The Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior (JNEB), the official journal of the Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior, is a refereed, scientific periodical that serves as a global resource for all professionals with an interest in nutrition education; nutrition and physical activity behavior theories and intervention outcomes; complementary and alternative medicine related to nutrition behaviors; food environment; food, nutrition, and physical activity communication strategies including technology; nutrition-related economics; food safety education; and scholarship of learning related to these areas. The purpose of JNEB is to document and disseminate original research and emerging issues and practices relevant to these areas worldwide. The Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior welcomes evidence-based manuscripts that provide new insights and useful findings related to nutrition education research, practice and policy. The content areas of JNEB reflect the diverse interests in nutrition and physical activity related to public health, nutritional sciences, education, behavioral economics, family and consumer sciences, and eHealth, including the interests of community-based nutrition-practitioners. As the Society's official journal, JNEB also includes policy statements, issue perspectives, position papers, and member communications.
Please refer to the Plagiarism Factsheet for information on plagiarism.
Conflict of Interest
JNEB is committed to preserving objectivity by identifying and acknowledging potential conflicts of interest, both real and perceived, among all persons involved in the publication process, including authors. This ethics policy is in keeping with current standards in the scientific literature, supported by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, and recommended in the American Medical Association Manual of Style, 10th edition. Examples of financial interests include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, expert testimony, royalties, patents, grants, and material or financial support from industry, government, or private agencies. Nonfinancial interests include personal or professional relationships, knowledge, or beliefs that might reduce one's objectivity.
By submitting a manuscript, authors certify that if the paper is accepted for publication in JNEB, the copyright will be transferred to the Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior. Copyright exceptions are made as required for manuscripts submitted by employees of the US government.
Submission declaration and verification
Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract, a published lecture or academic thesis, see 'Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication' for more information), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent of the copyright-holder. To verify originality, your article may be checked by the originality detection service Crossref Similarity Check.
Inclusive language acknowledges diversity, conveys respect to all people, is sensitive to differences, and promotes equal opportunities. Articles should make no assumptions about the beliefs or commitments of any reader, should contain nothing which might imply that one individual is superior to another on the grounds of race, sex, culture or any other characteristic, and should use inclusive language throughout. Authors should ensure that writing is free from bias, for instance by using 'he or she', 'his/her' instead of 'he' or 'his', and by making use of job titles that are free of stereotyping (e.g. 'chairperson' instead of 'chairman' and 'flight attendant' instead of 'stewardess').
The Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior follows the guidelines for authorship from the International Committee for Medical Journal Editors (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html). As such, the journal recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:
2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
To satisfy the requirement for authorship, each contributor must meet all 4 criteria above. Contributors meeting fewer than the 4 criteria listed here should be listed in the Acknowledgments section of an article.Copyright
Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be asked to complete a 'Journal Publishing Agreement' (see more information on this). An e-mail 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.
Subscribers may reproduce tables of contents or prepare lists of articles including abstracts for internal circulation within their institutions. Permission of the Publisher is required for resale or distribution outside the institution and for all other derivative works, including compilations and translations. If excerpts from other copyrighted works are included, the author(s) must obtain written permission from the copyright owners and credit the source(s) in the article. Elsevier has preprinted forms for use by authors in these cases.For gold open access articles: Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be asked to complete an 'Exclusive License Agreement' (more information). Permitted third party reuse of gold open access articles is determined by the author's choice of user license.
As an author you (or your employer or institution) have certain rights to reuse your work. More information.
Find out how you can share your research published in Elsevier journals.
Funding Source and Funding Body Policies
Elsevier has established agreements with funding bodies and developed policies to allow authors to comply with funding body OA/manuscript archiving requirements as specified as conditions of their grant awards, including specific user licenses, such as a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. To learn more about existing agreements and policies, please visit http://www.elsevier.com/fundingbodies. Some authors may be reimbursed for associated publication fees. If you need to comply with your funding body policy, you can apply for the CC BY license after your manuscript is accepted for publication.
Articles are made available to JNEB subscribers, as well as developing countries and patient groups, through our access programs (see http://www.elsevier.com/access). There is no fee to publish an article, and your publication choice—subscription or OA—will have no effect on the peer-review process or acceptance of submitted articles.
Funding body agreements and policies
Elsevier has established a number of agreements with funding bodies which allow authors to comply with their funder's open access policies. Some funding bodies will reimburse the author for the gold open access publication fee. Details of existing agreements are available online.
