Advertisement

Instructions for Authors

        Scope

        Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery seeks to provide readers with current information by publishing the best papers on clinical and basic research, review articles, technical notes, case reports, and editorials about the latest developments in arthroscopic surgery, knee surgery, and orthopaedic sports surgery. All articles are subject to peer review. Letters to the Editor and comments on the Journal’s content or policies are always welcome.
        All submissions to Arthroscopy must comply with the Instructions for Authors.
        Studies should be in compliance with human studies committees and animal welfare regulations at the authors’ institutions and also in compliance with Food and Drug Administration guidelines.
        Author warranties regarding any submitted manuscript:
        • Any manuscript or any data within a manuscript to be submitted to the Arthroscopy Journal for peer review is original work, has been written by the stated authors, and has not been published elsewhere. Likewise, a similar manuscript has not been submitted to or published by any other journal, either by you or any of your coauthors.
        • Any manuscript to be submitted to the Arthroscopy Journal is not currently being considered for publication by any other journal and will not be submitted for such review while under review by this Journal.
        • If there is any possibility, because of its content, that a manuscript to be submitted might be construed as duplicating in whole or in part another actual or pending publication by you or any of your coauthors, it is the corresponding author’s responsibility to advise the editors of the Arthroscopy Journal of this possibility and fully disclose the particulars of this potential conflict for the purpose of determining the propriety of this Journal’s reviewing the proposed submission.
        Online Submission and Review at Arthroscopy (http://ees.elsevier.com/arth/)
        All manuscripts are to be submitted electronically through the Arthroscopy online submission and review system Web site (http://ees.elsevier.com/arth/). There, after registering as an author, you will be guided, step by step, through the uploading of your own files and your approving of the single PDF that will be created from them. Through our Web site, you can track the progress of your manuscript. Communications about a manuscript will be handled through e-mail. Please access the Web site for more specifics about online submission, including a Tutorial for Authors, artwork guidelines, and a link to Author Support by e-mail that is monitored “24/7.”
        Tabled 1Recommended Maximums for Articles Submitted to Arthroscopy
        Type of ArticleNumber of Words
        Maximum number of words is exclusive of the title page, blind title page, references, and figure legends.
        ReferencesFigures (Figure Parts)Tables
        Original Article3,000357 (15)4
        Concise Review
        Please note that Concise Review, Level V Evidence, and Current Concepts articles are submitted at the invitation of the Editor-in-Chief or Assistant Editor-in-Chief. However, authors are encouraged to e-mail the Editorial office ([email protected]) with ideas for these types of articles.
        1,700101 (2)1
        Level V Evidence
        Please note that Concise Review, Level V Evidence, and Current Concepts articles are submitted at the invitation of the Editor-in-Chief or Assistant Editor-in-Chief. However, authors are encouraged to e-mail the Editorial office ([email protected]) with ideas for these types of articles.
        1,650400
        Current Concepts
        Please note that Concise Review, Level V Evidence, and Current Concepts articles are submitted at the invitation of the Editor-in-Chief or Assistant Editor-in-Chief. However, authors are encouraged to e-mail the Editorial office ([email protected]) with ideas for these types of articles.
        4,0007510 (24)4
        Technical Note1,500
        Technical Notes exceeding these recommendations are sometimes allowed when the subject is broad enough to require more data to convey the message adequately; however, brevity remains a key goal.
        83 (6)
        Technical Notes exceeding these recommendations are sometimes allowed when the subject is broad enough to require more data to convey the message adequately; however, brevity remains a key goal.
        1 (online only)
        Case Report
        Only a very limited number of Case Reports are accepted by the Journal.
        1,00052 (4)0
        Letter to Editor & Reply50042 (2)0
        low asterisk Maximum number of words is exclusive of the title page, blind title page, references, and figure legends.
        Please note that Concise Review, Level V Evidence, and Current Concepts articles are submitted at the invitation of the Editor-in-Chief or Assistant Editor-in-Chief. However, authors are encouraged to e-mail the Editorial office ( [email protected] ) with ideas for these types of articles.
        Technical Notes exceeding these recommendations are sometimes allowed when the subject is broad enough to require more data to convey the message adequately; however, brevity remains a key goal.
        § Only a very limited number of Case Reports are accepted by the Journal.

