eTable 1, eTable 2, eFigure 1, eFigure 2, eMethods). The first page of the online-only document should list the number and title of each element included in the document.
Online-Only Text. Online-only text should be set in Times New Roman font, 10 point in size, and single-spaced. The main heading of the online-only text should be in 12 point and boldface; subheadings should be in 10 point and boldface.
Online-Only References. All references cited within the online-only document must be included in a separate reference section, including those that also were cited in the main manuscript. They should be formatted just as in the main manuscript and numbered and cited consecutively in the online-only material.
Online-Only Tables. Online-only tables should be inserted in the document and numbered consecutively according to the order of citation as eTable 1, eTable 2, etc. The text and data in online tables should be Arial font, 10 point in size, and single-spaced. The table title should be set in Arial font, 12 point, and bold. Headings within tables should be set in 10 point and bold. Table footnotes should be set in 8 point and single-spaced. See also instructions for Tables above. If a table runs on to subsequent pages, repeat the column headers at the top of each page. Wide tables my be presented using a landscape orientation.
Online-Only Figures. Online-only figures should be inserted in the document and numbered consecutively according to the order of citation as eFigure 1, eFigure 2, etc. Figure titles should be set in Arial font, 12 point, bold, and single-spaced. Text within figures should be set as Arial font, 10 point. Figure legends should be set in 8 point and single-spaced. Graphs and diagrams should be exported directly out of the software application used to create them in a vector file format, such as WMF, and then inserted into the Word document. Image file formats such as JPG, TIF, and GIF are generally not suitable for graphs. Photographs, including all radiological images, should be prepared as JPG (highest option) or TIF (uncompressed) files at a resolution of 300 dpi and width of 3-5 inches, but the resolution of photographic files with an original resolution <300 dpi should not be increased digitally to achieve a 300-dpi resolution. Photographs should be inserted in the document with the “Link to File” button turned off. Wide figures may be presented using a landscape orientation.
Videos. For editorial and peer review of an initial submission, submit videos in .mov, .wmv, .mpg, .mpeg, .mp4, or .avi file format. To facilitate uploading and reviewing, the initial video submission should not exceed 10 MB. Verify that all videos are viewable in QuickTime or Windows Media Player before submission. Once the video has been approved for submission, you will be asked to upload an uncompressed version of the file in .dv or similar format (no size limit), with minimum physical dimensions of 480 pixels wide by 360 pixels high, to a secure FTP server. Please be prepared to provide this larger version promptly on request.
For each video, provide a citation in the appropriate place in the manuscript text and include a title (a brief phrase, preferably no longer than 10-15 words) and a caption/legend (a brief description or summary of the content) at the end of the manuscript. In the video caption/legend, specify the video file format and briefly describe the content of the video. Also, enter the same title and caption/legend in the designated fields on the Web-based manuscript submission system when uploading each video. If multiple video files are submitted, number them in the order in which they should be viewed.
Note: If the manuscript and accompanying video(s) are accepted for publication, all video files will be placed into a journal video frame and may be edited by the journal staff according to journal style.
Statistical Review. Manuscripts containing statistical evaluations should include the name and affiliation of the statistical reviewer.
TOP
Instructions for Preparing Structured Abstracts*
All manuscripts that are (1) reports of clinical data, (2) reports of basic science data, or (3) reviews, including meta-analyses, should be submitted with structured abstracts as described below.
To permit quick and selective scanning and allow more information to be conveyed per unit of space, the headings outlined below should be included in the abstract. For brevity, parts of the abstract can be written in phrases rather than complete sentences. (For example: “2. Design. Double-blind randomized trial,” rather than “2. Design. The study was conducted as a double-blind, randomized trial.”)
*Adapted from Haynes RB, Mulrow CD, Huth EJ, Altman DG, Gardner MJ. More informative abstracts revisited. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113(1):69-76.
TOP
Reports of Clinical Data
Authors submitting manuscripts reporting clinical data should prepare an abstract of no more than 250 words under the following headings: Objective, Design, Setting, Patients (or Other Participants), Interventions (if any), Main Outcome Measures, Results, and Conclusions. The content following each heading should be as follows:
- 1. Objective. The abstract should begin with a clear statement of the precise objective or question addressed in the report. If more than 1 objective is addressed, the main objective should be indicated and only key secondary objectives stated. If an a priori hypothesis was tested, it should be stated.
- 2. Design. The basic design of the study should be described. The duration of follow-up, if any, should be stated. As many of the following terms as apply should be used.
- A. Intervention studies: randomized controlled trial; nonrandomized controlled trial; double-blind; placebo-controlled; crossover trial; before-after trial.