After acceptance, open access papers will be published under a noncommercial license. For authors requiring a commercial CC BY license, you can apply after your manuscript is accepted for publication.
This journal offers authors a choice in publishing their research:
• Articles are made available to subscribers as well as developing countries and patient groups through our universal access programs.
• No open access publication fee payable by authors.
• The Author is entitled to post the accepted manuscript in their institution's repository and make this public after an embargo period (known as green Open Access). The published journal article cannot be shared publicly, for example on ResearchGate or Academia.edu, to ensure the sustainability of peer-reviewed research in journal publications. The embargo period for this journal can be found below.
Gold open access
• Articles are freely available to both subscribers and the wider public with permitted reuse.
• A gold open access publication fee is payable by authors or on their behalf, e.g. by their research funder or institution.
For gold open access articles, permitted third party (re)use is defined by the following Creative Commons user licenses: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.
The gold open access publication fee for this journal is USD 2500, excluding taxes. Learn more about Elsevier's pricing policy: https://www.elsevier.com/openaccesspricing.
Green open access
Authors can share their research in a variety of different ways and Elsevier has a number of green open access options available. We recommend authors see our green open access page for further information. Authors can also self-archive their manuscripts immediately and enable public access from their institution's repository after an embargo period. This is the version that has been accepted for publication and which typically includes author-incorporated changes suggested during submission, peer review and in editor-author communications. Embargo period: For subscription articles, an appropriate amount of time is needed for journals to deliver value to subscribing customers before an article becomes freely available to the public. This is the embargo period and it begins from the date the article is formally published online in its final and fully citable form. Find out more.
This journal has an embargo period of 12 months.
The use of ORCID - Open Researcher and Contributor ID – is an option for JNEB authors and reviewers. By registering with ORCID, users receive a unique digital identifier, also called ORCID, to which they can link their published articles and other professional activities. Authors then have a single record of all their research. This can reduce or eliminate confusion when the same person's name appears in different ways in various publications, when people have the same or similar names, or when people change their name.
JNEB encourages authors and reviewers to register with ORCID to facilitate consolidation of their publication records. If you have authored or reviewed for JNEB previously, go to https://ees.elsevier.com/jneb/default.asp. Log in. Just to the left of the log out tab, is Change Details (click here for more information). The third box down is titled Personal Information. Click on Link to ORCID. (click here for more information). You will need to register (free) or login with your password to link your JNEB profile to ORCID. If you have created a consolidated Elsevier profile, updating your JNEB account details ensures that your ORCID will also be available when submitting to other Elsevier journals.General manuscript preparation
The primary responsibility for preparing the manuscript in a form suitable for publication lies with the authors. Manuscripts (including the main text, references, and figure legends) should be saved without a title page as a single file and should be prepared in a 12-point typeface, double-spaced, and in a single column with 1-inch margins throughout. Keep the layout of the text as simple as possible. Most formatting codes will be removed upon initial processing of the article. Do not use the software's options to justify text or to hyphenate words. Use the software's bold, italic, subscript, and superscript functions. Use the software's table function to create tables, using rows and columns, not tabs and spaces, to align data.
Beginning with the Introduction, each manuscript page is numbered in the upper right-hand corner and each line of text is numbered consecutively. First-level headings are centered on the page, typed in uppercase, bolded letters, and followed by two blank lines. Second-level headings begin flush with the left margin, have each word capitalized and bolded, and are followed by one blank line. Third-level headings begin flush with the left margin, are written sentence style with a period at the end, and are bolded. Text follows immediately on the same line. (Third-level headings are only used in Research Articles.)Page and word limits are noted below. Page and word limits exclude the abstract but include all other text, acknowledgments, tables, figures, and references. Manuscripts must not exceed word count limits or page limits.
• Research Article: 20 double-spaced pages
• Research Brief: 14 double-spaced pages
• Research Methods: 25 double-spaced pages
• Report: 14 double-spaced pages
• Systematic Review: 25 double-spaced pages
• Perspective: 12 double-spaced pages
• GEMs: 6 double-spaced pages
• Letter to the Editor: 2 double-spaced pages
Please note:Scientific manuscripts (RA, RB) should have internal and external validity and move the field of nutrition education and behavior forward. The study objectives and result should hold significance for a larger audience than the one in the study. Threats to internal validity should be carefully explained in the limitations, such as selection bias and uncontrolled confounding variables. Threats to external validity include all situational specifics which may be conditions of the study or attributes of when and where the study is conducted. These also should be explained in the limitations. The extent to which these threats overwhelm the study results' internal and external validity will be evaluated by the editor when considering decisions about the manuscript. Those with higher internal and external validity are more likely to be moved by the editor to external review and evaluation for publication.