        Submitting a Revision Online

        Deadline for Revising Your Manuscript
        Speedy publication requires prompt revision. To encourage this, the Journal now adheres to this policy:
        • Revised manuscripts returned within 30 days from the date of an E-mail requesting revision will be guaranteed priority for publication.
        • Revised manuscripts returned between 30 and 60 days from the date of an E-mail requesting revision will be handled normally.
        • Revised manuscripts not returned in 60 days’ time may be withdrawn from consideration.
        When preparing an accepted-pending-revision manuscript, use the “Track Changes” option found under the Tools tab in Microsoft Word. Also, on each numbered page, number each line of text. Use continuous numbering.

        Preparing the Manuscript for Submission Online

        The title page (Separate Title Page) of each manuscript should include the title of the article; the authors’ full names, degrees, and affiliations; the name, address, telephone and fax numbers, and e-mail address of the person to whom correspondence and reprint requests should be addressed; any necessary footnotes to those items; and a running title (maximum of 45 characters and spaces). Indicate the specific affiliations of each author. Information about sources of financial support and possible conflicts of interest must be placed on the title page. Also, acknowledgments should be included here.
        The page after the title page (first page of Blinded Manuscript) should list only the title because all manuscripts are blinded to reviewers. Please do not include any identifying features in the body of the text, e.g., an author’s initials or the names of institutions where the study was done or a phrase such as “our study” that, when followed by a citation, reveals authorship of the present manuscript in the reference list.

        1. Abstract

        For an Original Article, abstracts should be a maximum of 300 words and structured to include the following sections: Purpose, Methods, Results, Conclusions, Level of Evidence (if the study is of humans) or Clinical Relevance (if in vitro or basic science), and Key Words. List as many as six key words. For further details, see the Editorial about evidence-based medicine in Arthroscopy 2004;20:1-3.
        For a Technical Note or Case Report, the abstract should be an unstructured summary (maximum length, 200 words). List as many as six key words at the end of this unstructured abstract. The body of these manuscripts should consist of: Introduction; Technique (or Case Report); and Discussion plus References and Figures/Figure Legends (if applicable).
        For Current Concepts and Level V Evidence articles, the abstract should be an unstructured summary (maximum length, 300 words). List as many as six key words at the end of this unstructured abstract.
        For Concise Review articles, the abstract should be an unstructured summary (maximum length, 200 words). List as many as six key words at the end of this unstructured abstract.
        The Journal will publish most Technical Notes and Case Reports in a “hybrid” format: The one-page print version will consist of the abstract and one figure, which may have two parts. Thus, the unstructured abstract should always give readers the core message of the article. In the electronic version at www.arthroscopyjournal.org, the entire article and all figures will be published.
        It is understood that some technical notes will not fit the hybrid format; at the Editor’s discretion, such articles may be allowed to exceed the recommended maximums and may be printed in their entirety, again at the Editor’s discretion.
        The body of an Original Article should consist of:

        2. Introduction

        State the problem that led to your undertaking the study, including a concise review of only the relevant literature. Conclude the introduction by stating your hypothesis and restating the purpose of the study.

        3. Methods

        Describe the study design (prospective or retrospective, inclusion and exclusion criteria, duration) and the study population (demographics, length of follow-up).
        The statistics that you have used to analyze the data should be described in detail. You cannot make the statement, “We found no significant difference between the two groups” unless a power study was done and you include in the text the value of alpha or beta. Use of the word significant requires your reporting a P value. Confidence intervals of 95% are required whenever the results of survivorship analysis are given in the text, tables, or figures. Use of the word correlation requires you to report the correlation coefficient.
        Arthroscopy encourages the use of validated outcome instruments. The use of both a generic (general) health outcome measure and a joint-specific, limb-specific, or condition-specific measure is encouraged. If an outcome instrument leads to a categorical ranking (e.g., excellent or good or poor), the aggregate outcome score for each patient should be provided.

        4. Results

        Describe in detail the data obtained during the study. Results obtained after less than two years of follow-up are rarely accepted for publication by the Journal. All data in the text must be consistent with the rest of the manuscript, including data in tables, figures, and legends.

