Kidney Medicine (ISSN:2590-0595), an official journal of the National Kidney Foundation, is an open access journal focused on clinical medicine in nephrology and hypertension. The mission of Kidney Medicine is to disseminate knowledge relevant to the care of people with or at risk of kidney diseases. Articles appearing in Kidney Medicine include original research, case reports, reviews, and editorials. Kidney Medicine adheres to the high standards associated with all of the National Kidney Foundation journals. Original research articles span a wide range of topics, including qualitative and quantitative research; health care policy, delivery and disparities research; and epidemiology and outcomes research. Recognizing a critical deficit in this area, Kidney Medicine also eagerly seeks research focused on assessing and improving nephrology education and on patient reported outcomes.
Manuscripts should be submitted via the Kidney Medicine Editorial Manager author submission site: https://www.editorialmanager.com/kidneymed/default.aspx.
Managing Editor, Elizabeth Frank
Editorial Office email: [email protected]
Direct line to Managing Editor: +1 978-331-0760
Editor-in-Chief email: [email protected]
Postal Address: Kidney Medicine Editorial Office, Daniel E. Weiner, Tufts Medical Center, Division of Nephrology, 800 Washington St, Box #391, Boston, MA 02111
Kidney Medicine is an open access journal: once published, all articles are immediately and permanently free to read and download. To provide open access, Kidney Medicine has an open access fee (also known as an article publishing charge, or APC), which needs to be paid by the authors or on their behalf, such as by their research funder or institution.
Permitted third party (re)use is defined by the following Creative Commons user licenses (see https://www.elsevier.com/openaccesslicenses):
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND)For non-commercial purposes, lets others distribute and copy the article, and to include in a collective work (such as an anthology), as long as they credit the author(s) and provided they do not alter or modify the article. For authors requiring a commercial CC BY license, you can apply after your manuscript is accepted for publication.
The open access publication fee for articles is displayed below in US dollars, excluding taxes:
| NKF Members | Non-NKF Members | |
| Brief Reports | 960 | 1,200 |
| Full-Length Articles | 1,920 | 2,400 |
Full-length articles include Original Research, Reviews, and other similar content. Brief reports include Case Reports, Research Letters, and other similar content. There is no fee for Letters to the Editor, Replies to Letters to the Editor, or solicited Accompanying Editorials. Please visit our Open Access page and Elsevier's pricing policy for more information.
Find out how you can share your research published in Elsevier journals.
ARTICLE TYPES Original Research
Original Research articles may evaluate pathogenesis, consequences, and treatment of kidney disease; kidney transplantation and dialysis therapies; and disorders of blood pressure and electrolyte and acid-base balance. Manuscripts must focus on clinical research and clinical care; laboratory studies are suitable only if they are directly linked to measurements or outcomes in humans. Criteria used in the review process include validity, clinical importance, and interest.
An Original Research article includes a structured abstract of up to 300 words and is limited to 3,500 words (excluding abstract, references, the article information section, tables, and figure legends); most Original Research articles will have no more than 50 references and 8 figures/tables/boxes in total. The body of the manuscript is organized into Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion sections; the Introduction and Discussion should not include any subheadings.
Reporting requirements vary by study design, which are listed in alphabetical order in this section. If reporting company-sponsored research, authors should consult the Good Publication Practice recommendations (GPP3). For methodological information in studies using laboratory testing of biomarkers, Kidney Medicine endorses following the recommendations of the Consortium of Laboratory Medicine Journal Editors.
Case SeriesA description of the clinical course of 11 or more actual individuals or patients with a condition of interest. A case series typically focuses on the description of variations in clinical presentation and, unlike an observational study, does not pursue evaluation of a research hypotheses. Clinical Trial
An experimental study that assesses the effect of an intervention or compares the effects of 2 or more interventions.
Kidney Medicine requires clinical trials to be registered (see clinical trial registration policy below) and strongly encourages including the study protocol (with any amendments identified with date) with the initial submission.
For randomized controlled trials, authors should include a CONSORT flowchart to report participant flow through enrollment, allocation, follow-up, and analysis. Authors should follow the specific CONSORT guideline that matches the study design:
- Trial With Parallel Group Design (more info)
- Cluster-Randomized Trial
- Noninferiority and Equivalence Trial
- Pragmatic Trial
- Trial of Herbal Medicine Intervention
- Trial of Nonpharmacologic Treatment
- Trial With Patient-Reported Outcomes
- N-of-1 outcomes (more info)
Authors should consider following the TIDieR guidance to describe the intervention. If appropriate, authors should follow CONSORT's recommendations for reporting of harms.
For nonrandomized trials evaluating behavioral and public health interventions, authors should follow the TREND guidelines.
Decision Analysis or Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisAn analysis that weighs choices in clinical care by modeling the projected consequences of different strategies to identify the optimal choice and/or to inform clinical decision making or public policy. Authors should follow the recommendations of the Second Panel on Cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine (Sanders et al. JAMA. 2016;316[10]: 1093-1103) to report economic evaluations of health interventions. Diagnostic Test Study
A study that compares the performance of 2 or more diagnostic tests or strategies. Authors should follow the STARD guidelines. Observational Study
Cohort, Case-Control, Cross-sectional, Case-Cohort, and Ecological Studies
These studies observe and describe individuals or patients based on their exposure to a potential risk factor or an intervention with the purpose of assessing the validity of research hypotheses. In contrast to a trial, investigators do not deliver an intervention or manipulate its use; ie, they do not assign patients to treatment or control groups.
Authors should follow the STROBE guidelines, using the appropriate checklist for the design:
For case-cohort studies, authors may wish to review Sharp et al (A review of published analyses of case-cohort studies and recommendations for future reporting. PLOSOne. 2014) for reporting suggestions.
For ecological studies, authors may wish to review Dufault and Klar (The quality of modern cross-sectional ecologic studies: a bibliometric review. Am J Epidemiol. 2011) for reporting suggestions.
Genetic Association Study
A study that investigates associations between genetic factors and clinical measurements or disease outcomes. Authors should follow the STREGA guidelines.
