In order to maximize the chance of publication of a manuscript in the Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery® (JFAS), the following tips are offered to authors. After a section on general guidelines, these suggestions are provided according to specific sections of each manuscript. These tips are to be utilized in addition to the "Instructions for Authors".
GENERAL: It is most helpful to read the "Instructions for Authors" before sitting down to script the paper. Delays in the review process and eventual publication are often because the paper is not in the proper format. Often the references are not formatted correctly. Remember that the search engines only cite the reference in one particular way and it is not compatible with the method of citation for JFAS.
It is helpful to have the manuscript read by one of your colleagues that is not an author of the manuscript, before it is submitted. Many times authors have too much ownership in their work to provide an objective analysis. Have the article proof-read by someone who does not have a medical background. This will help with grammar, the flow of the manuscript and will determine if it is "understandable".
Each author should read the paper before publication. Again this will help homogenize the thoughts of the individual authors into a concise and clear manuscript.
Each of the authors should declare whether or not he/she has any conflict of interest in any of the products mentioned in the paper. This includes being a consultant or member of the speakers' bureau. In addition any funding or donations of equipment received by the authors should be declared.
The manuscript should contain the following subheadings.
Title: The title should be as descriptive as possible. It should also accurately reflect the main subject of the paper without providing a conclusion or interpretation. For example: "1st MTPJ fusions in the elderly: A viable approach" does not tell the reader much about the paper. It also provides a conclusion, which is not appropriate. Rather, "First MTPJ fusions in patients over 60 years of age: A prospective study of outcomes in 200 consecutive patients" is far more descriptive and accurate.
If the paper is a case report, it should be stipulated as such.
The title should also not use any trade names if at all possible. Use generic terminology.
Abstract: The abstract should summarize the manuscript in less than 250 words. Does it briefly introduce the purpose of the study, discuss methods, summarize results, and provide a conclusion? In general it should follow the flow of the entire manuscript. It should not include introductory statements that are not pertinent to the project itself. For example, if the manuscript is on a particular procedure to address hallux valgus, the abstract does not need a statement telling the reader: "There are over 100 surgical operations to address hallux valgus".
If the paper is a case report, it is important to tell the reader the reason the case is being presented for publication. In the instance of a case report, the purpose should be one of the following: The condition is extremely rare; the outcome was unexpected; the treatment was unconventional; there is some redeeming and useful teaching point to the at-large foot and ankle surgeon.
It is most helpful to be concise and utilize the entire 250 word limit. The amount of text is limited because most search engines cut off the abstract at that limit.
Do not use abbreviations in the abstract.
Key Words: Use key words that you would use when searching for similar articles on the topic. These key words form the basis for the available search engines. Careful selection of key words will increase the exposure of your manuscript.
Introduction: The introduction should support the rationale for the study or the purpose of the paper. It should contain a concise statement of the problem, and the status of the existing literature (but not an overly verbose literature review). Then the introduction should conclude with the purpose and some information as to what gap in the existing literature the paper will fill.
Materials and Methods: This section should be written with sufficient detail so that any reader would be able to duplicate the study if he/she chose. It should provide information about study design, patient population, patient selection, operational definitions for study variables and outcomes, and statistical tests used to evaluate the data. This section should clearly state if outcomes are based on physical exam, chart review, telephone interview, or questionnaire? Inclusion/exclusion criteria should be clearly stated? Operational definitions should be defined (i.e., "osteomyelitis was determined by a positive culture and histopathology after bone biopsy")? This section should stipulate the method of statistical analyses and the level of confidence.
Surgical Procedure: If the paper describes a technique, either as part of a case report or as an index operation, it should not sound like an operative report. Unless an integral part of the protocol or technique, the reader assumes that the patient did have an anesthetic, the wound was closed or other obvious surgical maneuvers. This information should not be provided.
Results: The presentation of the results should be in the same format and order as the methods section. It is best to try and simplify the presentation so that trends and general concepts shown by the results, are easy to grasp. Highly technical information or mathematical data is less appealing to the practicing surgeon and should be distilled down into an "easy to grasp" concept. Descriptive data in the results should be clearly presented and appropriate, such as averages, standard deviations, and range. Avoid tables if the data set is small, but use bar/graphs or charts if the data set is large. Each figure and table should serve distinct purpose. Figures should be used to enhance comprehension of a concept. For example, it is not necessary to show the reader a picture of the incisional approach or the final wound closure. Before submission, consider whether the information can be summarized and presented in a more meaningful format. Statistical associations and their clinical meaning and relevance clearly stated? For the most part, is it understandable by the average reader?
Discussion: The discussion should thoroughly address results of the study as they relate to previously published reports, as well as their relevance to clinical medicine. It is the authors opportunity to provide insight into the results of the study. Again placing the findings and results into perspective is most welcomed by the reader. Care should be taken not to overstate the implications of the study.
The should be a section on the shortcomings of the study, such as bias, potential confounding factors, small sample size or any other design flaw. The authors should speculate how these limitations may have influenced the results.
Conclusion or Summary: The conclusion or summary should be justified on the basis of what has been presented and should not represent the authors' opinions. New information or speculative statements do not belong in this section.
References: References should include the key references on a particular topic as well as the most contemporary ones. The format should be carefully followed.
Photos and figures should be clear and support the specific points of the text. Figures, tables and their accompanying legends should be able to stand alone, communicating the meaning and significance of the information without reverence to the main text. Figures and tables should not merely repeat what is contained in the body of the paper, but rather should enhance the comprehension of the data or surgical procedure.
High quality photographs are necessary in the digital format. Higher resolution figures result in a quality photograph in the printed media. Be sure to submit each figure as a separate file. Do not embed these figures within the body of the text. This is to allow the editor and publisher to digitally enhance and alter the figure.