        5. Discussion

        Be concise. What does your study show? Is your hypothesis affirmed or refuted? (1) Compare and contrast your study with others in the relevant world literature (note that a complete literature review is unnecessary). (2) Analyze your data and discuss both the strengths and limitations of your study.

        6. Conclusions

        Here you must briefly state your new (or verified) view of the problem you outlined in the Introduction. Take special care to draw your conclusions only from your results. Check that your conclusions are firmly supported by your data. And, most important, refrain from making concluding statements that lie beyond the scope of your study, or unnecessary statements such as “further studies are warranted.” Your conclusions in the text must essentially match those in the abstract.

        7. References

        The Journal follows the reference style given in the “Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals” (see the New England Journal of Medicine 1997;336:309-315 or http://www.icmje.org/). References must be cited in the text by number and must appear in numerical order. Please do not include unpublished material or personal communications in your reference list. If necessary to your message, include unpublished material in the body of the text and end the statement with the appropriate information in parentheses. For example: (J. Karlsson, MD, personal communication, [month and year of communication]).
        Your reference list should be typed double-spaced and appear after the text and before figure legends and tables. Provide all authors’ names when six or fewer; when seven or more, list the first three and add et al. For abbreviations of journal names, refer to the National Library of Medicine’s List of Journals Indexed in Index Medicus (ftp://nlmpubs.nlm.nih.gov/online/journals/ljiweb.pdf). Also, provide article titles and inclusive page numbers (321-328, not 321-8). The accuracy of reference data is the responsibility of all authors.
        Use these examples when formatting your references:
        Periodical
        • 1
          Barber FA, Dockery WD. Long-term absorption of poly-L-lactic acid interference screws. Arthroscopy 2006;22:820-826.
        Chapter in a book
        • 2
          Ruch DS, Poehling GG. Operative arthroscopy of the wrist. In: Andrews JR, Timmerman LA, eds. Diagnostic and operative arthroscopy. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1997;199-205.
        Book
        • 3
          Burkhart SS, Lo IK, Brady PC. Burkhart’s view of the shoulder: The cowboy’s guide to advanced shoulder arthroscopy. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Williams, 2006.
        Web-only article
        • 4
          Kim S-J, Jung K-A, Song D-H. Arthroscopic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autogenous quadriceps tendon. Arthroscopy 2006;22:797.e1-797.e5 (available at www.arthroscopyjournal.org).
        Please refrain from using End Notes or automatic list numbering for references because these features are lost during production by the publisher; instead, type reference numbers in parentheses in the text and type the reference list that appears at the end of the text.
        The reference list, figure legends, and tables must appear at the end of the manuscript.

        8. Tables

        Tables should be neatly typed, each on a separate page, with a short descriptive title above the tabular data and any notes below. Define all abbreviations. Do not give the same information in tables that you give in the text or in figures.

        9. Figure Legends

        Provide a separate, fully explicit legend for each figure and each part of a multipart figure. All abbreviations and symbols used on figures must be defined here. It is important that figure legends be composed so that they can stand on their own, providing the reader with a “take-home” message.