Prediction Study
A study that describes the development or use of a model designed to estimate risk of reaching a specific clinical end point within a defined period of time. Prediction models may also be referred to as prognostic (or predictive) indices, rules, tools, or instruments. Authors should follow the TRIPOD guidelines (more info); for risk prediction models involving genetic risk factors, authors should consult the GRIPS guidelines (more info).
Qualitative Study
A study used to gain an understanding about people's behaviors, attitudes, and values. Qualitative approaches include focus groups, in-depth or semi-structured interviews, observations, or document analysis. For qualitative research based on interviews and focus groups, authors should follow the COREQ guidelines.
Registry or Health Care Database Study
A study that uses routinely collected health or healthcare administrative data that seeks to draw inferences about patterns of healthcare delivery, clinical decision-making, and their relationship to health outcomes. Authors may wish to review the RECORD guidelines for reporting suggestions.
Quality Improvement StudyA description of an initiative conducted to improve quality of care. The purpose of quality improvement studies is to modify human activities and not to produce new, generalizable knowledge. Improvement interventions are often adjusted in response to outcomes. These studies do not typically address the mechanisms through which interventions work. Authors should follow the SQUIRE guidelines (more info). Systematic Review or Meta-analysis
A systematic review follows an explicit protocol to systematically identify, appraise, and synthesize the findings of studies that address a similar question; a meta-analysis, which contains a quantitative synthesis of the results of the systematic review, is preferred, whenever possible. Authors should include a PRISMA flow diagram to report study yield and selection (if relevant, the format should be adapted according to the specific reporting guidelines being followed). For systematic review/meta-analysis of health care interventions, authors should follow the PRISMA guidelines (more info); for observational studies, authors should follow the MOOSE checklist (Stroup et al, JAMA. 2000; 283[15]:2008-2012).
For meta-analyses of gene-disease association studies, Kidney Medicine does not endorse a particular set of reporting recommendations, but encourages authors to review the following resources: the Human Genome Epidemiology Network Review Handbook, Evangelou & Ioannidis (Meta-analysis methods for genome-wide association studies and beyond. Nat Rev Genet. 2013;14: 379-389), and Sagoo et al (Systematic reviews of genetic association studies. PLoS Med. 2009).
For synthesis of primary qualitative studies (including by thematic synthesis, meta-ethnography, and critical interpretive synthesis) authors should report the approach for conducting the literature search and selection, appraisal, and synthesis of findings in accordance with the ENTREQ framework.
For systematic reviews and meta-analyses of individual participant data, authors should follow the PRISMA-IPD guidelines.
For network meta-analyses, authors should follow the PRISMA network meta-analysis extension.
Authors of systematic reviews are encouraged to prospectively register study protocols at the PROSPERO international registry, reporting the registration number at the end of the abstract. As of July 1, 2018, authors submitting systematic reviews that were not prospectively registered must register retroactively and include in ‘Author Comments’ an explanation as to why registration was delayed.
Research LettersResearch Letters report findings relevant to clinical practice or research in a concise format comprising up to 800 words, 10 references, and a total of 2 figures or tables. Criteria for review include validity, clinical importance, and interest. Research Letters include an introduction, brief methods, key results, and a discussion, but no subheadings are used. Authors should use online supplementary material (combined into a single “Item S1”) for detailed methods or supporting data. Since reports of cases do not include methods, they are not suitable as Research Letters. Case Reports
Case Reports present interesting, rare, and/or novel situations that bring to the attention of the experienced practitioner and others newly described clinical presentations, diagnostic dilemmas, or treatment responses that provide insights into mechanisms of disease. Criteria for review include clinical importance, originality, and the clarity of the case presentation. Limited to 1,500 words and requiring an unstructured abstract (150-200 words), most Case Reports will have no more than 20 references and 4 figures/tables/ boxes in total. The format comprises an Introduction, Case Report, and Discussion. Authors should consult the CARE guidelines, with the understanding that certain items may not apply to all reports of cases. Kidney Biopsy Teaching Cases
A case report to educate clinicians on pathologic correlates of clinical presentations, with key educational points well delineated in the discussion. These articles are limited to 1,800 words and 4 figures or tables, require an unstructured abstract (up to 200 words), and are organized into the following sections: Introduction, Case Report (with 4 subsections: Clinical History and Initial Laboratory Data, Kidney Biopsy, Diagnosis, and Clinical Follow-up), and Discussion. A maximum of 4 authors is generally recommended. Reviews
An authoritative exploration of a clinical, translational, or basic science topic of interest to practitioners. Clinically focused Reviews should describe the treatment, diagnosis, or pathogenesis of a disease process or its complications, emphasizing recent advances in the field. Articles translating basic science topics to clinical applications and relevance should give particular attention to cellular and molecular mechanisms of disease and their relation to diagnostic approaches or therapeutic applications. Criteria for review include clinical relevance, comprehensiveness, and balance. These articles are limited to 4,000 words; an unstructured abstract (150-200 words) is required, and most Reviews will have no more than 100 references. The editors encourage the use of figures, tables, and boxes (up to 8 total) to help convey the central concepts. Perspectives
An in-depth discussion of an issue of significance to the nephrology community that may be based in part on the author's opinions or professional experiences. Rarely, a Perspective may present new descriptive data used to support an opinion (data included to substantiate a conclusion related to a research hypothesis is not permitted). Criteria for review include originality, rigor of argument, and clinical relevance. Perspectives are limited to 3,000 words of body text and 4 figures/tables/boxes in total; an unstructured abstract (150-200 words) is required, and most Perspectives will have no more than 70 references. Editorials
An article that provides focused commentary and narrative analysis concerning a current issue in nephrology. Editorials are limited to 1,500 words and 1 figure, table, or box; in most cases, editorials have no more than 20 references. Editorials typically will be solicited. Images in Kidney Medicine
The Images in Kidney Medicine feature highlights remarkable or interesting images. This feature includes 1-3 images, a caption of up to 250 words, and up to 5 references. Letters to the Editor
Letters should be in response to an article in Kidney Medicine and should not exceed 250 words (up to 5 references and 1 figure or table may also be included) and 3 authors. Priority will be given to letters submitted within 4 weeks of the article's date of publication. SUBMISSION POLICIES
Submission of a manuscript is understood to signify that the authors have complied with all policies in this document. Individuals who violate these policies are subject to forfeiture of acceptance, if applicable, or editorial action including, but not limited to disclosure of violations to relevant entities (employers, funding agencies, etc) and/or the wider public via publication of an erratum, editorial, editorial expression of concern, or retraction. Originality
Except by explicit, prior arrangement, manuscripts are considered for publication if the article or its key features (1) are not under consideration elsewhere, (2) have not already been disseminated in print or online, and (3) will not be disseminated in print or online prior to publication in Kidney Medicine. Printing of a dissertation or thesis is not considered dissemination; however, online access to the full text should be embargoed until the Kidney Medicine article is published. Abstracts published in connection with scientific meetings do not violate Kidney Medicine’s originality requirements; in addition, press reports arising from a conference will not be considered prior publication, provided that authors who discuss their work with reporters do not offer more detail than was contained in their oral or poster presentation. If copies of posters, slide sets, or audio/video recordings of presentations are produced in conjunction with a scientific conference, this is permissible as long as the materials are intended for meeting participants only.