Author Guidelines for Manuscript Titles
Short: Try to keep to 12 words or less
• Instead of "A School-based Intervention for 5 to 7 Year Olds to Improve General Nutrition Knowledge, Self-Efficacy for Choosing Healthy Snacks, Fruit and Vegetable Intake, and Minutes Spent in Active Play in 2 Counties in Texas with Head Start"
• Suggest "Head Start Program Focusing on Diet and Active Play"
• Instead of "Development and Internal and Test-Retest Reliability, Content Validity and Construct Validity of a Questionnaire to Determine General Nutrition Knowledge, Self-efficacy for Choosing Healthy Snacks, Fruit and Vegetable Intake, and Minutes Spent in Active Play for 14 to 16 year old Boys in Michigan"
• Suggest "Diet and Active Play Questionnaire Development for Teens"
• Instead of "Total Fiber Improved with Whole Grain Program"
• Suggest "Whole Grain Program Improves Total Fiber Intake"
Professional, not trite:
• Instead of "LB/FB Increases Shares for EFNEP Programs"
• Suggest "Social Media Strategies in EFNEP"
• Instead of "Snacking and Yakking: Social Interaction to Promote Healthy Choices"
• Suggest "Conversation Improves Healthy Snack Choices"
Statement, not question"
• Instead of "Will a Three Week Afterschool Program Improve Low Fat Food Choices?"
• Suggest "Impact of an Afterschool Low Fat Food Program"
Research Articles are concise reports of original research on any aspect of nutrition education and/or behavior. Papers based on the results of preliminary research are not acceptable.
In Research Articles, a structured abstract of 200 words or less organizes information with descriptive headings that begin flush with the left margin. Incomplete sentences are acceptable in a structured abstract for the sake of brevity. To facilitate selective electronic searches, structured abstracts include the following subheadings (verbatim), bolded and presented in the order shown here:• Objective: Specifies the primary purpose or objective(s) of the study and/or hypotheses tested.
• Design: Describes the basic research design, methods used to collect data, timing and sequence of intervention, and data collection.
• Setting: Describes the study setting. This subheading may not be appropriate for secondary data analyses and can be omitted.
• Participants: States the number of participants or subjects/objects of observation by group and subgroup, describes how they were selected, specifies the response rate for participants, summarizes key demographic characteristics for each study group and subgroup, and describes the extent to which they represent the population from which they were drawn (may not be appropriate for secondary data analyses). More or less information relating to participants may be included, depending on word count limits and the need for more space in the "Results" section.
• Intervention(s): Describes the essential features of the intervention(s), including setting, methods, and duration. If no intervention was conducted, omit this subheading from the abstract.
• Main Outcome Measure(s): Specifies dependent and independent variables and describes how each variable was measured. In the case of descriptive research, replace this subheading with "Variables Measured." In the case of qualitative research, replace this subheading with "Phenomenon of Interest."
• Analysis: Summarizes how data were analyzed quantitatively and/or qualitatively and specifies the level used to determine statistical significance of quantitative results.
• Results: Summarizes primary results reported in the manuscript, including the number of participants (if it differs from what was described in the "Participants" section), direction of change, and variance and level of statistical significance for each quantitative result, as well as confidence intervals or effect sizes wherever appropriate. Qualitative themes should be reported.
• Conclusions and Implications: Specifies study conclusions directly supported by results reported in the abstract and specifies implications for research and practice or policy, when appropriate.
Research Articles include the following major sections:
• Introduction: Concisely describes the issue addressed in the manuscript, explains its importance in relation to existing literature, describes the theoretical or conceptual foundation on which the study is based, states the objectives of the article, and specifies the hypotheses tested.
