| JOURNAL HOME | CME HOME | THIS MONTH | PAST ISSUES | ETOC | COLLECTIONS |
| AUTHORS | REVIEWERS | EDITORIAL BOARD | FEEDBACK | RSS | HELP |
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
*David J. Birnbach, James G. Bovill, Sorin J. Brull, John Butterworth, Xavier Capdevila, Vincent W.S. Chan, Neal Cohen, Marie E. Csete, Peter J. Davis, Franklin Dexter, François Donati, Marcel E. Durieux, Norig Ellison, Jeffrey M. Feldman, Kazuhiko Fukuda, Thomas J. Gal, Tong J. Gan, Adrian W. Gelb, Tony Gin, Peter S. A. Glass, Keith M. Gregg, Jeffrey B. Gross, George M. Hall, Quinn H. Hogan, Charles W. Hogue, Jr., Terese T. Horlocker, Jonas S. Johansson, Igor Kissin, Jerrold H. Levy, Spencer S. Liu, Martin J. London, Nancy A. Nussmeier, Hans-Joachim Priebe, Richard C. Prielipp, Carl E. Rosow, Lawrence J. Saidman, Steven L. Shafer, Edward R. Sherwood, Peter Douglas Slinger, Gary R. Strichartz, Jukka Takala, Paul F. White, Cynthia A. Wong, Tony L. Yaksh, and Mark H. Zornow.
 |
Introduction |
|---|
 Top Introduction REFERENCES |
|---|
The Guide for Authors is available at http://www.aaeditor.org/GuideForAuthors.pdf. When preparing a manuscript, please be certain to download the most recent version of the guide.
If you have questions, please contact our Editorial Office:
Anesthesia & Analgesia
The Hearst Building
5 Third Street, Suite 1216
San Francisco, CA 94103
e-mail: editor{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org
Phone: (415) 777-2750
Fax: (415) 777-2803
About Anesthesia & Analgesia
Anesthesia & Analgesia, the oldest publication for the specialty of anesthesiology, is the official scientific journal of the following societies and foundations:
Anesthesia & Analgesia is divided into the following sections:
We assign all manuscripts to one of these sections. Each section has one or more designated Section Editors, who are responsible for shepherding manuscripts through the peer review process. Authors may request a section at the time of the submission. Requests are considered by the Editor-in-Chief when the manuscript is assigned to a Section Editor.
Responsible Conduct of Research
The following pages describe the standards set by the Editorial Board of Anesthesia & Analgesia for responsible conduct of research. The Editorial Board does not permit publication of any manuscripts that do not adhere to these rules.
The name of the Institutional Review Board (IRB) varies with country and local custom. For example, many countries call their IRB a "Research Ethics Committee" or REC. Some institutions refer to the board that reviews animal studies as the "Animal Care and Use Committee." In this document, "IRB" is used generically to refer to the local board that reviews the ethical treatment of human or animal experimental subjects and grants institutional approval for the study.
Human Subjects
Regardless of the country of origin, all clinical investigators describing human research must abide by the Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki, and adopted in October 2000 by the World Medical Association. This document can be found at http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/helsinki.html. Investigators are encouraged to read and follow the Declaration of Helsinki. Clinical studies that do not meet the Declaration of Helsinki criteria will be denied peer review. If published research is subsequently found to be noncompliant it will be withdrawn or retracted.
On the basis of the Declaration of Helsinki, Anesthesia & Analgesia requires that all manuscripts reporting clinical research state in the first paragraph of the Methods section that:
Human subjects should not be identifiable. Do not disclose patients' names, initials, hospital numbers, dates of birth, or other protected healthcare information. Keep copies of your IRB approval and written informed consents. In unusual circumstances, the editors may request blinded copies of these documents to address questions about IRB approval and study conduct.
Investigational Drugs
The Editorial Board of Anesthesia & Analgesia may exercise judgment about the ethics of a clinical trial involving investigational drugs that is more stringent than the investigator's IRB. Compliance with the Journal's guidelines should be specified in the Methods section, when appropriate.
Neuraxial or Perineural Drug Administration
Studies using drugs injected into the intrathecal, epidural, or perineural space must meet one of the following three criteria:
Drug Studies in Children
Anesthesia & Analgesia is committed to expanding our knowledge of the clinical pharmacology of drugs in children. However, studying drugs in children when there is no pediatric indication poses ethical concerns1. Therefore, studies of drugs in children must meet one of the following three criteria:
Nonconformity in Dose, Route, or Indication ("Off-Label" Use)
In the United States, FDA regulations state that drug use conforms to the package insert ("on-label") when the dose, route of administration, and indication match the guidelines in the package insert. If the dose, route, or indication does not match the package insert, then the drug use is "off-label." Drugs are commonly used off-label in clinical trials, and the practice is generally acceptable. However, the Editorial Board of Anesthesia & Analgesia reserves the right not to consider a manuscript describing off-label administration of a drug if the Editorial Board believes the study has posed unacceptable risk to the study subjects. To preclude such a determination, investigators are encouraged to obtain an Investigator IND from the FDA, as described in http://www.fda.gov/Cder/about/smallbiz/clinical_investigator.htm, or an equivalent agency in their country.
