Surveys of readers of Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery indicate that the journal is favored as a clinically relevant and technical resource for practicing arthroscopic surgeons. Our readers require both quality, peer-reviewed, high-impact scientific manuscripts and worthy advice based on studied, practical experience, which is especially necessary in cases where an evidence-based answer to an urgent clinical question may be pending.
Arthroscopy’s Editors are motivated to study, teach, encourage, and apply the international and continuously improving understanding of medical research and publication techniques.
1
, 2
, 3
We seek scientific manuscripts of the highest levels of evidence.4
We solicit unbiased reviews of published literature to summarize Current Concepts.Yet, as above, in areas of clinical investigation where evidence-based scientific publications are limited, answers are still required. In such cases, Level V evidence, expert opinion, is desired. Although Level V may represent the lowest level in the hierarchy of evidence, “the quality of the evidence is not a determinant of the quality of an idea and is but one measure of the quality of a manuscript.”
4
As such, Level V evidence is critically important.Thus, in this issue, Arthroscopy introduces a new featured column: “Level V Evidence.” It is an honor for me to co-author this first Level V Evidence column with Michael J. Stewart, M.D.—a true expert.
5
The Level V Evidence column will seek to answer a question based on the experienced opinions of contributing authors. These columns will be concise, and references will be optional. These columns will be concise (and are recommended to be less than 2,000 words).
Readers or authors with requests or proposals for either Current Concept Reviews or Level V Evidence topics may contact James H. Lubowitz, M.D., in care of the Arthroscopy journal.
Editor-in-Chief Poehling and the Associate Editors are hopeful that Level V Evidence articles will have a high journalistic impact, impart clinically useful information, and be well received by the readers of Arthroscopy.
References
- The impact of future trends in electronic data collection on musculoskeletal research and evidence-based orthopaedic care.Arthroscopy. 2003; 19: 1007-1011
- Practical aspects of randomization and blinding in randomized clinical trials.Arthroscopy. 2003; 19: 1000-1006
- Considerations on sample size and power calculations in randomized clinical trials.Arthroscopy. 2003; 19: 997-999
- Understanding evidence-based arthroscopy.Arthroscopy. 2004; 20: 1-3
- Surgical options for the middle-aged patient with osteoarthritis of the knee joint.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000; 82: 1768-1781
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2006 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
