1. Original research
Title
The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 100 characters (including spaces).
Abstract
The abstract, written in English, should be no longer than 300 words and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a succinct account of the objectives, methods, results and significance of the research. The structured abstract for an Original Research article should consist of five paragraphs labelled Background, Objective, Methods, Results, and Conclusion.
Background: Why do we care about the problem? State the context and purpose of the study. (What practical, scientific or theoretical gap is your research filling?)
Objective: What problem are you trying to solve? What is the scope of your work (e.g. is it a generalised approach or for a specific situation)? Avoid using jargon that will not be readily understood by non-expert readers.
Methods: How did you go about solving or making progress on the problem? Clearly state the basic design of the study, what data and/or samples were collected and name or briefly describe the key techniques without going into excessive detail.
Results: What is the answer? Present the main, most important findings. Identify trends, relative change or differences in answers to questions.
Conclusion: What are the implications of your answer? Briefly summarise any potential implications. What are the larger implications of your findings, especially for the problem or gap identified in your motivation?
Do not cite references in the abstract.
Do not use abbreviations unless they are used at least 3 times in the abstract.
Main text
Introduction: The Introduction section must contain your argument for the social and scientific value of the study, as well as the aim and objectives. No structural sub-headings should be used. All text should be presented in narrative paragraphs; bulleted or numbered lists are not permitted.
- Social value: The first part of the introduction should make a clear and logical argument for the importance or relevance of the study. Your argument should be supported by the use of evidence from the literature.
- Scientific value: The second part of the introduction should make a clear and logical argument for the originality of the study. This should include a summary of what is already known about the research question or specific topic and should clarify the knowledge gap that this study will address. Your argument should be supported by the use of evidence from the literature.
- Conceptual framework: In some research articles it will also be important to describe the underlying theoretical basis for the research and how these theories are linked together in a conceptual framework. The theoretical evidence used to construct the conceptual framework should be referenced from the literature.
- Aim and objectives: The introduction should conclude with a paragraph that clearly summarises the aim and objectives of the study.
Methods: The Methods section must address the elements listed below. Structural sub-headings are encouraged.
Ethical considerations: For studies involving human or animal research, approval must have been obtained from the author's institution or other relevant ethics committee before the start of the study. Please include:
- Name of Institutional Review Board or ethical review committee.
- Study approval number(s).
- Manner of consent (written, oral) for human participants.
- Description of measures taken to maintain the confidentiality of data.
If the study was not human or animal research or the study was determined to be non-human subjects research or exempt, the authors must provide a statement with those details in this section.
Study design: An outline of the type of study design.
Setting: A description of the setting for the study; for example, the type of community from which the participants came or the nature of the health system and services in which the study was conducted.
Study population and sampling strategy: Describe the study population and any inclusion or exclusion criteria. Describe the intended sample size and your sample size calculation or justification. Describe the sampling strategy used. Describe in practical terms how this was implemented.
Intervention (if appropriate): If there were intervention and comparison groups, describe the intervention in detail and what happened to the comparison groups. If a clinical trial, the trial registration number should be indicated.
Sample and/or data collection: Describe what type of samples were collected (e.g. sputum, blood), the manner of sample collection (e.g. venous blood into EDTA tube), the volume of sample collected (e.g., two 4-ml samples from each patient) and how samples were stored (e.g. in -20°C freezer) and/or transported after collection (e.g. in cooler with ice packs). Define any data collection tools that were used (e.g. worksheets, questionnaires, etc.); briefly describe how questionnaires were validated for the study population. Describe in practical terms how data were collected (e.g., in-person interviews) and any key issues involved (e.g. language barriers). Provide manufacturer information for all supplies and equipment (name and location). Cite references for established data collection tools and their validation studies.
Laboratory analyses: Describe sample preparation and details about all laboratory tests, analyses and/or assays that were conducted. Provide manufacturer information for all supplies and equipment (name and location). Cite references for established methods and explain any deviations from these.
Data analysis: Describe how data were captured, checked and cleaned. Describe the analysis process, for example, the statistical tests used, or steps followed in qualitative data analysis. Provide manufacturer information for all software used (name and location).