• Methods: Describes the research design, sampling methods, recruitment strategies, measurement instruments, methods used to test instruments for validity and reliability, data collection procedures, and statistical analyses in enough detail for replication. The Methods section specifies the level used to determine statistical significance for each test. Confidence intervals and standard errors of the mean, effect sizes, or other statistical results that may be used for post hoc analyses comparing program results are encouraged. For general statistical guidelines, go to Guidelines for Statistical Methods for JNEB. However, if authors are using t tests and more than 2 t tests are being conducted with a data set, in addition to testing for normality, they should also use a Bonferroni adjustment or other adjustment that is supported with reference. For example, if authors used t tests to measure pre-post differences after an intervention for calcium knowledge, calcium-related behavior, sodium knowledge, self-efficacy to lower sodium, and fruit and vegetable intake, then they have used 5 t tests and should use the Bonferroni adjustment or other adjustment, which is available in both SPSS and SAS software packages. This adjustment will decrease the probability that authors find a significant effect by chance. There are exceptions to this, but authors must justify such an exception within their methods.
The Methods section provides rationale for analyzing data by race or ethnicity (if applicable).
Institutional Review Board. It also specifies that the project was reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or similar human studies review board, with a full, expedited, or limited review and that written, oral, or implied consent and/or assent was obtained. For all projects with IRB approval other than exempt, authors should include how consent was obtained. Alternately, if no IRB approval was necessary for this research, please add a statement explaining why. In this statement, include which institution reviewed the study and decided that it was exempt from IRB review (institution should be blinded for review). If it was not reviewed by your university or institution, please provide the documentation that pertains to this type of study, deeming it unnecessary to be reviewed. An example of this may be:
"Review by the IRB was not required for this study because human subjects were not involved, as per US Department of Health and Human Services guidelines (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/checklists/decisioncharts.html#c1)."
The DHHS regulations may also allow projects to be exempt if they have agency or unit head approval and the data are unidentifiable. In these cases, the Methods section should state:
The heads of xx agency/organization do not require IRB approval and this work is exempt through DHHS 46.101 (b) relating to unidentifiable survey or interview data (reference: DHHS, Code of Federal Regulations TITLE 45, 2009, available at https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/#46.101.
The bolded section may also be an abbreviated version of:
(5) Research and demonstration projects that are conducted by or subject to the approval of department or agency heads, and which are designed to study, evaluate, or otherwise examine: (i) Public benefit or service programs; (ii) procedures for obtaining benefits or services under those programs; (iii) possible changes in or alternatives to those programs or procedures; or (iv) possible changes in methods or levels of payment for benefits or services under those programs.
International Research: Research conducted by US university investigators in foreign countries remains under the researchers' university purview and guidelines. Research conducted by non-US investigators is under the purview of that country's human studies guidelines, or international guidelines to which the particular country might adhere.
• Results: Outlines results clearly and systematically, mentioning or highlighting—but not duplicating—information displayed in tables, and specifies the direction and magnitude of each statistically significant difference reported. Carefully designed tables and figures are encouraged to showcase results.
• Discussion: Provides an in-depth interpretation of results reported, compares and discusses results in relation to those from similar studies reported in the literature and in relation to theory, outlines limitations of the study, describes how study limitations influence interpretation of results, and offers alternative explanations for the findings. The Discussion section should not represent a summary of results.
• Implications for Research and Practice: Specifies how researchers and practitioners, and policy makers when appropriate, could apply results to future work.
Research Articles may include second-level sections to clarify or enhance readability within major sections. At times, Research Articles may require second-level sections that are specific to the research being reported. The following second-level sections are generally recommended, if necessary, for these major sections:
• Methods: Study Design, Participants and Recruitment (includes descriptions of sampling methodology and ethical approval/human subjects consent), Instruments, Measures, Procedures, and/or Data Analysis
• Discussion: Limitations
Research Briefs are (1) articles that describe development and validation of new measures and methods for research and/or (2) articles that satisfy all criteria for a Research Article but report results from a small or non-representative sample, report on secondary or ancillary results from a larger study, or report on a topic that is considered low priority but would be of interest to some readers of JNEB.
Structured abstracts for Research Briefs of 150 words or less include the following subheadings (verbatim), bolded and presented in the order shown here:• Objective: Specifies the primary purpose or objective(s) of the study and/or hypotheses tested.
• Methods: Describes the basic research design, methods used to collect data, timing and sequence of intervention, and data collection.
• Results: Summarizes primary results reported in the manuscript, including the number of participants, direction of change, and variance and level of statistical significance for each quantitative result, as well as confidence intervals or effect sizes wherever appropriate.
• Conclusions and Implications: Specifies study conclusions directly supported by results reported in the abstract and specifies implications for research and practice or policy making when appropriate.