        10. Figures

        Upload your figures, each as a separate file, along with the rest of your manuscript (or compress all figures into one Zip file and upload that in one step; the system will then “unpack” the files and prompt you to name each figure. Visit www.winzip.com for a trial version of the compression software). Do not include figures in the text document and do not upload your text as a PDF.
        Remove from figures any identifying features such as authors’ names or institutions because we send blinded manuscripts to reviewers. Graphs and drawings should be of professional quality. Radiographs or clinical photographs: Remove all markings (such as patients’ initials, dates, names of institutions) from imaging. Any labels (e.g., arrows or lettering) must be of professional quality. These identifying labels must be large enough to be legible if the figure must be reduced in size. Sequences of radiographs should be of identical magnification. The subject should be centered in clinical photographs. Crop extraneous material and background before capturing the image electronically.
        Upload each figure as a separate file. Images should be in EPS or TIF format. Graphics software such as Photoshop or Illustrator can be used to create your illustrations. Do not use presentation software such as PowerPoint, CorelDraw, or Harvard Graphics. Color images must be RGB, of at least 300 DPI resolution. Gray scale images must have at least 300 DPI resolution. Combinations of gray scale and line art must be at least 500 DPI resolution. Line art (black-and-white or color) must be at least 1,000 DPI resolution.
        Permissions: Photographs in which a person’s face is recognizable must be accompanied by a letter of release from that person explicitly granting permission for publication in the Journal. For any previously published material, written permission for both print and electronic reprint rights must be obtained from the copyright holder. Contact the publisher for permission. Authors are also responsible for paying any fees required by copyright holders to reprint material. Please forward e-mailed permissions to the editorial office ( [email protected] ) or Fax to 336-716-8448.
        Color figures are accepted only when color is necessary to convey clinical information. Authors are encouraged to submit black-and-white digital images whenever possible. Note that the online submission system will provide feedback to you on the quality of your figures; please take a minute to look at those results. Although the artwork quality-check tool will not prevent your submitting substandard artwork, this may become a point of discussion with you should we be interested in your paper.
        Arthroscopy will assume the cost of publishing a limited number of color figures, the selection of which will be made by the Editor-in-Chief. The publication of color figures beyond this limited number will be charged back to the authors, who will receive a prepublication quotation of charges. Authors will retain the option of either publishing their figures in color at the quoted charge or providing black-and-white figures to be used instead.

        Details of Style

        Drug names: Use only generic names in referring to drugs. After first mention, add in parentheses any commonly used variant generic.
        Abbreviations: Follow the American Medical Association Manual of Style (available from online booksellers).

        Article Proofs

        To expedite publication, a password-protected link to the electronic page proof (PDF files) is sent to the corresponding author by e-mail. Any corrections must be sent to the Journal Manager at the publisher within 48 hours of receipt; late return may delay publication of an article. Please check text, references, tables, figures, and legends carefully.

        Copyright

        Copyright to all published articles will be held by the Arthroscopy Association of North America. In view of the present United States copyright law, each coauthor of a submitted manuscript must sign a form expressly transferring copyright in the event that a paper is accepted for publication in the Journal.
        Copyright forms for manuscripts submitted online are handled by the production department of the publisher once the manuscript is accepted and scheduled for publication.

        Software Recommendation

        Microsoft Word is the recommended word-processing software.

        Document Formatting

        Typographical formatting will be handled by the publisher. This pertains to design specifications for the final printed product, such as column width, page depth, and type styles. Please refrain from using nonstandard formatting in your manuscript.
        Editorial formatting may be included. This refers to attributes such as italics, superscripts/subscripts, and Greek letters. The coding scheme for each such element must be consistent throughout the manuscript file.

        Text Style

        • Type text flush left (i.e., do not indent paragraphs), using upper and lowercase letters as appropriate.
        • Enter only one space after punctuation.
        • Use two hard returns at the end of each paragraph (i.e., one blank line should appear between paragraphs).
        • Use two hard returns between headings and text.
        • Do not justify the right margin of your manuscript.