Results: Present the results of your study in a logical sequence that addresses the aim and objectives of your study. Use sub-headings, if needed, to organize the presentation of the study findings. Use tables and figures as required to present your findings. Tables should not contain vertical lines. Each table and figure should have a legend. Use quotations as required to establish your interpretation of qualitative data. Biomolecular sequence or structure data and datasets must be submitted to appropriate publicly available databases and their accession numbers should be cited in the results section. Metric units and their international symbols must be used throughout, as is the decimal point (not the decimal comma). Please ensure that the Results section does not contain descriptions of methods used that should be presented in the Methods section. Also ensure that all results presented in the Results section have an associated data/sample collection or analysis methods presented in the Methods section.
Discussion: The discussion section should address the elements listed below.
Key findings: In the first paragraph, summarise the key findings without reiterating details of the results.
Discussion of key findings: Explain how the key findings relate to previous research or existing knowledge, practice or policy.
Implications or recommendations: State the implications of your study or recommendations for future research (questions that remain unanswered), policy or practice. Make sure that the recommendations flow directly from your findings.
Limitations: Describe all inherent weaknesses of the study’s design and/or implementation, how they may have affected your findings, and what you did (or could not do) to mitigate their effect on your findings. Mention any other factors that the reader should take into account when interpreting your results.
Conclusion: Provide a brief conclusion that summarises the results and their meaning or significance to each objective of the study.
References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible and must follow the APA referencing style.
Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named.
Also provide the following, each under their own heading:
Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
Author contributions: All authors must meet the criteria for authorship and a brief summary of their contribution stated using the initials of each other.
Sources of support: Provide information on funding if relevant.
Disclaimer: A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own (or their) and not an official position of the institution or funder.
2. Systematic Review Article
Systematic reviews should follow the same structure as other original research articles. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses should meet the standards of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).
Title
The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 100 characters (including spaces).
Abstract
The abstract should be no longer than 300 words and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a concise account of the objectives, methods, results and significance of the matter. The abstract must be structured and should consist of five paragraphs labelled Background, Aim, Methods, Results, and Conclusion.
Background: Why is the topic important? State the context of the review.
Aim: What is the purpose of the review? Describe the aim or purpose of the review.
Methods: How was the review conducted? Describe the methods used for searching, selecting and appraising your evidence.
Results: What were the main findings? State the main findings of the literature review.
Conclusion: What are the implications of the findings? Briefly summarise any potential implications.
Main Text
Introduction: Present an argument for the social and scientific value of your review that is itself supported by the literature. Present the aim and objectives of your literature review.
Methods: Outline how you searched for, selected and appraised the literature that you used, and ensured that you met the standards of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Clearly describe in detail the search strategy, criteria used to select or reject articles; attempts made to obtain all important and relevant studies and deal with publication bias (including grey and unpublished literature); how the quality of included studies was appraised; and the methodology used to extract and/or analyse data. Discuss any methodological limitations.
Results: Present your review of the literature and make use of appropriate sub-headings. Your review should be a critical synthesis of the literature and should describe the homogeneity of the different findings, as well as clearly present the overall results and any meta-analysis.
Discussion and conclusion: Clearly state the main conclusions of the review in terms of addressing the original aim and objectives.
References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible and must follow the APA referencing style.
Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named.
Also provide the following, each under their own heading:
Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
Author contributions: All authors must meet the criteria for authorship and a brief summary of their contribution stated using the initials of each other.
Sources of support: Provide information on funding if relevant.
Disclaimer: A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her (or their) own and not an official position of the institution or funder.
3. Narrative Review Article
Prospective authors of narrative reviews should contact the editorial office to determine suitability before submission. Narrative reviews should have a clear aim and objectives and focus on a question that will be addressed in the review. The review should be organized in sections appropriate for the topic and attempts made to include all important and relevant articles including grey and unpublished literature.
Title
The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 100 characters (including spaces).
Abstract
The abstract should be no longer than 300 words and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a concise overview of the topic and the main findings.
Main Text
The main text should be organized in sections appropriate for the topic and should begin with the presentation of an argument for the social and scientific value of the review that is itself supported by the literature. Present the aim and objectives of the literature review and outline how you searched for, selected and appraised the literature that you used. Discuss any methodological limitations. The review should be a critical synthesis of the literature and should end by stating the main conclusions of the review in terms of addressing the original aim and objectives.
References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible and must follow the APA referencing style.
Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named.
Also provide the following, each under their own heading:
Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
Author contributions: All authors must meet the criteria for authorship and a brief summary of their contribution stated using the initials of each other.
Sources of support: Provide information on funding if relevant.
Disclaimer: A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her (or their) own and not an official position of the institution or funder.
Please see guideline to authors for other article types.