Research Briefs include the same major sections as Research Articles. Use of second-level sections is allowed, but overuse is discouraged. Third-level sections are not permitted in Research Briefs.Research Methods
Research Methods are manuscripts that describe the objectives and methodologies for multi-year interventions whose aims are to change nutrition and/or physical activity behavior and/or related physiological outcomes, such as BMI or blood glucose. Research Methods are expected to have protocols that have already undergone review external to the author's institution (federal or national agencies) prior to funding. Although Results are not included in Research Methods, a Discussion should include a brief summary of potential limitations and expected benefits or outcomes. Research Methods are peer-reviewed by the Editors and a member of the Board of Editors for completeness, clarity, and contribution to the literature. Research Methods are assigned a digital object identifier (DOI).
A structured abstract of 200 words or less organizes information with descriptive headings similar to those of a Research Article:• Objective: Specifies the primary purpose or objective(s) of the study and/or hypotheses tested.
• Design: Describes the basic research design, methods used to collect data, timing and sequence of intervention, and data collection.
• Setting: Describes the study setting.
• Participants: States the number of participants or subjects/objects of observation by group and subgroup and describes how they will be selected.
• Intervention(s): Describes the essential features of the intervention(s), including setting, methods, and duration.
• Main Outcome Measure(s): Specifies dependent and independent variables and describes how each variable will be measured.
• Analysis: Summarizes how data will be analyzed quantitatively and/or qualitatively and specifies the level used to determine statistical significance of quantitative results.
Research Methods include the following major sections: Introduction, Methods, and Discussion (which should describe the protocol’s strengths and limitations as described to funding agencies). They should not include sections for Results or Implications for Research and Practice.The future tense of verbs is used throughout Research Methods.
Reports are (1) articles that discuss policy issues relevant to nutrition education and behavior, or (2) articles that review emerging topics as they relate to nutrition education and behavior. Reports reflect newly proposed models or processes with relevance to policy or research methodology. Reports are not reviews of the literature without critical evaluation and interpretation. To decide whether your manuscript is a Report, Research Brief, or Research Article, consider the topic itself and whether it reflects the prior definitions. It may be helpful to read some Reports as you decide.
• Cost-Effectiveness Model for Youth EFNEP Programs: What Do We Measure and How Do We Do It? Serrano et al. JNEB 2011;43:295-302. This Report presents the results of an expert panel related to a national program and the policy implications of creating a model for determining costs and effects of the program.
• Best Practices Models for Implementing, Sustaining, and Using Instructional School Gardens in California. Hazzard et al. JNEB 2011;43:409-413. This Report contains the results of interviewing key members in schools who had exemplary school garden programs, with the synthesis into best practices, which could lead to policy changes.
• Obesity in Rural Youth: Looking Beyond Nutrition and Physical Activity. Reed et al. JNEB 2011;43:401-408. This Report presents emerging ideas concerning traditional and nontraditional factors contributing to childhood obesity in rural youth within an expanded Social Ecological Framework that the authors have developed.
• Nutrition Program Quality Assurance through a Formalized Process of On-Site Program Review. Paddock and Dollahite. JNEB 2012;44:183-188. This Report describes the development and lessons learned from implementing a nutrition program quality assurance process, which could be replicated with other state nutrition programs, and whose goal was to influence policies on programming to ensure excellence.
Reports include the following major sections: Introduction, Discussion, and Implications for Research and Practice. They should not include sections for Methods or Results. Instead, they should employ alternately titled headings that distinguish them from Research Articles and Research Briefs. Examples include Description of the Intervention, Description of the Evaluation, and Lessons Learned. Reports that develop new concepts or review topics may include additional major sections as needed. Second-level sections are allowed, but overuse is discouraged. Third-level sections are not permitted in Reports.Systematic Reviews
Unsolicited Systematic Reviews are accepted for consideration for peer review, provided they represent a topic area of interest to JNEB readers and follow accepted methodology.
A Systematic Review attempts to identify, appraise, and synthesize all the empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a given research question. Researchers conducting systematic reviews use explicit methods aimed at minimizing bias in order to produce more reliable findings that can be used to inform decision making (Cochrane Collaboration).Several guidelines are available for conducting systematic reviews, including those of the Institute of Medicine,1 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA),2 Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR),3 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality,4 and United States Department of Agriculture.5 The guideline that you choose to follow should be mentioned in the Methods section and referenced.