Animal Subjects
Manuscripts that describe investigations performed in vertebrate animals must explicitly state that the study was approved by the authors' IRB for animal research. This statement should appear at the beginning of the Methods section.
Multiple Publications of Human or Animal Trials
In the interest of minimizing the risk to human and animal subjects, as well as promoting efficient use of scarce research funds, investigators will sometimes pose several questions and make multiple measurements in a single study, with the intent of publishing multiple manuscripts. This may be a laudable practice, or it may be an inappropriate attempt to slice a single study into "minimum publishable units." Division of data from a single research study into multiple manuscripts is acceptable, provided three requirements are met:
Registration of Clinical Trials
Anesthesia & Analgesia encourages authors to register their clinical trials at www.clinicaltrials.gov or a similar registry. As of January 1, 2008, all clinical trials that involve investigational drugs supported by a pharmaceutical firm or investigational devices supported by a device manufacturer must be registered at the time that a manuscript is submitted for publication. The registry must be stated in the first paragraph of the Methods section of the manuscript. As of January 1, 2009, all clinical trials that involve investigational drugs or devices supported by a pharmaceutical firm or device manufacturer that began after January 1, 2008 must be registered prior to patient enrollment.
Conflict of Interest
A conflict of interest exists when an author's judgment about a manuscript or Letter to the Editor may be influenced by secondary gain. Secondary gain typically involves personal, financial, academic, or political advancement. Examples of financial gain are easiest to identify and include direct monetary benefits such as investments, stocks, honoraria, etc. When study findings may affect an author's bonus, incentive payment, or salary (e.g., research related to academic appointments and salary), this is also considered a conflict of interest. The academic recognition and advancement that come from publishing good papers are the appropriate reward for good work and do not represent a conflict of interest.
Potential conflicts of interest occur frequently. In some disciplines, they may be unavoidable. Authors of scientific studies sponsored by industry necessarily possess a conflict of interest. Although this conflict is understood and accepted, it must be disclosed. Investigators frequently also have consulting or lecturing relationships with companies sponsoring their research. These relationships are typically entirely appropriate, understood, and accepted, but they must be disclosed.
Conflict of interest disclosure should be made at the time of manuscript submission so that a decision can be made on whether the competing interests may have influenced the manuscript in any manner. A manuscript will not be rejected solely because of conflict of interest. However, appearance of a potential conflict of interest could result in a request that the conflict of interest be stated in the published manuscript.
Anesthesia & Analgesia does not have a threshold monetary value to determine "relevant" or "significant" conflicts of interest. Similarly, the Journal believes that there is no specific time at which a potential conflict of interest ceases to exist. All relevant potential conflicts of interest should be declared, regardless of monetary value or the date of the relationship. Conversely, we recognize that extensive disclosures of trivial or ancient relationships may unintentionally obfuscate relevant conflicts.
Authors are encouraged to err on the side of full disclosure. Full disclosure at the time of submission has fewer repercussions than subsequent exposure. This does not mean that everything disclosed will appear in the manuscript. Only what is deemed relevant will be included in the published manuscript, based on discussion between the editors and the author(s).
Each author is expected to make appropriate disclosures. However, the corresponding author may provide a disclosure for all authors.
Conflicts of interest must be disclosed in all submissions to Anesthesia & Analgesia, including General Articles, Case Reports, Echo Rounds, Brief Reports, Technical Communications, Review Articles, Medical Intelligence Articles, Special Articles, Editorials, Pro/Con Editorials, Pro/Con/Core Reviews, Book and Multimedia Reviews, Meeting Reports, Letters to the Editor, and author responses to Letters to the Editor. We also encourage reviewers to disclose conflicts of interest. This will be discussed in the Guide for Reviewers, currently in preparation.
To facilitate disclosure, each author must answer the following questions. A "yes" answer requires additional information. A conflict of interest checklist can be downloaded from http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/misc/coi.doc.
No No No No No No
Preparing Your Manuscript
The following pages describe the types of manuscripts published by Anesthesia & Analgesia. The guidelines offer general rules on length, format, and content. These guidelines are intended to help authors write manuscripts that meet the expectations of the reviewers and editors, improving the chances that a manuscript will be accepted for publication. If a manuscript must deviate from these rules in any significant manner, please contact the Editorial Office in advance of submitting the manuscript to be certain that the Journal will consider publication.
Submissions to Anesthesia & Analgesia should use grammatically accurate English and American spellings. All submissions will be edited for syntax, grammar, and spelling.
Implications Statements and Abstracts are described on page 193. Authors are expected to write the Implications Statement, which may be heavily edited or completely rewritten by the Section Editor.
Manuscript Types and Word Count
Please review the following descriptions of manuscript types and recommended word counts. The word counts are for guidance and are not absolute limits. Manuscripts should be as succinct as possible. All submissions must include a title page.
General Articles describe clinical or laboratory investigations. General Articles include an Implications Statement, structured Abstract (maximum 400 words), Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. General Articles should not exceed 3000 words.
