93
N otes for Authors- I CM J E
Autho rs hip
International Committee
of Medical Journal Editors
All pe rso ns de signate d as autho rs sho uld q ualify fo r autho rship. Each autho r sho uld have p artic ip ate d suffic ie ntly in the wo rk to take pub lic re spo nsib ility fo r the co nte nt.
Autho rship cre dit sho uld b e b ase d o nly o n sub stantial co ntrib utio ns to 1) co nce ptio n and de sign, o r analysis and inte rpre tatio n o f data; and to 2) drafting the article o r re vising it critically fo r impo rtant intellectual co ntent; and o n 3 ) fin a l a p p ro va l o f th e ve rs io n to b e pub lishe d. Co nditio ns 1, 2, and 3 m ust all b e m e t. Participatio n so le ly in the acq uisitio n o f fund ing o r the c o lle c tio n o f d ata d o e s no t justify autho rship. Ge ne ral supe rvisio n o f the re se arch gro up is no t sufficie nt fo r autho rship. An y p art o f an artic le c ritic al to its m ain c o nc lusio ns m ust b e the re sp o nsib ility o f at le ast o ne autho r.
Edito rs m ay ask autho rs to de scrib e what e ac h c o ntrib ute d ; this info rm atio n m ay b e pub lishe d.
In c re a s i n g l y, m u l ti c e n te r tri a l s a re attrib ute d to a co rpo rate autho r. All m e m b e rs o f the gro up who are nam e d as autho rs, e ithe r in the autho rship po sitio n b e lo w the title o r in a fo o tno te , sho uld fully m e e t the ab o ve crite ria fo r autho rship . Gro up m e m b e rs who d o no t m e e t the se crite ria sho uld b e liste d, with the ir pe rm issio n, in the Ackno wle dgm e nts o r in an appe ndix (see Ackno wle dgm e nts).
The o rde r o f autho rship sho uld b e a jo int de cisio n o f the co autho rs. Be cause the o rde r is as s ig ne d in d iffe re nt ways , its m e aning canno t b e infe rre d accurate ly unle ss it is state d b y the autho rs. Autho rs m ay wish to e xplain th e o rd e r o f a u th o rs h ip in a fo o tn o te . In de ciding o n the o rde r, autho rs sho uld b e aware
Sao Paulo Med J/Rev Paul Med 1999; 117(2):93-5.
that many jo urnals limit the numb e r o f autho rs liste d in the tab le o f co nte nts and that the U.S. Natio nal Lib rary o f Me d ic ine (NLM) lists in MEDLINE o nly the first 24 plus the last autho r whe n the re are m o re than 25 autho rs.
Me tho d s
International Committee
of Medical Journal Editors
De s c ri b e yo u r s e l e c ti o n o f th e o b s e rva ti o n a l o r e xp e ri m e n ta l s u b j e c ts ( p atie nts o r lab o rato ry anim als , inc lud ing co ntro ls) clearly. Identify the age, sex, and o ther im po rtant characte ristics o f the sub je cts. The de finitio n and re le vance o f race and e thnicity are am b iguo us. Autho rs sho uld b e particularly care ful ab o ut using the se cate go rie s.
Ide ntify the m e tho ds, apparatus (give the m a n u fa c tu re r’s n a m e a n d a d d re s s i n p are nthe s e s ) , and p ro c e d ure s in s uffic ie nt de tail to allo w o the r wo rke rs to re pro duce the re s u l ts . Gi ve re fe re n c e s to e s ta b l i s h e d m e tho d s, inc lud ing statistic al m e tho d s (se e b e l o w) ; p ro vi d e re fe re n c e s a n d b ri e f d e s c rip tio n s fo r m e th o d s th a t h a ve b e e n pub lished b ut are no t well kno wn; describ e new o r s u b s ta n ti a l l y m o d i fi e d m e th o d s , g i ve re as o ns fo r us ing the m , and e valuate the ir lim itatio ns. Id e ntify p re c ise ly all d rugs and c he m ic als use d , inc lud ing ge ne ric nam e ( s) , do se (s), and ro ute (s) o f adm inistratio n.
94
Sao Paulo Med J/Rev Paul Med 1999; 117(2):93-5.