- B. For studies of screening and diagnostic tests: criterion standard (that is, a widely accepted standard with which a new or alternative test is being compared; this term is preferred to “gold standard”); blinded or masked comparison.
- C. For studies of prognosis: inception cohort (subjects assembled at a similar and early time in the course of the disorder and followed thereafter); cohort (subjects followed forward in time, but not necessarily from a common starting point); validation cohort or validation sample if the study involves the modeling of clinical predictions.
- D. For studies of causation: randomized controlled trial; cohort; case-control; survey (preferred to “cross-sectional study”).
- E. For descriptions of the clinical features of medical disorders: survey; case series.
- F. For studies that include a formal economic evaluation: cost-effectiveness analysis; cost-utility analysis; cost-benefit analysis. For new analyses of existing data sets, the data set should be named and the basic study design disclosed.
- 3. Setting. To assist readers to determine the applicability of the report to their own clinical circumstances, the study setting(s) should be described. Of particular importance is whether the setting is the general community, a primary care or referral center, private or institutional practice, ambulatory or hospitalized care.
- 4. Patients or Other Participants. The clinical disorders, important eligibility criteria, and key sociodemographic features of patients should be stated. The numbers of participants and how they were selected should be provided (see below), including the number of otherwise eligible subjects who were approached but refused. If matching is used for comparison groups, characteristics that are matched should be specified. In follow-up studies, the proportion of participants who completed the study must be indicated. In intervention studies, the number of patients withdrawn for adverse effects should be given. For selection procedures, these terms should be used, if appropriate: random sample (where “random” refers to a formal, randomized selection in which all eligible subjects have a fixed and usually equal chance of selection); population-based sample; referred sample; consecutive sample; volunteer sample; convenience sample. These terms assist the reader to determine an important element of the generalizability of the study. They also supplement (rather than duplicate) the terms used by professional indexers when articles are entered into computerized databases.
- 5. Intervention(s). The essential features of any interventions should be described, including their method and duration of administration. The intervention should be named by its most common clinical name (for example, the generic term “chlorthalidone”). Common synonyms should be given as well to facilitate electronic text word searching. This would include the brand name of a drug if a specific product was studied.
- 6. Main Outcome Measure(s). The primary study outcome measurement(s) should be indicated as planned before data collection began. If the paper does not emphasize the main planned outcomes of a study, this fact should be stated and the reason indicated. If the hypothesis being reported was formulated during or after data collection, this information should be clearly stated.
- 7. Results. The main results of the study should be given. Measurements that require explanation for the expected audience of the manuscript should be defined. Important measurements not included in the presentation of results should be declared. As relevant, it should be indicated whether observers were blinded to patient groupings, particularly for subjective measurements. Due to the current limitations of retrieval from electronic databases, results must be given in narrative or point form rather than tabular form if the abstract is to appear in computerized literature services such as MEDLINE. If possible, the results should be accompanied by confidence intervals (for example, 95%) and the exact level of statistical significance. For comparative studies, confidence intervals should relate to the differences between groups. For nonsignificant differences for the major study outcome measure(s), the clinically important difference sought should be stated and the confidence interval for the difference between the groups should be given. When risk changes or effect sizes are given, absolute values should be indicated so that the reader can determine the absolute as well as relative impact of the finding. Approaches such as “number needed to treat” to achieve a unit of benefit are encouraged when appropriate; reporting of relative differences alone is usually inappropriate. If appropriate, studies of screening and diagnostic tests should use the terms “sensitivity,” “specificity,” and “likelihood ratio.” If predictive values or accuracy is given, prevalence or pretest likelihood should be given as well. No data should be reported in the abstract that do not appear in the rest of the manuscript.
- 8. Conclusions. Only those conclusions of the study that are directly supported by the evidence reported should be given, along with their clinical application (avoiding speculation and overgeneralization), and indicating whether additional study is required before the information should be used in usual clinical settings. Equal emphasis must be given to positive and negative findings of equal scientific merit.
TOP
Reports of Basic Science
Authors submitting manuscripts reporting basic science data should prepare an abstract of no more than 250 words under the following headings: Objective, Design, Subjects, Interventions (if any), Results, and Conclusions. The content following each heading should be as follows:
- 1. Objective. The abstract should begin with a clear statement of the precise objective or question addressed in the report. If more than one objective is addressed, the main objective should be indicated and only key secondary objectives stated. If an a priori hypothesis was tested, it should be stated.
- 2. Design. The basic design of the study should be described. The duration of follow-up, if any, should be stated. As many of the following terms as apply should be used.