Case Reports describe truly exceptional cases that make an important teaching point or scientific observation. Case Reports may describe unusual and instructive cases, novel anesthetic techniques, novel use of equipment, or new information on diseases of importance to anesthesiology. Case Reports are suitable for documenting unusual cases of toxicity. Case Reports are almost never appropriate for describing the efficacy of a drug or a treatment, which should be demonstrated by an adequately powered and well-controlled clinical trial. The only exception is efficacy in a population, or a clinical scenario, that is so uncommon that a clinical trial cannot be performed. Case Reports include an Implications Statement, unstructured Abstract (maximum of 100 words), Introduction, Case Description, and a Discussion. The Case Description and Discussion should not exceed 1500 words. Interesting but not truly exceptional cases should be submitted as Letters to the Editor.
Echo Rounds are short reports that provide a focused discussion of one or more unique or interesting perioperative echocardiographic images (transesophageal, precordial, epicardial, or epiaortic) from a clinical situation in which echocardiography was central to clinical management. Submissions must provide succinct teaching points on echocardiographic views, techniques, or calculations. Teaching points must be supported by the current literature or standard reference texts of echocardiography, preferably those most accessible to the general reader. Echo Rounds should not be construed as "mini-Case Reports" and as such only the most relevant clinical details should be succinctly presented. The suggested format is to present clinical details and specific echo findings in the first third of the report and didactic discussion of the echo topic(s) in the subsequent two-thirds, followed by 2–5 references. The report should be accompanied by 1–2 echocardiographic still images and video clip(s), with legends, which will be available online. The still images should usually, but not always, correspond to the respective video clip(s). Authors should provide appropriate labeling (e.g., arrows, abbreviations of anatomic structures, etc.) of figures and clips (if possible) and may elect to consolidate consecutive time segments into one clip (although adequate viewing time for each segment must be provided to clearly illustrate the primary findings being discussed in the text). Selected reports may benefit from addition of a short table or schematic figure. Authors are advised to examine previously published Echo Rounds (either via the Table of Contents or via the online Echo Rounds database at www.scahq.org or via www.anesthesia-analgesia.org) to avoid submission of topics previously published in this series. See page 187 for video formatting details. Echo Rounds do not include an Implications Statement or Abstract and should be 500–750 words in length. A detailed checklist for submitting Echo Rounds is available at http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/misc/EchoRoundsCheckList.doc.
Brief Reports describe clinical or laboratory investigations that do not require the breadth of experimentation or documentation expected of a General Article. Brief Reports require an Implications Statement and an Abstract (structured or unstructured, depending on the topic, maximum of 100 words). Brief Reports contain an Introduction, Methods, Results, and a very brief (1 paragraph) Discussion. The Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion together should not exceed 1000 words.
Technical Communications describe instrumentation and analytic techniques. Technical Communications include an Implications Statement, unstructured Abstract (maximum of 400 words), and the text of the communication, which should not exceed 1500 words.
Review Articles synthesize previously published material into an integrated presentation of our current understanding of a topic. Review Articles should describe aspects of a topic in which scientific consensus exists, as well as aspects that remain controversial and are the subject of ongoing scientific disagreement and research. Review Articles are expected to be comprehensive in scope. If the author used a formal strategy to search the medical literature, this strategy should be described. Review Articles should include an unstructured Abstract of <400 words. Review Articles should not exceed 5000 words.
Medical Intelligence Articles collate and evaluate previously published material to aid in evaluating new concepts or updating old concepts germane to anesthesiology. Medical Intelligence Articles are expected to be highly focused in scope. Medical Intelligence Articles should include an Implications Statement, unstructured Abstract (maximum of 100 words), and the text of the review, which should not exceed 2000 words.
Special Articles are manuscripts that do not fit in any of the above categories. Special Articles are typically invited by the Editorial Board to examine a particular topic. Occasionally authors produce publishable scholarly texts that do not fit the above models. These may be submitted as Special Articles. There are no word limits or rules for the structure of Special Articles, although they usually have Implication Statements and Abstracts.
Editorials provide editorial perspective on articles published in the Journal or express the general policies or opinions of the Editorial Board. Editorials are solicited by the Editorial Board. Editorials do not have Implication Statements or Abstracts. Editorials should not exceed 1500 words.
Pro/Con Editorials are scholarly discussions of clinically relevant topics providing opposing, well-founded viewpoints. Pro/Con Editorials are solicited by the Editorial Board. Pro/Con Editorials do not have Implication Statements or Abstracts. They should not exceed 1500 words.
Pro/Con/Core Reviews present a focused review accompanied by expert commentary for and against a specific clinical topic or technique. The Core Review includes an Implications Statement, Abstract (unstructured, maximum of 100 words), and the text of the review, which should not exceed 2500 words. The Core Review may be accompanied by figures or a video supplement. Pro/Con/Core Reviews are solicited by the Editorial Board.
Book and Multimedia Reviews report current literature in perioperative medicine, critical care, and pain management. All books and multimedia material for review should be sent to Norig Ellison, MD, Book Review Editor, Department of Anesthesia, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. Book Reviews should not exceed 750 words.