Any text, figure, table, or data from other sources (including a thesis or dissertation) must be clearly attributed. If copyright permission is required for any component of the submission, appropriate documentation must be on file before publication. To monitor compliance with the journal’s requirements regarding attribution, accepted manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software. Consistent with the position of the US Office of Research Integrity, Kidney Medicine does not consider “limited use of identical or nearly-identical phrases which describe a commonly used methodology or previous research” to meet the definition of plagiarism.
AuthorshipIn accordance with International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations, each author must meet all 4 of the following conditions; moreover, each person fulfilling these conditions must be listed as an author.
(1) the individual made a substantial contribution to conception and design of the study, to data acquisition, or to data analysis and interpretation; and
(2) the individual drafted the article and/or revised it for important intellectual content; and
(3) the individual approved the final version of the submitted manuscript; and
(4) the individual accepts accountability for the overall work by ensuring that questions pertaining to the accuracy or integrity of any portion of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
If revision is requested, item 3 applies to any revisions submitted. Item 4 is intended to make clear that the responsibilities of authorship are not limited to direct accountability for the parts of the work that the author performed, but also cover knowing which co-authors are responsible for which other parts of the work, and having confidence in the accuracy and integrity of these co-authors. If questions arise about an aspect of a study or article, the authors have a collective responsibility to ensure the issue is resolved.
Any individual who does not qualify as an author but who contributed to the work described in the manuscript must be named in the Acknowledgements. In particular, if medical writer(s)/editor(s) have been involved, their role must be explicitly acknowledged, and their affiliation/source of funding must be listed.
For Original Research and Research Letters, a brief description of the contribution of each individual listed as an author must be provided in the Article Information. (At their discretion, the editors may request this information for other article types.)
Potential Conflicts of Interest for AuthorsKidney Medicine's conflict of interest (COI) policies generally follow those of the ICMJE Recommendations. As described in the Support, Financial Disclosure, and Other Disclosures sections of this document, authors must disclose all relationships that could be viewed as a potential COI. Editors may use information in COI disclosures as the basis for editorial decisions. Patient/Participant Protections
All manuscripts reporting research studies involving human participants or data (including quality improvement activities) must include a statement that the research was approved by the appropriate research ethics committee (eg, an institutional review board), quoting the approval number. If the relevant ethics committee exempted the study from the need for approval, the name of the committee and a brief explanation must be provided. In all cases, the research must have been conducted according to principles having their origin in the the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki and follow the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Studies related to transplantation must comply with the Declaration of Istanbul.
Manuscripts reporting research studies (including quality improvement activities) must either state that written, informed consent was obtained from all participants or that the responsible ethics committee ruled that informed consent did not apply (eg, for a case series). If investigators have potential COIs, these must be disclosed to study participants, and a statement should be included in the manuscript to indicate that such disclosure was made.
Whenever possible, any information identifying individual patients or study participants should be avoided. If identifying information is necessary, the individual must be shown the manuscript and provide written informed consent before publication.
Clinical Trial RegistrationTo help limit publication bias and to aid in the identification of clinical trials for meta-analyses, Kidney Medicine requires that authors of manuscripts pertaining to clinical trials have prospectively registered their study in a public trials registry. Kidney Medicine defines a clinical trial as any research project that prospectively assigns participants to an intervention (with or without a comparison group) to study the cause- and-effect relationship between a health-related intervention and a health-related outcome. Interventions include but are not restricted to drugs or devices, surgical procedures, behavioral treatments, quality improvement programs, educational initiatives, process-of-care changes, and preventive care. This definition includes phase 1 to 4 studies of drugs or other treatments.
For trials that were completed before 2006, authors may instead cite a published peer-reviewed article describing the study.
A list of other acceptable registries is maintained on the WHO Primary Registries page. Authors must include the minimum required information at the time of registration, and are encouraged to update the record with the full journal citation when the results are published.
If authors have failed to prospectively register their trial, the manuscript should explain when registration was completed and the reason for the delay; the editors will take this information into consideration when deciding whether to grant an exception to the prospective registration requirement.
Data SharingIn recognition of the increased attention given to reproducibility of research findings, and to enhance opportunities for research collaboration, as of July 1, 2018, each manuscript reporting a clinical trial should include a data sharing statement. Of note, at this stage Kidney Medicine does not have a particular data sharing expectation (beyond the requirement to make data available to editors' inspection, as detailed in the Research and Publication Integrity section); the requirement is simply that authors be transparent about their data sharing intentions. Data sharing statements should specify the type of data that will be shared (eg, deidentified, individual participant data underlying the results presented in the manuscript); whether other documents will be available (eg, study protocol, statistical analysis plan, analytic code); if data will be available, the start and end dates of this availability; with whom data will be shared (eg, anyone, researchers with a methodologically sound proposal); the types of analyses to be allowed (eg, any, meta-analysis); and the procedure for requesting access. Authors are encouraged to review the table in the ICMJE's publication regarding data sharing for further detail on the type of information to be included in data sharing statements and possible wording of such statements.