- A. Intervention studies: randomized controlled trial; nonrandomized controlled trial; double-blind; placebo-controlled; crossover trial; before-after trial.
- B. For studies of screening and diagnostic tests: criterion standard; blinded or masked comparison.
- C. For studies of causation: randomized controlled trial; cohort; case-control; survey (preferred to “cross-sectional study”).
- D. For descriptions of biologic characteristics: anatomic; audiologic; physiologic; genetic analysis; etc.
- 3. Subjects. The numbers of subjects and how they were selected should be provided. If matching is used for comparison groups, characteristics that are matched should be specified. In intervention studies, the number of subjects withdrawn for adverse effects should be given.
- 4. Intervention(s). The essential features of any interventions should be described, including their method and duration of administration.
- 5. Results. The main results of the study should be given. Measurements that require explanation for the expected audience of the manuscript should be defined. Important measurements not included in the presentation of results should be declared. As relevant, it should be indicated whether observers were blinded to groupings, particularly for subjective measurements. Due to the current limitations of retrieval from electronic databases, results must be given in narrative or point form rather than tabular form if the abstract is to appear in computerized literature services such as MEDLINE. No data should be reported in the abstracts that do not appear in the rest of the manuscript. If more than one outcome measure is addressed, list results separately.
- 6. Conclusions. Only those conclusions of the study that are directly supported by the evidence reported should be given, along with their clinical application (avoiding speculation and overgeneralization), and indicating whether additional study is required before the information should be used in usual clinical settings. Equal emphasis must be given to positive and negative findings of equal scientific merit.
TOP
Review Manuscripts (Including Meta-analyses)
Authors submitting review manuscripts and reports of the results of meta-analyses should prepare an abstract of no more than 250 words under the following headings: Objective, Data Sources, Study Selection, Data Extraction, Data Synthesis, and Conclusions. The content following each heading should be as follows:
- 1. Objective. The abstract should begin with a precise statement of the primary objective of the review. The focus of this statement should be guided by whether the review emphasizes factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention. It should include information about the specific population, intervention, exposure, and test or outcome that is being reviewed.
- 2. Data Sources. A succinct summary of data sources should be given, including any time restrictions. Potential sources include experts or research institutions active in the field, computerized databases and published indexes, registries, abstract booklets, conference proceedings, references identified from bibliographies of pertinent articles and books, and companies or manufacturers of tests or agents being reviewed. If a bibliographic database is used, the exact indexing terms used for article retrieval should be stated, including any constraints (for example, English language or human subjects).
- 3. Study Selection. The abstract should describe the criteria used to select studies for detailed review from among studies identified as relevant to the topic. Details of selection should include particular populations, interventions, outcomes, or methodologic designs. The method used to apply these criteria should be specified (for example, blind review, consensus, multiple reviewers). The proportion of initially identified studies that met selection criteria should be stated.
- 4. Data Extraction. Guidelines used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity (such as criteria for causal inference) should be described. The method by which the guidelines were applied should be stated (for example, independent extraction by multiple observers).
- 5. Data Synthesis. The main results of the review, whether qualitative or quantitative, should be stated. Methods used to obtain these results should be outlined. Meta-analyses should state the major outcomes that were pooled and include odds ratios or effect sizes and, if possible, sensitivity analyses. Numerical results should be accompanied by confidence intervals, if applicable, and exact levels of statistical significance. Evaluations of screening and diagnostic tests should address issues of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, receiver operating characteristic curves, and predictive values. Assessments of prognosis could include summarizations of survival characteristics and related variables. Major identified sources of variation between studies should be stated, including differences in treatment protocols, co-interventions, confounders, outcome measures, length of follow-up, and dropout rates.
- 6. Conclusions. The conclusions and their applications should be clearly stated, limiting generalization to the domain of the review. The need for new studies may be suggested.
TOP
Preparing Reports of Randomized Controlled Trials
The CONSORT checklist should be completed and submitted with the manuscript. In addition, a flow diagram illustrating the progress of patients throughout the trial should be included as a figure in the manuscript (see Figure for example). The checklist and flow diagram will be reviewed along with the manuscript.