Meeting Reports are scholarly outlines of the program and content of a scientific meeting. They may be organized temporally (day by day) or thematically (topic by topic). Meeting Reports do not have Implication Statements or Abstracts. Meeting Reports should not exceed 1500 words.
Letters to the Editor include brief constructive comments concerning previously published articles, interesting cases that do not meet the requirement of being truly exceptional, and other communications of general interest. Letters should be double-spaced, have a title, and include appropriate references. They must include the author's mailing and e-mail addresses. E-mail Letters to the Editor as Word-compatible attachments to editor{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org. Letters are edited by the Correspondence Editor, sometimes extensively, to sharpen their focus. They may be sent for peer review, at the discretion of the Correspondence Editor. Letters to the Editor should not exceed 200 words.
General Guidelines and Set-up Instructions
Authors are encouraged to follow these guidelines carefully, which will improve the timeliness and quality of the review process. The Editors of Anesthesia & Analgesia may return manuscripts to authors without peer review if the manuscripts do not conform to the Journal guidelines.
The Editorial Office has prepared a series of templates in Microsoft Word format that can be downloaded and used for manuscript preparation. Each template includes the appropriate formatting defaults, instructions for the type of manuscript being submitted and a checklist for manuscript submission. The instructions and checklist should be deleted before submitting the manuscript electronically. Templates exist for
Title Page
The title page should contain the following elements:
Title of the article: Be concise but informative. Include species when appropriate.
Short Title of no more than 40 characters, including letters and spaces. The short title is used on the Journal's cover, and also appears in the footer of the published article.
List of Authors: First name, middle initial, and last name of each author, with highest academic degree(s), for each author. Authors must
Attributing authorship to those who have not contributed intellectually is not acceptable. For example, it is unacceptable to include senior members of a research group, chairs of academic departments, or representatives of the commercial sponsor, if they do not meet the above requirements.
It is similarly unacceptable to exclude individuals who meet the requirements for authorship. For example, scientists from a sponsoring company who are involved in the study design, execution of the study, data analysis, and preparation of the manuscript should be coauthors of the paper, with appropriate disclosure.
Name of Department(s) and Institution(s) to which the work should be attributed. Multiple institutions may be listed if appropriate.
Disclaimers, if applicable.
Corresponding Author: Name, address, telephone number, FAX number, and e-mail address of author responsible for manuscript correspondence.
Reprints: Name and address of author to whom requests for reprints should be addressed or a statement that reprints will not be available from the author.
Financial Support: The source(s) of funding, including foundations, institutions, pharmaceutical and device manufacturers, private companies, or intramural departmental sources.
Conflict of Interest: All relationships between authors and any company or organization with a vested interest in the outcome of the study should be disclosed, including current or previous relationships with a potential interest in the outcome of the research project. More information on conflict of interest can be found on page 189.
Implications Statement
Location: The Implications Statement should appear after the title page(s).
Content: The Implications Statement summarizes in one or two sentences the main findings of the manuscript and why these findings are important. It is written primarily for the clinician reader, and should explain how the findings relate to the practice of perioperative medicine, pain management, or critical care, or the scientific foundations of anesthesiology.
Abstract
Location: The Abstract should appear after the title page(s) and Implications Statement.
Content: Structured Abstracts include Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusions. Structured abstracts should provide enough detail to permit the reader to quickly understand the study and findings.
Unstructured Abstracts summarize the article, including salient observations and conclusions.
Abbreviations: All abbreviations used in the Abstract should be defined in the abstract, except those approved by the International System of Units.
Word Count: Please state the number of words in the Abstract after the Abstract text.
Text
The text of General Articles is usually, but not necessarily, divided into the following sections: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion, as described below.
Introduction
Summarize the background in one or two sentences.
Offer only fundamental references for the work, if any.
Succinctly state the purpose of the study.
If the study tests a specific hypothesis, state the hypothesis.
Do not review the topic.
The introduction should typically be <500 words.
Methods
State your study's conformance with the Journal's requirements for human and animal trials, as described in Responsible Conduct of Research, page 187.
If your study involves neuraxial or perineural drug administration, drug administration in children, or "off-label" use of drugs, you must state how the study conforms to the Investigational Drug guidance on page 188. If the drug is used "off-label" and you did not obtain an investigator IND, this should be stated. If an investigator IND was obtained for your study, please include the IND number.
Describe how you selected observational or experimental subjects (patients or experimental animals, including controls).
Describe methods, materials, devices (manufacturer's name and city, state, country in parentheses), computer software (including revision numbers), and procedures in sufficient detail so that your experiment can be reproduced by other investigators. If the text and the references provide inadequate detail, include an Appendix or Web Supplement.
Disclose molecular structures when describing novel compounds. Structural disclosure may be waived, at the discretion of the Editorial Board, when there is a compelling reason to publish a manuscript before the sponsor is ready to disclose the molecular structure.
Provide references to established methods, including statistical methods.