Clinical trials that begin enrolling participants on or after January 1, 2019, should include a data sharing plan when registering the trial (see Clinical Trial Registration section), and should update the registry record if the plan is subsequently modified.
Research and Publication IntegrityKidney Medicine endorses the Singapore Statement on Research Integrity, which lists the responsibilities of researchers in upholding research integrity. Kidney Medicine considers irresponsible and unethical research practices to include fabrication (invention of data), falsification (tampering with data, including images), misrepresentation (plagiarism, duplicate publication, misattribution), or any other behavior that lessens the reliability or integrity of the research record. Kidney Medicine takes seriously its responsibility to respond to suspicions or allegations of misconduct according to its misconduct handling policy.
For all research articles (Original Research and Research Letters), authors have a responsibility to report methodology accurately, clearly, and with sufficient detail such that the findings can be independently confirmed, and to retain the underlying data for at least 3 years after study completion, unless questions have been raised regarding the conduct of the research, in which case all relevant data must be retained until all such matters are resolved. Collectively, the authors are responsible that the article is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned (and, if relevant, registered) have been explained.
For all article types, the editors may at their discretion request to inspect raw data or unprocessed images. Kidney Medicine's expectations regarding image processing are detailed in the Tables and Figures section.
Use of Inclusive LanguageInclusive language acknowledges diversity, conveys respect to all people, is sensitive to differences, and promotes equal opportunities. Content should make no assumptions about the beliefs or commitments of any reader; contain nothing which might imply that one individual is superior to another on the grounds of age, gender, race, ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation, disability or health condition; and use inclusive language throughout. Authors should ensure that writing is free from bias, stereotypes, slang, reference to dominant culture and/or cultural assumptions. We advise to seek gender neutrality by using plural nouns ("clinicians, patients/clients") as default/wherever possible to avoid using "he, she," or "he/she." We recommend avoiding the use of descriptors that refer to personal attributes such as age, gender, race, ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation, disability or health condition unless they are relevant and valid. When coding terminology is used, we recommend to avoid offensive or exclusionary terms such as "master", "slave", "blacklist" and "whitelist". We suggest using alternatives that are more appropriate and (self-) explanatory such as "primary", "secondary", "blocklist" and "allowlist". These guidelines are meant as a point of reference to help identify appropriate language but are by no means exhaustive or definitive. Ethics in Publishing
Please see our information pages on Ethics in publishing and Ethical guidelines for journal publication. Declaration of Generative AI in Scientific Writing
Where authors use generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, authors should:
- Only use these technologies to improve readability and language, not to replace key researcher tasks such as interpreting data or drawing scientific conclusions.
- Apply the technology with human oversight and control, and carefully review and edit the result, as AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete or biased.
- Not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, or cite AI as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans, as outlined in Elsevier's AI policy for authors.
- Disclose in their manuscript the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process by following the instructions below. A statement will appear in the published work. Please note that authors are ultimately responsible and accountable for the contents of the work.
Authors must disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process by adding a statement at the end of their manuscript in the core manuscript file, before the References list. The statement should be placed in a new section entitled 'Declaration of AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process'. Statement: During the preparation of this work the author(s) used [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication. This declaration does not apply to the use of basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references etc. If there is nothing to disclose, there is no need to add a statement. Reporting Sex- and Gender-based Analyses (SGBA) Reporting Guidance
For research involving or pertaining to humans, animals or eukaryotic cells, investigators should integrate sex and gender-based analyses (SGBA) into their research design according to funder/sponsor requirements and best practices within a field. Authors should address the sex and/or gender dimensions of their research in their article. In cases where they cannot, they should discuss this as a limitation to their research's generalizability. Importantly, authors should explicitly state what definitions of sex and/or gender they are applying to enhance the precision, rigor and reproducibility of their research and to avoid ambiguity or conflation of terms and the constructs to which they refer (see Definitions section below). Authors can refer to the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines and the SAGER guidelines checklist. These offer systematic approaches to the use and editorial review of sex and gender information in study design, data analysis, outcome reporting and research interpretation; however, please note there is no single, universally agreed-upon set of guidelines for defining sex and gender. Definition
Sex generally refers to a set of biological attributes that are associated with physical and physiological features (e.g., chromosomal genotype, hormonal levels, internal and external anatomy). A binary sex categorization (male/female) is usually designated at birth ('sex assigned at birth'), most often based solely on the visible external anatomy of a newborn. Gender generally refers to socially constructed roles, behaviors, and identities of women, men and gender-diverse people that occur in a historical and cultural context and may vary across societies and over time. Gender influences how people view themselves and each other, how they behave and interact and how power is distributed in society. Sex and gender are often incorrectly portrayed as binary (female/male or woman/man) and unchanging whereas these constructs actually exist along a spectrum and include additional sex categorizations and gender identities such as people who are intersex/have differences of sex development (DSD) or identify as non-binary. Moreover, the terms “sex” and “gender” can be ambiguous; thus it is important for authors to define the manner in which they are used. MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION GUIDANCE Title Page
Titles should be concise and descriptive. Reports of studies should not summarize the results in the title. For Original Research articles, a subtitle stating the study design is recommended. Other elements that should be included on the title page are: each author's first and last names and highest degree(s); institution of each author; corresponding author's contact information; and word counts for the abstract (if present) and the body of the manuscript.
Note: The author list must comply with Kidney Medicine's definition of authorship.
AbstractAbstracts for Case Reports and Reviews are unstructured, should be 150-200 words, and should be followed by a list of index (key) words.
Abstracts for Original Research articles are 300 words or fewer, structured, and followed by a list of index words. The structured headings differ according to type of study, as shown below (these headings may differ from published reporting guidelines such as CONSORT; Kidney Medicine authors should follow the journal?s preferred headings).