Editorial Board
EDITORIAL STAFF
Editor: Roger N. Rosenberg, MD
Department of Neurology
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
5323 Harry Hines Blvd
Dallas, TX 75390-9108
Associate Editors:
Hassan M. Fathallah-Shaykh, MD, Chicago, Ill
Christopher G. Goetz, MD, Chicago, Ill
Lawrence S. Honig, MD, PhD, New York, NY
Susan T. Iannaccone, MD, Dallas, Tex
Matthew Menken, MD, Princeton, NJ
David E. Pleasure, MD, Philadelphia, Pa
E. S. Roach, MD, Winston-Salem, NC
Ira Shoulson, MD, Rochester, NY
Editorial Assistants:
Yeong-Hee Shin, Dallas, Tex
Jenny Wong, Austin, Tex
Editorial Office in Dallas:
(214) 648-9383
fax: (214) 648-9388
e-mail: archneurol@jama-archives.org
SECTION EDITORS
Neurological Review Editor: David E. Pleasure, MD, Philadelphia, Pa
Controversy in Neurology/Consensus in Neurology Editor: E. S. Roach, MD, Winston-Salem, NC
Basic Science Seminars in Neurology Editor: Hassan M. Fathallah-Shaykh, MD, Chicago, Ill
Clinical Trials Editor: Ira Shoulson, MD, Rochester, NY
History of Neurology Editor: Christopher G. Goetz, MD, Chicago, Ill
Neurology and Public Health Editor: Matthew Menken, MD, Princeton, NJ
Book Review Editor: Susan T. Iannaccone, MD, Dallas, Tex
Web Editor: Lawrence S. Honig, MD, PhD, New York, NY
CME Editor: Matthew Menken, MD, Princeton, NJ
EDITORIAL BOARD
James I. Ausman, MD, PhD, Chicago, Ill
Louis R. Caplan, MD, Boston, Mass
Steven T. DeKosky, MD, Pittsburgh, Pa
Mahlon R. DeLong, MD, Atlanta, Ga
James A. Ferrendelli, MD, Houston, Tex
John H. Growdon, MD, Boston, Mass
Vladimir Hachinski, MD, DSc, London, Ontario
Audrey S. Penn, MD, Bethesda, Md
Stanley B. Prusiner, MD, San Francisco, Calif
Michael K. Racke, MD, Dallas, Tex
Bruce R. Ransom, MD, PhD, Seattle, Wash
Thomas R. Swift, MD, Augusta, Ga
Kenneth L. Tyler, MD, Denver, Colo
Paul C. Van Ness, MD, Dallas, Tex
INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Johan A. Aarli, MD, Bergen, Norway
Oded Abramsky, MD, PhD, Jerusalem, Israel
Samir F. Atweh, MD, Beirut, Lebanon
Paula Coutinho, MD, PhD, Porto, Portugal
Alexandra D¨¹rr, MD, Paris, France
Bruno Estanol, MD, Mexico City, Mexico
Cesare Fieschi, MDN, Rome, Italy
Hans J. Freund, MD, D¨¹sseldorf, Germany
Wang Guo-Xiang, MD, Beijing, China
Sang-Bok Lee, MD, PhD, Seoul, Korea
Colin Masters, MD, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Sergio Novis, MD, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Michael Piradov, MD, Moscow, Russia
Niphon Poungvarin, MD, FRCP, Bangkok, Thailand
Anthony H. V. Schapira, DSc, MD, FRCP, London, England
Bhim S. Singhal, MD, Bombay, India
Erik Stalberg, MD, Uppsala, Sweden
Eduardo Tolosa, MD, Barcelona, Spain
Shoji Tsuji, MD, PhD, Tokyo, Japan
PUBLICATION STAFF
Offices: 515 N State St, Chicago, IL 60610
Catherine D. DeAngelis, MD, MPH
Editor in Chief
Scientific Publications & Multimedia Applications
Cheryl Iverson: Managing Editor
Editorial Processing Department
Department Director: Paula Glitman
Manuscript Editing Manager: Brenda Gregoline
Senior Manuscript Editor: Vickey Golden
Manuscript Editors: Tracy Frey, Novid Parsi, Kristine Simmons, Mahsa M. Tousi
Freelance Manuscript Editing Manager: Diane L. Cannon
Freelance Manuscript Editing Coordinators: Connie Manno, Cheryl L. Tobey
Freelance Copy Editors and Copyreaders: Catherine A. Alden, Karen L. Boyd, Lisa M. Cluver, Mary Coerver-Connolly, Allison Esposito, Laura King, Mary A. Kingzette, Nicole C. Netter, Caroline Woods
Editorial Systems Managers: Paul Frank, Monica Mungle
Systems Programmer/Internet Specialist: J.D. Neff
Editorial Assistant: Wanda Hill
Scientific Publications & Multimedia Applications
Executive Assistant to the Editor: Marla A. Hall
Scientific Online Resources
Director: Margaret Winker, MD
Electronic Media Department Director: Michelle Kurzynski
Associate Web Editors: Erin M. Giannini, Peter Kim
Web Office Manager: Nadine Siewnarine
|
刊名字顺( Alphabetical List of Journals):
返回页首 