Provide references and brief descriptions for published methods that are not well known. Your manuscript should be interpretable on its own to a knowledgeable reader, who should not need access to another manuscript to understand yours.
Describe new or substantially modified methods, give reasons for using them, and define their limitations.
Identify all drugs and chemicals, including generic name(s), dosage(s), and route(s) of administration. Refer to the drugs throughout the text by their generic names, unless the subject of the research is a comparison of branded formulations, in which case the use of the brand name is more precise.
Describe all data handling and statistical methods.
If you use a methodology that you have used before, it is acceptable to use wording that is identical to your previous wording. If you are not the author of the prior description of the methodology, then you must rewrite it in your own words with reference to the original description of the methodology.
Present the methodology in the order in which you intend to present the results.
Results
The results are the most important part of the manuscript.
Present your results in logical sequence in the text, tables, and illustrations.
Account for all subjects, e.g., number enrolled but not randomized, number withdrawn and for what reasons, etc.
Do not repeat large amounts of material in the text that are also presented in tables or figures. However, commenting on key data from tables or figures is necessary to highlight the main findings.
Emphasize important observations.
In text, tables, and illustrations, present P values as the actual value (e.g., P = 0.043) rather than as an inequality (e.g., P < 0.05). Inequality may be used in footnotes describing symbols that designate statistical significance in tables and figures (e.g., *P < 0.05) and when statistical software uses an inequality to report very small P values (e.g., P < 0.001).
Use consistent rules for presenting numerical results. For example, if a numeric result appears in the abstract, the results, and a table, be certain that it is reported with the same precision in each instance.
In general, determining that the difference between two groups is greater than 0 at P < 0.05 is not an interesting question. Even the most trivial difference might be statistically significant if enough subjects were studied. The important questions are 1) what are the confidence bounds for the difference between groups, and 2) is the difference large enough to matter scientifically or clinically? This is discussed further in the Anesthesia & Analgesia Statistical Guide, available at http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/misc/StatisticalGuide.pdf.
Follow the organization of the Methods section, so that each result is presented in the same order that the methodology was presented.
Discussion
As stated above, the results are more important than the discussion. Discussions should be focused and succinct.
Claims of being the first to publish a finding are best made in retrospect. Do not claim to be the first to report something. It only invites angry Letters to the Editor.
Where possible, structure your discussion in the same order that the results were presented in the Results section.
Emphasize new and important aspects of the study and the conclusions that follow from them.
State the limitations of the study, including the limitations of the materials and methods. State how the limitations temper your conclusions.
Succinctly relate the observations to other relevant studies.
Do not repeat data presented in the Results section, except as required for clarity.
In the last paragraph, link the conclusions with goals of the study. If the study was hypothesis-driven, state the results of the test of the hypothesis.
Avoid unqualified statements and conclusions not completely supported by the data.
Tables
Use a separate page for each table.
Double-space each table's entries.
Do not submit tables as photographs or pasted images. Tables must be submitted as text.
Number the tables consecutively. Each table should have a brief title. Each column in a table should have a brief name.
Use footnotes (not table titles or column headings) for explanatory matter and definitions of abbreviations. Abbreviations must be described with footnotes, even if they are defined in the text or in other tables.
For footnotes, use lower-case italicized letters in alphabetical order.
Cite each table in the text in consecutive order.
If you include a block of data, a table, or a figure from another source, whether published or unpublished, acknowledge the original source.
You must obtain and submit written permission from both the author and the publisher (if published) to reproduce the material, when you submit the manuscript for review. Permission is required, regardless of authorship or publisher, except for documents in the public domain.
Figures and Illustrations
For useful information on preparing digital art, please review the detailed instructions at http://cjs.cadmus.com/da.
You are encouraged to read The Visual Display of Quantitative Information by Edward Tufte6 (http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/books_vdqi), a superb treatise on statistical graphics, charts, and tables.
Design figures and illustrations with their published size in mind i.e., 1 or 2 columns wide. Large figures will be reduced.
If you use Microsoft Excel to create your figures, pay close attention to having axis names, labels, and fonts clear and appropriately sized. In general, the default formatting provided with Microsoft Excel is not acceptable for scientific graphics.
Number figures consecutively. Supply a brief title for each. Cite figures in the text in consecutive, numerical order.
Color figures may be published at no charge at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. Authors willing to bear the additional expense of color figures should indicate this in their cover letter. Regardless of whether or not color figures are reproduced in color in the printed edition of Anesthesia & Analgesia, color figures are reproduced in full color in the pdf files that can be downloaded from HighWire Press (www.anesthesia-analgesia.org) at no cost to authors.
If a figure has already been published, acknowledge the original source. You must obtain and submit written permission from both the author and the publisher to reproduce the material when you submit the manuscript for review. Permission is required, regardless of authorship or publisher, except for documents in the public domain.
Define all abbreviations used in each figure. Repeat definitions of any abbreviations used in subsequent legends.
References
All references must be generally available to readers. Cite references to articles only if they are published in peer-reviewed journals included in the Index Medicus. Unacceptable references include abstracts appearing only in meeting programs or abstracts more than 3 years old. These should be listed as footnotes.