Case Series- Rationale & Objective
- Study Design
- Setting & Participants
- Results
- Limitations
- Conclusions
- Rationale & Objective
- Study Design
- Setting & Participants
- Intervention(s)
- Outcomes
- Results
- Limitations
- Conclusions
- Funding
- Trial Registration
- Rationale & Objective
- Study Design
- Setting & Population
- Intervention(s)
- Outcomes
- Model, Perspective, & Timeframe
- Results
- Limitations
- Conclusions
- Rationale & Objective
- Study Design
- Setting & Population
- Tests Compared
- Outcomes
- Results
- Limitations
- Conclusions
- Rationale & Objective
- Study Design
- Setting & Population
- Exposure(s) or Predictor(s)
- Outcomes
- Analytical Approach
- Results
- Limitations
- Conclusions
- Rationale & Objective
- Study Design
- Setting & Participants
- New Predictors & Established Predictors
- Outcomes
- Analytical Approach
- Results
- Limitations
- Conclusions
- Rationale & Objective
- Study Design
- Setting & Participants
- Analytical Approach
- Results
- Limitations
- Conclusions
- Rationale & Objective
- Study Design
- Setting & Participants
- Quality Improvement Activities
- Outcome(s)
- Analytical Approach
- Results
- Limitations
- Conclusions
- Rationale & Objective
- Study Design
- Setting & Study Populations
- Selection Criteria for Studies*
- Data Extraction
- Analytical Approach
- Results
- Limitations
- Conclusions
*Use the heading ?Search Strategy & Sources? if a systematic review of qualitative studies.
Manuscript BodyManuscripts should be double-spaced with numbered pages; use of 12-point Times New Roman and an unjustified right-hand margin is preferred.
Word limits are provided in the Article Types section of this document. For initial submission, authors may exceed these limits if they are concerned about omission of key information; if revision is requested, the editors will provide guidance on appropriate reductions or the use of online supplementary material.
Online Supplementary MaterialWhen important supporting information for an article is too extensive for PDF typeset publication (eg, a lengthy study questionnaire), it should be submitted as online-only supplementary material.
The supplementary material components should be combined into one file and submitted with the manuscript as the “Supplementary Figure, Table, or Item (online publication only)” item type. In the text, each component should be cited (cite as follows: Table S1, Fig S1, Item S1, etc). Titles and legends for supplementary material should be included in the actual supplementary file, but the titles should be repeated in a Supplementary Material listing between the end of the article and the Article Information section.
Supplementary material is governed by the same copyright transfer policies as the article; if supplementary material has been reproduced from another source, the authors must provide documentation granting permission for its reuse in Kidney Medicine.
Article Information Section Authors' ContributionsOriginal Research and Research Letters must describe each author's contributions and provide a statement of collective responsibility, eg:
Authors' Contributions: research idea and study design: AB, CD, EFG; data acquisition: HIJ; data analysis/interpretation: AB, EFG; statistical analysis: KL; supervision or mentorship: EFG, MN. Each author contributed important intellectual content during manuscript drafting or revision and accepts accountability for the overall work by ensuring that questions pertaining to the accuracy or integrity of any portion of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Except for Letters and their Replies, each article must report any support for the work described in the submission, whether directed to an author or that individual's institution. Types of support include, but are not limited to:
- grants, active or pending (including industry grants)
- consulting fees or honoraria related to the study
- funding of travel related to the study
- fees related to data monitoring boards, statistical analysis, end point committees, etc
- funds for writing or reviewing the manuscript
- nonmonetary support (eg, writing or administrative assistance), or provision of medicines or equipment
- employment
Financial Disclosure
Each article must list financial relationships between each author (or the author's institution) and entities that did not support the study, but that might reasonably be considered to be relevant stakeholders. For manuscripts that discuss tests or treatments, relationships with entities offering alternatives to those tests or treatments are considered pertinent. The types of relationships include, but are not limited to:
- patents (planned, pending, or issued) or royalties
- employment or consultancy
- board membership
- payment or reimbursement of travel/accommodation expenses for expert testimony or lectures (including service on speakers? bureaus)
- stock/stock options
- a first-degree relative with any such relationship
Other Disclosures
If there are relevant nonfinancial associations (personal, professional, political, institutional, religious, or other) that may reasonably represent or create the perception of a COI related to the submitted work, authors should include this information in the “Enter Comments” text box provided during the submission process. When authors are uncertain about the need to disclose, they should err on the side of so doing.
Acknowledgements
Authors may express thanks or note assistance in the Acknowledgements. In addition, any individuals who contributed to the work described in the manuscript but who do not qualify as authors must be named in this section. Authors are responsible for informing all those listed that they are being mentioned in the manuscript and for obtaining their approval prior to publication.
Data Sharing Statement
Authors of manuscripts reporting clinical trials should include a statement of their data sharing plans, as described in the Data Sharing section.
Tables and Figures
Tables and figures should be cited in numerical order in the text using Arabic numbering.
Each table should be on a separate page of the manuscript file, ordered immediately after the references. The table number and title should be included above the table. Any additional information, including conversion factors for international units, should be included in notes below each table.
Each figure should have a legend (figure title and other explanatory text); legends should be placed at the end of the manuscript file, after the references or tables (if present). Titles and legends should not appear in the figure files themselves.
Figures should not be embedded within the manuscript file; instead they should be uploaded in the Editorial Manager system as separate files. For initial evaluation, figures must be of sufficient quality to be interpretable. If revision is requested, production-quality figures will be required, for which advice will be given. In general, authors should minimize conversions between file types. Resolution should not be reduced except when file size would otherwise be impractically large; in most cases, pixel-based images should have a resolution of at least 1,200 dpi for graphs and line art or 500 dpi for micrographs and other images. Color figures should use CMYK color mode.
For all borrowed material, authors are responsible for applying for permission from the relevant publisher(s) for electronic rights and are responsible for paying any permissions fees. In addition to providing proof of permission to the editorial office, authors must include appropriate wording in the figure legend or table note to indicate the source of the material.
For photographs of identifiable persons, the authors must obtain a signed release that indicates informed consent.
Kidney Medicine's expectations for image processing are that (1) adjusting contrast/levels or rescaling is acceptable if the adjustment was performed across the entire image; and (2) if certain parts of an image have been altered (other than obscuring confidential patient information), the authors must explain what has been done in a text box provided during the submission process and must be prepared to provide the original image for the editors' inspection.
Provided the manuscript is clear and complete, editors will not penalize submissions that do not follow journal style. However, for publication, manuscripts must adhere to journal style, and thus style changes may be requested at revision.