(m e tho d s o f rand o m izatio n, c o nc e alm e nt o f a llo c a tio n to tre a tm e n t g ro u p s ) , a n d th e m e tho d o f m asking (b linding).
Autho rs sub m itting re vie w m anusc rip ts s h o u l d i n c l u d e a s e c ti o n d e s c ri b i n g th e m e th o d s u s e d fo r l o c a ti n g , s e l e c ti n g , e xtra c tin g , a n d s yn th e s izin g d a ta . Th e s e m e tho d s sho uld also b e sum m arize d in the ab stract.
Ethics
Whe n re p o rting e xp e rim e nts o n hum an s ub je c ts , ind ic ate whe the r the p ro c e d ure s fo llo we d we re in acco rdance with the e thical stand ard s o f the re sp o nsib le c o m m itte e o n h u m a n e xp e rim e n ta tio n ( in s titu tio n a l o r re gio nal) and with the He lsinki De claratio n o f 1975, as re vise d in 1983. Do no t use patie nts’ names, initials, o r ho spital numb ers, especially i n i l l u s tra ti ve m a te ri a l . Wh e n re p o rti n g e xpe rim e nts o n anim als, indicate whe the r the institutio n’s o r a natio nal re se arc h c o unc il’s guide fo r, o r any natio nal law o n, the care and use o f lab o rato ry anim als was fo llo we d.
S ta tis tic s
International Committee
of Medical Journal Editors
De scrib e statistical me tho ds with e no ugh de tail to e nab le a kno wle dge ab le re ade r with access to the o riginal data to verify the repo rted re sults. Whe n po ssib le , q uantify findings and p re se nt the m with ap p ro p riate ind ic ato rs o f m e as ure m e nt e rro r o r unc e rtainty ( s uc h as co nfide nce inte rvals). Avo id re lying so le ly o n statistical hypo the sis te sting, such as the use o f P value s, whic h fails to c o nve y im p o rtant
q uantitative info rmatio n. Discuss the eligib ility o f e xp e rim e ntal sub je c ts. Give d e tails ab o ut rando m izatio n. De scrib e the m e tho ds fo r and succe ss o f any b linding o f o b se rvatio ns. Re po rt co m plicatio ns o f tre atm e nt. Give num b e rs o f o b s e rvatio ns . Re p o rt lo s s e s to o b s e rvatio n
( s u c h a s d ro p o u ts fro m a c l i n i c a l tri a l ) . Re fe re nc e s fo r the d e s ign o f the s tud y and s tatis tic al m e tho d s s ho uld b e to s tand ard wo rks whe n po ssib le (with page s state d) rathe r than to papers in which the designs o r metho ds we re o riginally re po rte d. Spe cify any ge ne ral-use co m pute r pro gram s ral-use d.
Put a ge ne ral de scriptio n o f m e tho ds in th e M e th o d s s e c ti o n . Wh e n d a ta a re sum m arize d in the Re sults se ctio n, spe cify the s tatis tic al m e tho d s us e d to analyze the m . Re strict tab le s and figure s to tho se ne e de d to explain the argument o f the paper and to assess its sup p o rt. Use grap hs as an alte rnative to tab le s with many e ntrie s; do no t duplicate data in graphs and tab le s. Avo id no nte chnical use s o f te c h n i c a l te rm s i n s ta ti s ti c s , s u c h a s “rando m” (which implies a rando mizing device), “n o rm al,” “s ig n ific an t,” “c o rre latio n s ,” an d “s a m p l e . ” De fi n e s ta ti s ti c a l te rm s , ab b re viatio ns, and m o st sym b o ls.
Re sults Discussion
-Acknowle dgme nts
International Committee of
Medical Journal Editors
Results
Present yo ur results in lo gical sequence in the text, tables, and illustratio ns. Do no t repeat in th e te xt all th e d ata in th e tab le s o r illus tratio ns ; e m p has ize o r s um m arize o nly impo rtant o bservatio ns.
Discussion
Emphasize the new and impo rtant aspects o f the study and the co nclusio ns that fo llo w fro m the m . Do no t re p e at in d e tail d ata o r o the r material given in the Intro ductio n o r the Results sectio n. Include in the Discussio n sectio n the implicatio ns o f the findings and their limitatio ns, including implicatio ns fo r future research. Relate the o bservatio ns to o ther relevant studies.