Number references consecutively in the order in which they are first mentioned in the text. Double-space between all lines of each reference and between references.
Identify references in text, tables, and legends by numbers in superscript.
The titles of journals must be abbreviated according to the style used in Index Medicus.
Verify all references against the original documents or Medline. (http://www.pubmed.gov)
Include copies of "in press" references, which should be sent by e-mail attachment to editor{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org, along with the title and corresponding author of the submitted manuscript.
Check the citation list for duplicate entries.
Use the formats of the example references shown in Table 1 above as guides for formatting your references.
|
Data Supplements
Data supplements provide additional material too detailed for inclusion in your manuscript or material not readily presented in printed form. For example, data supplements include audio and video files, spreadsheets, additional figures and tables, appendices, data files, and statistical analysis programming code. If you submit a data supplement, be sure to remove all patient identifiers from the material.
Because a supplement is part of the overall submitted manuscript, make every effort to have the supplement clearly formatted and organized. The supplement must be available when the manuscript is submitted for publication.
Authors are urged to share raw data whenever possible. Raw data are invaluable to the community of investigators working to move your area forward. Excel spreadsheets are commonly used to share raw data.
Please follow the guidelines below for submitting supplemental video and audio files:
Video, including video for Echo Rounds
The preferred video file formats are MPEG, QuickTime (MOV), and Windows Media Video (WMV). Please preview video clips on both Windows and Macintosh platforms to be certain they play correctly. The review process will be delayed if the Editorial Office cannot play your video clip.
Deliver still images from video clips in high-resolution JPEG or TIFF formats.
Individual video clips should not exceed 10 MB. Use video-compression software to reduce video size if necessary. Optimal video frame dimensions are 480 x 360 pixels and 640 x 480 pixels. Videos of 320 x 240 pixels have inadequate resolution for teaching. Video clips are typically 15–25 seconds.
Combinations of clips: If you combine several video clips, for example several TEE echocardiographic loops, please provide adequate time for each segment, and leave a suitable gap between the videos. Use appropriate labeling to ensure that the viewer can understand the timing of the pathology and events. Labeling can be added with video editing programs such as Adobe Premiere or iMovie.
Patient Identifiers: Remove all patient identifiers from video clips and still images.
For echocardiographic video, please consult Rokey and Vick. Masking Personal Health Information on Real-time Echocardiographic Images.7
Audio
Submit audio files in WAV or MP3 formats.
Letters to the Editor
Submit Letters to the Editor by e-mail to editor{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org for handling by our Correspondence Editor. Letters are often extensively revised to provide focus. Consider the following points when you compose a Letter to the Editor.8
Brevity
Although absolute length is not specified, letters that respond to a published paper should not exceed a single paragraph or two. Long critiques are difficult to follow and will likely generate a response that is also too lengthy. Letters describing an interesting or uncommon clinical experience should be limited to relevant clinical details. Unlike Case Reports, these letters should not delve into the background of diseases or therapeutic interventions. A letter describing a new gadget or technique should not exceed several paragraphs. References should be limited to a few key articles.
Focus
A letter should address a single issue. It should not discuss an entire subject, but should briefly identify the reason for submission (e.g., a flaw in methodology, relevant observations, or alternative explanation).
Interest
A letter should be of interest to more than the correspondent and the author of the article in question. Quibbles involving a complex and sophisticated subject or methodology should be settled privately rather than in the Correspondence Section of the Journal.
Scientific Accuracy
Letters do not necessarily have the imprimatur of external peer-review. Nevertheless, scientific accuracy is crucial. If letters deal with complex or arcane issues, they will be reviewed by members of our Editorial Board or, occasionally, outside reviewers, especially when letters propose a new idea or methodology.
Tone
Letters must be respectful. Letters that attack authors, the Journal, or our readership will not be published. Letters that are self-promoting will also not be published. Just as we discourage authors of peer-reviewed articles from claiming to be first to make an observation, we similarly are not interested in letters claiming prior publication of an observation, although we will publish letters to correct the record if we believe that the claim is meritorious.
Timeliness
A letter written in response to a published paper should be submitted no later than 4 months after the paper has been published. A longer interval detracts from the interest, relevance, and "punch."
Writing
All letters are edited, and occasionally completely rewritten, to be highly focused, readable, and succinct. Accepted letters may or may not be forwarded to the author to approve the edited text.
Conflict of Interest
The conflict of interest rules apply to all submissions to the Journal, including letters.
Units of Measurement
Anesthesia & Analgesia serves an international audience. For this reason, Système International (SI) units are preferred.
We recognize that authors and readers unfamiliar with SI units have difficulty interpreting them. Authors may make undetected errors if they convert their measurements to SI units. To minimize the chance of conversion errors, authors should submit manuscripts using the units of measurement used in the study, or the units that are used clinically at the author's institution. These are the units that will appear in the published manuscript.
Readers may readily convert published units to units of their choice using commonly available conversion tables. Anesthesia & Analgesia provides a spreadsheet for unit conversion, available at http://www.anesthesia-analgesia.org/misc/units.xls.