        Author Inquiries About Online Manuscript Submissions

        The corresponding author may access the Journal’s online submission Web site (http://ees.elsevier.com/arth/), log in, and view the progress of a manuscript as it moves from one stage to the next.
        Tabled 1Levels of Evidence for Primary Research
        A complete assessment of the quality of individual studies requires critical appraisal of all aspects of the study design.
        Types of Studies
        Therapeutic Studies-Investigating the Results of TreatmentPrognostic Studies-Investigating the Effect of a Patient Characteristic on the Outcome of DiseaseDiagnostic Studies-Investigating a Diagnostic TestEconomic and Decision Analyses-Developing an Economic or Decision Model
        Level I
        • High-quality randomized controlled trial with statistically significant difference or no statistically significant difference but narrow confidence intervals
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-I randomized controlled trials (studies were homogeneous
          Studies provided consistent results.
          )
        • High-quality prospective study
          Study was started before the first patient enrolled.
          (all patients were enrolled at the same point in their disease with ≥80% follow-up of enrolled patients)
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-I studies
        • Testing of previously developed diagnostic criteria in series of consecutive patients (with universally applied reference “gold” standard)
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-I studies
        • Sensible costs and alternatives; values obtained from many studies; multi-way sensitivity analyses
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-I studies
        Level II
        • Lesser-quality randomized controlled trial (e.g., <80% followup, no blinding, or improper randomization)
        • Prospective
          Study was started before the first patient enrolled.
          comparative study
          Patients treated one way (e.g., with cemented hip arthroplasty) compared with patients treated another way (e.g., with cementless hip arthroplasty) at the same institution.
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-II studies or Level-I studies with inconsistent results
        • Retrospective
          Study was started after the first patient enrolled.
          study
        • Untreated controls from a randomization controlled trial
        • Lesser-quality prospective study (e.g., patients enrolled at different points in their disease or <80% follow-up)
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-II studies
        • Development of diagnostic criteria on basis of consecutive patients (with universally applied reference “gold” standard)
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-II studies
        • Sensible costs and alternatives; values obtained from limited studies; multi-way sensitivity analyses
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-II studies
        Level III
        • Case-control study
          Patients identified for the study on the basis of their outcome (e.g., failed total hip arthroplasty), called “cases,” are compared with those who did not have the outcome (e.g., had a successful total hip arthroplasty), called “controls.”
        • Retrospective
          Study was started after the first patient enrolled.
          comparative study
          Patients treated one way (e.g., with cemented hip arthroplasty) compared with patients treated another way (e.g., with cementless hip arthroplasty) at the same institution.
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-III studies
        • Case-control study
          Patients identified for the study on the basis of their outcome (e.g., failed total hip arthroplasty), called “cases,” are compared with those who did not have the outcome (e.g., had a successful total hip arthroplasty), called “controls.”
        • Study of nonconsecutive patients (without consistently applied reference “gold” standard)
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-III studies
        • Analyses based on limited alternatives and costs; poor estimates
        • Systematic review
          A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
          of Level-III studies
        Level IVCase series
        Patients treated one way with no comparison group of patients treated another way.
        Case series
        • Case-control study
        • Poor reference standard
        • No sensitivity analyses
        Level VExpert opinionExpert opinionExpert opinionExpert opinion
        Reprinted with permission. Copyright © 2005 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.
        1 A complete assessment of the quality of individual studies requires critical appraisal of all aspects of the study design.
        2 A combination of results from two or more prior studies.
        3 Studies provided consistent results.
        4 Study was started before the first patient enrolled.
        5 Patients treated one way (e.g., with cemented hip arthroplasty) compared with patients treated another way (e.g., with cementless hip arthroplasty) at the same institution.
        6 Study was started after the first patient enrolled.
        7 Patients identified for the study on the basis of their outcome (e.g., failed total hip arthroplasty), called “cases,” are compared with those who did not have the outcome (e.g., had a successful total hip arthroplasty), called “controls.”
        8 Patients treated one way with no comparison group of patients treated another way.

        Video Clips

        Arthroscopy invites authors to submit video clips to be published on the Journal’s Web site at www.arthroscopyjournal.org as illustrations incorporated in an article that the author is submitting for publication. All video clips are subject to peer review.

        Copyright

        Copyright for all video clips published on the Journal’s Web site will be held by the Arthroscopy Association of North America. Each coauthor of a video clip must sign a form expressly transferring copyright in the event that the video clip is published on the Journal’s Web site.
        Video Clips must be limited to no more than 1 minute in length and no more than 10 MB in file size. Videos must be submitted in either MPEG or QuickTime format. Authors who want their videos accessible in a streaming format must also provide either a single SureStream file or 3 uniquely named single-rate clips (28.8, 56, T1) with a SMIL file to list the bandwidth choices. Video clips must meet production quality standards to be published on the Web so that modifications or editing by the editorial office are not needed. The Journal can accept only video submissions that meet the Journal’s formatting and image quality requirements. Authors will be notified if there are any problems with submitted files and asked to resubmit modified files. Image editing and correct formatting are the author’s responsibility.
        Video clips accepted for publication will be posted on the Journal’s Web site in both nonstreaming QuickTime or MPEG format for optimal image quality and in a streaming video format for those who prefer faster downloading.
        For detailed instructions on capturing, digitizing, and saving videos, please visit the Elsevier Author Gateway, Artwork Instructions for Multimedia Files at http://authors.elsevier.com