Units of Measurement
Values should be expressed in US conventional units; international equivalents or conversions are not necessary in running text. However, conversion factors should be provided in figure legends and table notes, as appropriate, eg, “Conversion factors for units: serum creatinine in mg/dL to µmol/L, ×88.4; urea nitrogen in mg/dL to mmol/L, ×0.357.”
A list of values requiring unit conversions, as well as conversion factors, is available for download.
Numerical values should always be reported for P, even if they are nonsignificant. If the P value is greater than or equal to 0.10, it should be reported with 2 nonzero digits, eg, 0.33. P values less than 0.10 should be rounded to one nonzero digit, eg, 0.0105 rounds to 0.01 and 0.0452 rounds to 0.05. Except for genetic association studies, P values less than 0.001 should be reported as <0.001, eg, 0.0009 and 1.92 × 10-6 become <0.001.
Reference Style
References should be compiled at the end of the manuscript according to the order of citation in the text, in the format shown in the following examples.
Journal article (6 or fewer authors):
Al-Absi A, Gosmanova EO, Wall BM. A clinical approach to the treatment of chronic hypernatremia. Am J Kidney Dis. 2012;560(6):1032-1038.
Journal article (more than 6 authors):
Matsui S, Imai E, Horio M, et al. Revised equations for estimated GFR from serum creatinine in Japan. Am J Kidney Dis. 2009;53(6):982-992.
Journal article published online but not yet in print:
Li Y, Kottgen A. Genetic investigations of kidney disease [published online ahead of print March 4, 2013]. Am J Kidney Dis. Doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2012.11.052.
Supplement:
National Kidney Foundation. KDOQI clinical practice guidelines and clinical practice recommendations for anemia in chronic kidney disease. Am J Kidney Dis. 2006;47(5)(suppl 3):S1-S145.
Item presented at a meeting but not yet published:
Weiner D, Tighiouart H. Nutritional supplement use and mortality in dialysis. Poster presented at: Kidney Week 2012; October 30-November 4, 2012; San Diego, CA.
Published meeting abstract:
Pudur S, Savin VJ, McCarthy ET, Sharma M. Albumin permeability in FSGS is associated with rapid progression to ESRD [NKF abstract 127]. Am J Kidney Dis. 2006;47(4):B50.
Web page:
National Kidney Foundation. What is a kidney biopsy? Accessed February 5, 2015. https://www.kidney.org/atoz/content/kidney-biopsy
Complete book:
Ahmad S. Manual of Clinical Dialysis. London, England: Science Press Ltd; 1999.
Book chapter:
Curhan G. Nephrolithiasis. In: National Kidney Foundation's Primer on Kidney Diseases. 6th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2013:405-411.
Dataset:
Oguro M, Imahiro S, Saito S, Nakashizuka T. Mortality data for Japanese oak wilt disease and surrounding forest compositions, Mendeley Data, v1; 2015. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.17632/xwj98nb39r.1.
Note: where appropriate, authors are encouraged to cite underlying or relevant datasets. So that Elsevier can tag the reference properly the reference properly, authors should add the text “[dataset]” adjacent to the reference (this identifier will not appear in the published article).
Personal Communication:
Information attributed to a “personal communication” should be cited in-text. Prior to publication, the author must supply written documentation that the individual cited was shown the proposed personal communication wording and gave permission to be named in the article as the source of this information.
MANUSCRIPT CONSIDERATION PROCESSAll manuscripts are submitted and processed using the online manuscript handling system Editorial Manager (https://www.editorialmanager.com/kidneymed/default.aspx).
Standard Consideration Process
Every manuscript will be reviewed by either an Associate Editor or the Editor-in-Chief, unless a conflict exists (see the Potential Editor Conflicts section). If the editors deem that the manuscript is unlikely to be published in Kidney Medicine, it may be rejected at this stage. Otherwise, most content will undergo external peer review; a Peer Review Statement is included in published articles to describe the consideration process.
Except when expedited handling is required, Original Research, Research Letters, Case Reports, and selected other content is discussed at weekly editorial meetings attended by a team generally including the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors. Essentially all research articles will undergo statistics/methods review before being invited for revision.
Authors may provide editors with the names of persons they feel should not review their manuscript because of a potential COI. However, when possible, authors should explain the reason(s) for their concerns. Editors will try to avoid inviting individuals to review who have potential COIs, and will ask those who are invited to review to declare any relevant competing interests. Further information is available in the Potential Reviewer Conflicts and Review Policy sections.
The Potential Editor Conflicts section describes workflows for managing manuscripts that may pose COIs for editors.
Recognizing the redundancy of having different peer reviews at each journal a manuscript may be submitted to, the limited time of volunteer reviewers, and the importance of speedy publishing to authors and the medical community, Kidney Medicine offers KM Express, an expedited consideration path.
Manuscripts submitted for expedited consideration will typically receive a communication from Kidney Medicine within 3 business days indicating whether or not the manuscript has been deemed eligible for KM Express.
If the manuscript is eligible, the authors will receive a decision letter within an additional 5-14 calendar days for manuscripts that do not require statistical review or up to 21 days for those that undergo statistical review. In the case of a revision letter, the requests will most often be based on comments from the Kidney Medicine editors (including a Statistical Editor) and reviews from the previous journal; in rare cases, requests from peer review(s) obtained by Kidney Medicine will also be included.
Manuscripts published via KM Express will specify in the Peer Review statement that the manuscript was submitted via this accelerated track.
Authors desiring this expedited consideration path for their work should state this in the Author Comments step in the submission process and must also upload the decision letter from the previous journal. Of note, authors should revise the abstract for submission to KM Express based on Kidney Medicine guidance.
AFTER ACCEPTANCE Prepublication EmbargoKidney Medicine will not publish content that has already been disseminated online or in print. If the confidentiality of a Kidney Medicine article or its key elements is not maintained up to the point it is published by Kidney Medicine, the article's acceptance for publication may be forfeited. Further information is available in the Originality section of the Submission Policies.
If an author's institution is interested in preparing a press release regarding the upcoming Kidney Medicine publication, the editorial office should be contacted for information regarding embargo dates. Authors may not discuss their accepted manuscript with reporters without the prior approval of the journal.