A more complete conversion table can be found in the American Medical Association Manual of Style, A Guide for Authors and Editors, Chapter 15: Units of Measure, Table 4: Conversions from Conventional Units to Système International (SI) Units, pp 486–503.9
Abbreviations
AAWP. Avoid Abbreviations Whenever Possible. The added length of spelling out words is more than compensated for by the increased readability when words are spelled out.
Idiosyncratic abbreviations make text particularly difficult to read. Abbreviations widely used within a narrow discipline can make a manuscript uninterpretable to the interested reader from outside that discipline.
Do not create new or unusual abbreviations. For example, if your paper refers to the paw pressure test, just call it the paw pressure test throughout the paper, not the PPT.
Spell out in full the first mention of an abbreviated word, followed by its abbreviation enclosed within parentheses. For subsequent uses of the term in the same section, use only the abbreviation, without parentheses. It may enhance readability to reintroduce the abbreviation in subsequent sections of the manuscript.
Write as you speak. You would call an electrocardiogram an ECG, or EKG, so it is acceptable to abbreviate it as ECG or EKG (after it is spelled out on first use). However, spell out words if there is any possible ambiguity. This will help clarify your manuscript on morphine sulfate kinetics in multiple sclerosis patients with severe mitral stenosis.
Articles with many abbreviations should contain a Table of Abbreviations.
Consult the following sources for abbreviations:
Submitting Your Manuscript
1. Go to Rapid Review, at https://www.rapidreview.com/IARS2/CALogon.jsp or access the same site from either www.iars.org or www.anesthesia-analgesia.org, where you can find the link under "Authors."
2. If you have not previously submitted a manuscript to Anesthesia & Analgesia, click "Create Account" to create a username and password, and enter your author profile. Otherwise, just log in with your user name and password.
3. Fax, e-mail, or mail the Copyright Transfer Form to the Editorial Office.
Fax: 415 777-2803
E-mail: editor{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org
Mail: Anesthesia & Analgesia
The Hearst Building
5 Third Street, Suite 1216
San Francisco, CA 94103
4. If you have having difficulty uploading the manuscript, the problem is almost always caused by the document having margins outside the printable space (
inch on all sides of a letter size page). Carefully check the margins on every page, including tables and figures to make certain there is at least a inch margin on every page.
What Happens After Submission?
Manuscripts are reviewed by the Editorial Office to make certain that the submission contains all parts. The Editorial Office will not accept a submission if the author has not supplied all parts of the manuscript, as outlined in this document.
Manuscripts are then forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief, who makes an initial assessment of the manuscript. If the manuscript does not appear meritorious, or is not appropriate for Anesthesia & Analgesia, the manuscript will be returned with an explanation that it has not been forwarded for external peer review.
If the manuscript appears meritorious and appropriate for the Journal, the Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to the appropriate Section Editor, or serves as Section Editor if the manuscript falls within the "General" section of the Journal. Authors are encouraged to suggest the section of the Journal they believe is best suited for their manuscript. The Editor-in-Chief considers authors' suggestions when assigning a manuscript to a section within Anesthesia & Analgesia.
The Section Editor makes an initial assessment of the manuscript. The Section Editor determines whether the manuscript is meritorious, and verifies that the assignment of the manuscript to his or her section is appropriate. If the manuscript meets these criteria, it is sent for peer review.
Acceptance of manuscripts is based on the importance of the findings, originality, and scientific rigor. Reviewers submit their critiques of the manuscript to the Section Editor, using Rapid Review. The Section Editor drafts an initial decision letter, weighing the views of the reviewers and his or her own impressions of the manuscript. This decision letter is forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief, who may modify the decision. The decision letter is then forwarded to the Editorial Office for final editing and then sent to the author by e-mail.
Anesthesia & Analgesia currently accepts about one-third of the manuscripts submitted, making it among the most selective journals in the specialty. If a manuscript is rejected, and the author believes that the reviewers' critiques can be addressed, the author may appeal the rejection by sending a letter to editor{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org. If the author chooses to submit the paper elsewhere, we strongly encourage the author to first revise the manuscript, based on the reviews received from Anesthesia & Analgesia, in order to have the best chance of publication elsewhere.
Sometimes we recommend that a rejected manuscript be resubmitted to Anesthesia & Analgesia as a Letter to the Editor. This occurs when the manuscript is not exceptional enough for publication, but contains an interesting observation that our readers would value. If your manuscript is rejected, with a recommendation to resubmit as a Letter to the Editor by e-mail to editor{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org, the manuscript must be revised to meet the guidelines for Letters to the Editor. Additionally, the Correspondence Editor is under no obligation to accept a Letter to the Editor submitted at the suggestion of a Section Editor. The letter will be evaluated on its own merits.
Authors can expect an initial decision on submitted manuscripts or letters within 6 weeks. Nearly all accepted manuscripts undergo several rounds of revision and copy editing to produce the best possible published paper.
Academic Misconduct
Anesthesia & Analgesia takes academic misconduct seriously. The Editorial Board of Anesthesia & Analgesia will adhere to the Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct for Editors of Biomedical Journals and its Guidelines on Good Publication Practice. See http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/ for details. The US Public Health Service's Office of Research Integrity has devoted a considerable amount of effort to help institutions and authors understand responsible conduct of research. We strongly recommend that authors utilize this excellent resource, available at http://ori.dhhs.gov/.
We will limit our discussion to just three areas of academic misconduct: plagiarism, duplicate publication, and data falsification.
Plagiarism is the use of previously published material without attribution. There is an excellent summary of what constitutes plagiarism at http://www.indiana.edu/~wts/pamphlets.shtml. The ability to rapidly search text fragments using Google and similar search tools on the Internet makes plagiarism very easy to identify.
Self-plagiarism is the use of your own previously published material without attribution. This is a common practice when a laboratory frequently uses the same methodology. In this setting, the description of an assay or an analysis technique may be identical in multiple papers. This is acceptable. However, with this sole exception, manuscripts that plagiarize previously published material, even if it is the author's own work, will be rejected if identified during peer review, and will be retracted if the plagiarism is discovered after publication.
Authors uncomfortable with writing in English occasionally use sentences from a published manuscript simply to obtain grammatically correct text. This is still plagiarism. This is generally discovered during the review process, and will result in rejection of the submission and possible sanction. Authors uncomfortable with writing in English are strongly encouraged to ask for editing help from English-speaking colleagues.
Duplicate publication is prior publication of a manuscript with considerable content overlap by the same author or co-authors. Prior publication may be in the same language, or it may be a translation (usually to English from the author's native language). If a manuscript has been published previously, the submission to Anesthesia & Analgesia will be rejected, unless it has already been published, in which case it will be retracted.
Prior publication of an abstract does not count as duplicate publication. We request that authors inform the Journal when parts of a manuscript have previously been published as an abstract.
There is sometimes value in publishing in English an important manuscript previously published in another language. Anesthesia & Analgesia will consider such submissions. However, they must be accompanied by a letter from the copyright holder of the original publication granting Anesthesia & Analgesia permission to publish the work.
Duplicate submission is concurrent submission of a nearly identical manuscript to two journals. Duplicate submissions identified during peer review will be immediately rejected. Duplicate submissions that are discovered after publication will be retracted.
Data falsification is any manipulation of data that is not disclosed in the publication. This can include editing data (removing outliers, altering values), creating false data, or misrepresenting data analysis (e.g., describing an intent-to-treat analysis but actually performing a per-protocol analysis). Any manuscript in which the data have been falsified will be rejected if the falsification is discovered during peer review. If the manuscript has been published, it will be retracted.
Anesthesia & Analgesia will review all allegations of academic misconduct. This review will likely include inquiries to the author for clarification. If inquiries to the author do not generate satisfactory replies, we will request that the author's institution assess the facts. The conclusion of the author's institution is not binding on Anesthesia & Analgesia, should sufficient evidence exist to support a different conclusion.
Sanctions against authors range from requesting a Letter to the Editor acknowledging the error and voluntarily withdrawing a manuscript, to a lifetime ban on publication in Anesthesia & Analgesia.
Conclusion
Anesthesia & Analgesia exists for the benefit of current and future patients under the care of healthcare professionals engaged in the disciplines broadly related to anesthesiology: perioperative medicine, critical care, and pain management. The Journal furthers the care of these patients by reporting the fundamental advances in the sciences of these clinical disciplines and by documenting the clinical and administrative advances that guide therapy. The Journal thus seeks a balance between outstanding basic scientific reports and definitive clinical and management investigations. The Journal welcomes original manuscripts reflecting rigorous analysis, even if unusual in style and focus.
Anesthesia & Analgesia accepts a limited number of the manuscripts submitted for publication. However, the Journal is genuinely honored by every submission. In exchange for authors' following the Guide for Authors, the Journal promises to consider every manuscript thoughtfully. In addition, the Journal promises to treat all authors with the respect and dignity they have so thoroughly earned by their dedication to improving the health and well-being of patients.
Addendum: Many members of the Editorial Board of Anesthesia & Analgesia also serve on the editorial boards of other journals. Anesthesia & Analgesia acknowledges the contribution of these editorial boards to these guidelines through our overlapping editors. Neither Anesthesia & Analgesia nor the International Anesthesia Research Society (IARS) wishes to claim ownership of the principles espoused in these guidelines. The IARS hereby grants societies, journals, and individuals the right to paraphrase or quote verbatim sections of any length from these guidelines without attribution.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Address correspondence to Steven L. Shafer, MD, Editor-in-Chief, Anesthesia & Analgesia, The Hearst Building, 5 Third Street, Suite 1216, San Francisco, CA 94103. Address e-mail to sshafer{at}anesthesia-analgesia.org. 
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TopIntroductionREFERENCES |
|---|
Related articles in A&A:
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. L. Shafer Anesthesia & Analgesia's Policy on Off-Label Drug Administration in Clinical Trials Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2007; 105(1): 13 - 15. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. London and N. Skubas Echo Rounds in evolution. Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2007; 105(1): 16 - 18. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