In rare instances, such as an urgent public health need or testimony before a government body, authors may be permitted to discuss their unpublished Kidney Medicine article, even though it is under embargo. Authors anticipating such a situation should contact the editorial office for approval before releasing any information contained in the article.
CopyrightUpon acceptance of an article, authors will be asked to complete a 'Journal Publishing Agreement' (for more information on this and copyright, see https://www.elsevier.com/copyright). An email will be sent to the corresponding author confirming receipt of the manuscript together with a 'Journal Publishing Agreement' form or a link to the online version of this agreement. Compliance With NIH Public Access Policy
If the corresponding author reports receipt of NIH funding when completing Elsevier?s Journal Publishing Agreement, Elsevier will send PubMed Central (PMC) the accepted peer-reviewed manuscript and will authorize that the article be posted for public access 12 months after print publication; authors will receive further communications from the NIH regarding the manuscript. In accordance with Kidney Medicine?s author agreement, authors should not post manuscripts directly to PMC.
Article Proofs
Corresponding authors are provided with proofs via email. Please use this proof only for checking the typesetting, editing, completeness and correctness of the text, tables and figures. Significant changes to the article as accepted for publication will only be considered at this stage with permission from the Editor. Corrections should be returned within 48 hours.
Article Numbering
Within the publishing industry, using article numbering (rather than page range) has emerged as an easy and efficient way to cite journal articles. As of January 2022, Kidney Medicine now uses article numbering instead of page numbers. While journal volumes and issue numbers will remain in place, article numbering will now play the key role in identifying specific articles. A unique article number is an abbreviated form of an article's DOI - digital object identifier. Citing an article with an article number is very simple: the article number is used instead of the page range in the citation.
2. Michalopoulos SN, Gauthier-Loiselle M, Aigbogun MS, et al. Patient and care partner burden in CKD patients with and without anemia: A US-based survey. Kid Med. 2022;4(4):100439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xkme.2022.100439.
The corresponding author will be notified and receive a link to the published version of the open access article on ScienceDirect. This link is in the form of an article DOI link which can be shared via email and social networks. For an extra charge, paper offprints can be ordered via the offprint order form which is sent once the article is accepted for publication. CrossMark and Digital Preservation
Each article published in Kidney Medicine has a CrossMark logo near its title. By clicking on the logo, readers can verify whether they are viewing the most current version of the article or see any associated errata.
As described in its digital archive policy, Elsevier ensures permanent availability and preservation of Kidney Medicine content.
Kidney Medicine policies generally follow those provided in the ICMJE Recommendations and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices.
Review Policy
Kidney Medicine conducts single-blind review: authors' identities are not masked to the reviewers, but reviewers' identities are masked to the authors. Each published article will contain a statement summarizing the review process.
If a manuscript is rejected, a copy is retained in Kidney Medicine's manuscript handling system for internal record-keeping; the confidentiality of the files and associated records will be maintained unless requested otherwise by the authors or in exceptional circumstances involving suspected misconduct.
Kidney Medicine endorses the COPE guidelines for ethical peer review. The manuscript must be kept confidential and the reviewer must request permission from Kidney Medicine beforehand if a colleague is to be consulted. Reviewers must not appropriate any information contained in the manuscript for their own work, nor should they contact the authors directly. Reviewers should keep their reviews confidential, even if the manuscript is later published. Comments should be constructive and professional, and reviewers should not state in the comments to the author whether the manuscript should be published. If a review does not meet these objectives, the editor may edit the reviewer's comments or may in extreme cases omit the comments from the material sent to the author.
Authors should not publicize reviews received from Kidney Medicine; however, if the manuscript is rejected by Kidney Medicine, authors may include reviews in submissions to other journals, provided information identifying the journal is removed.
It is very rare that editorial decisions are overturned. However, authors who believe that their manuscript was rejected due to a misunderstanding or mistake may email the editorial office to explain why they believe the decision to be in error. Appeals must include substantive new information with direct bearing on the decision (eg, a well- reasoned argument providing compelling evidence that a key critique raised in the rejection letter relied on incorrect or outdated information). A difference of opinion as to the interest, novelty, or suitability of the manuscript for the journal is not sufficient reason for an appeal.
The appeal will be considered by the Editor-in-Chief and other relevant editors. The journal's response to the appeal will be final. Even if the journal agrees to reconsider the manuscript, acceptance is not guaranteed, and the reconsideration process may involve previous or new reviewers or editors and substantive revision.
Kidney Medicine's COI policy generally follows those of the ICMJE Recommendations.
A COI may exist when financial or personal relationships with other persons or organizations may inappropriately influence or bias actions. There is a potential for a COI whether or not an individual believes that a relationship affects his or her scientific judgment. COIs can occur as the result of financial relationships, personal and family relationships, or academic competitive pressures.
The Support, Financial Disclosure, and Other Disclosures sections explain how authors must disclose the potential COIs.
Potential Reviewer COIs
Individuals who have potential COIs should not serve as peer reviewers. This includes individuals who work in the same institution as any of the authors (or will be joining that institution or are applying for a job there); who are or have been within the past 2 years mentors, mentees, close collaborators (in clinical care or research), or joint grant holders; and/or who have a close personal relationship with any of the authors. However, if the manuscript pertains to a large consortium to which a potential reviewer has contributed data but has not otherwise been involved, Kidney Medicine does not consider this to be a disqualifying condition. In addition, prior review of the manuscript for another journal does not necessarily disqualify an individual, provided that the reviewer considers the submission in its current form and according to Kidney Medicine's article type criteria.
Editors will try to avoid inviting individuals to review who have potential COIs. Editors will also attempt to honor authors? requests to exclude potential reviewers, provided that the reason for exclusion is a true COI and that rigorous and comprehensive review is possible if these individuals are excluded.
At the time they are invited to review, individuals must disclose any COIs that could bias their opinions, and they must disqualify themselves from reviewing when appropriate. If a COI becomes apparent during the review process, the reviewer must contact the journal office and, when appropriate, ask to be recused.
Editors and editorial office staff must not use information gained in the course of their duties for private gain. Records pertaining to potential editor COIs will be kept on file in the editorial office. Authors and reviewers who require this information should contact editorial office staff.
Kidney Medicine's procedures for managing editors' potential COIs are intended to balance the benefit of having a consistent group of knowledgeable editors evaluate manuscripts with the risk of making biased decisions. If the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor is an author of a manuscript, is from the same institution as an author, has a recent (within 24 months) or ongoing financial COI with an author, or has a recent (within 24 months) or ongoing close collaboration with an author, the manuscript will be handled by an Editorial Board member serving as Acting Editor-in-Chief. It should be noted that collaboration (eg, some co-authorships and some co-investigatorships) and close personal relationship are as perceived by the Editor. Recent co-authorship need not meet the standard for collaboration if the Editor and the coauthor are not joint grant holders, do not work together closely in clinical care, and are not co-investigators in a collaborative group.
Kidney Medicine will publish errata to correct important errors in published articles. The corresponding author of the article being corrected will be asked to verify and approve the wording of the erratum.
Misconduct Handling Policy
The Kidney Medicine editors recognize their role in making all reasonable efforts to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record, and will generally follow COPE recommendations when they suspect or receive credible allegations of a breach of journal policies. Any reports of potential misconduct submitted to the journal should include as much detailed information as possible to assist the editors in their investigation. Because of the time and resources required to thoroughly investigate allegations, Kidney Medicine must prioritize investigations on the basis of the most compelling evidence.
In exceptional circumstances, the Editor-in-Chief may reach the conclusion that, in order to investigate possible misconduct, manuscript or review records must be shared confidentially with, for example, another journal office or with an author?s institution. In general, however, Kidney Medicine will first contact the author(s) to request an explanation concerning an allegation or suspicion of misconduct.
When authors are unable to provide an explanation that the journal deems satisfactory, the authors are subject to editorial action including but not limited to contact with relevant institutions and/or regulatory bodies to disclose violations and/or request an investigation and/or publication of an editorial, editorial expression of concern, and/or retraction.
Regardless of the editors' efforts to prevent, detect, and respond to misconduct, authors remain ultimately responsible for the validity of their work and publications.
As a member of COPE, Kidney Medicine seeks to follow the COPE Core Practices. Authors, readers, reviewers, or members of the public who have a well-founded concern that the journal's conduct deviates from the Core Practices should email the Editor-in-Chief via the editorial office. Complainants who believe that the matter has not been satisfactorily resolved may contact COPE by the process laid out by COPE?s Facilitation and Integrity Subcommittee.
Advertising Policy
Editorial independence is crucial to scholarly publishing, and the editorial team has full authority to decide on the content of the journal. The criteria for editorial decision making regarding journal content do not include any perceived effect on advertising revenue. The Editor-in-Chief has the right to review all new advertising that is proposed to be associated with the journal and may reject any advertising that is deemed not in keeping with the journal's mission.
Supplement Policy
Kidney Medicine will consider publication of sponsored supplements that are of interest to its readers and demonstrate scientific validity. The content must be of sufficient informational value and quality to warrant a separate journal issue and must have a unifying theme. Submission of a supplement from a symposium or conference must occur in a timely fashion; in general, supplements will not be published if the publication date is more than 12 months after the date of the event. No more than 2 supplements per month will be published. Publication costs must be borne entirely by the sponsor(s). Further information on sponsorship opportunities may be obtained from Elsevier.
Following initial contact with Elsevier, a written proposal for the supplement must be submitted to the editorial office for the Editor-in-Chief?s consideration. The proposal must contain:
- The Guest Editor's or Coordinator's name, affiliation, and contact information;
- Topic(s) to be covered by the supplement, with a preliminary table of contents;
- If the supplement is to be based on a conference or symposium, information on dates, venue, and financial supporter(s);
- An estimate of the total number of double-spaced manuscript pages; and
- Sponsor(s) of the supplement.
Kidney Medicine can provide information on the journal's production schedule, and can recommend deadlines for receipt of materials that are intended to allow enough time for review, revision, and reconsideration of the supplement manuscripts. It should be noted that any estimated publication date is simply a projection based on the information available at the outset; whether it can be met will depend on submission of the completed manuscripts in a timely fashion, the nature of the review required, and the extent of mandatory revisions. Ideally, a supplement based on a conference or symposium should be planned so that authors provide the manuscripts to the Guest Editor or Coordinator at the time of the meeting.
The manuscripts must be prepared and submitted according to standards governing regular journal content. Manuscripts that do not follow journal format will be returned for editing before review; furthermore, the editorial office will not begin processing the supplement articles until all of the manuscripts for the supplement are received.
All supplements will undergo appropriate review of their contents. The review process depends on the number and length of articles and the nature of their content. Articles will almost invariably require revision; in addition, the EIC reserves the right to reject portions of the supplement, or the entire supplement. The editorial office will contact the Guest Editor or Coordinator regarding the decision to accept, reject, or require additional revisions. Once a supplement has been accepted it is formally scheduled for publication; changes to the publication date at this stage cannot be accommodated.
The supplement must contain a statement indicating the source(s) of funding. It is the responsibility of the Guest Editor or Coordinator to disclose to the editorial office at the time of submission any restrictions or expectations communicated to the Guest Editor or Coordinator by the sponsor(s) regarding the contents of the supplement. Furthermore, the Guest Editor or Coordinator must state what, if any, financial relationship they may have with the sponsor of the supplement. Likewise, all authors should disclose what, if any, financial relationship they have with the sponsor of the supplement, or the manufacturer of any products (or competing products) that are discussed in their manuscripts. Each manuscript must indicate any support that was obtained for the manuscript or its contents. If medical writer(s)/editor(s) have been involved, their role must be explicitly acknowledged, and their affiliation/source of funding must be listed. Additionally, if the sponsor has a financial interest in a product either directly or indirectly discussed in the manuscript, this relationship should be identified, along with the name of the product. Information about sponsorship and related products will be published with each article in the supplement.
Publication of a supplement does not constitute product or sponsor endorsement by the NKF or Kidney Medicine, and a disclaimer indicating this will be printed in each supplement.
Articles published in a Kidney Medicine supplement are subject to the same copyright restrictions that apply to articles published in regular journal issues.