A Systematic Review should have a structured abstract as for Research Articles, have 200 words or less, and contain the following sections in the abstract and main body of the paper:• Introduction: Presents the topic and states why a systematic review is needed. The clearly stated objective should be linked to the research question and how the research questions were developed. This may include the PICO process (patient problem or population [P], intervention [I], comparison [C], and outcomes [O]) or another citable research question development process.
• Methods: Briefly describes the members of the research team, their areas of expertise (content, systematic review methods, meta-analysis), and their roles in the systematic review. If a research librarian or information specialist is part of the team, this should be noted. Detailed information should be provided on inclusion/exclusion criteria, search strategies, databases, and other search engines or manual methods for identifying articles, article quality evaluation schema (such as the Nutrition Evidence Library quality checklist6 or GRADE guidelines7), type of comparative analysis across articles, summary, and synthesis strategies. When appropriate, please describe who made these decisions, how they were made (consensus, majority, most senior research team member), and the rationale for the final decision. This section should also include a diagram that contains the number of all articles found by the initial search, how many were excluded, and why, in a manner similar to a Consort diagram.
• Results: Outlines results clearly and systematically, mentioning or highlighting—but not duplicating—information displayed in tables, and specifies the quality evaluation of articles selected and the synthesis or summary of outcomes. Carefully designed tables and figures are encouraged to showcase results.
• Discussion: Compares the results to any previous reviews on this topic. If other reviews are not available, the Discussion should compare key findings to those already reported in the literature. The Discussion should include any limitations of the systematic review, such as publication bias.
• Implications for Research and Practice: Concisely states how these findings or major conclusions could be applied to best practices, if they can, and what additional research would strengthen the conclusions or extend the results to larger audiences. Any policy implications should also be included in this section.
Note: Systematic reviews that conclude there is not enough quality research to draw any results are not generally accepted as Systematic Reviews. Occasionally these manuscripts may be rewritten as Perspectives.
1. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Finding What Works in Health Care. Standards for Systematic Reviews. March, 2011. http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Finding-What-Works-in-Health-Care-Standards-for-Systematic-Reviews/Standards.aspx. Accessed October 31, 2013.
2. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6: e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed1000097.
3. Chandler J, Churchill R, Higgins J, Lasserson T, Tovey D. Methodological standards for the conduct of new Cochrane intervention reviews (MECIR). http://www.editorial-unit.cochrane.org/mecir. Accessed October 31, 2013.
4. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/index.cfm/search-for-guides-reviews-and-reports/?pageaction=displayproduct&productid=318. Accessed October 31, 2013.
5. United States Department of Agriculture. Nutrition Education Systematic Review Project: Methodology. http://www.nel.gov/topic.cfm?cat=3319. Accessed October 31, 2013.
6. United States Department of Agriculture. Nutrition Evidence Library. Research design and implementation checklists. http://www.nel.gov/topic.cfm?cat=3232. Accessed October 31, 2013.
7. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidem. 2011;64:401-406.
Perspectives are articles communicating opinions on current issues and controversies in the field. Opinions expressed in Perspectives are supported by references. Opposing perspectives are acknowledged. For controversial issues, the Editor-in-Chief may invite articles from others holding alternative opinions for simultaneous or sequential publication.
Perspectives have an unstructured abstract written in paragraph form of 100 words or less. The unstructured abstract provides a brief overview of all key aspects of the manuscript. Topics covered in a conventional abstract depend on whether the manuscript describes a program and its evaluation, a new research method, or a review of literature or policy issues. All abstracts begin with a clearly defined purpose or objective and end with conclusions and implications for research, practice, and policy making.Perspectives include the following major sections: Introduction, Discussion, and Implications for Research and Practice. They should not include sections for Methods or Results. Instead, they should employ alternately titled headings that distinguish them from Research Articles and Research Briefs. Examples include those headings that would present the viewpoint, premise, or argument beyond an introduction—that is, these headings reflect the concept, program, model, or topic about which the authors have a perspective.
The manuscript reviewers are instructed to evaluate the breadth and depth that the authors address the topic, and the appropriateness of the Implications for Research and Practice section, as well as the preceding guidelines.GEMs
Great Educational Materials (GEMs) are brief descriptions of innovative and useful approaches to nutrition education and behavior. Innovative approaches are novel, creative, and thoughtful, generally not having been published before. GEMs describe educational material, including brochures, curricula, videos, websites, apps, materials, or something tangible that teaches to change behavior. GEMs may also be an educational process (teaching style or venue). The material or process should be described in enough detail to be replicated, or available (links or sources to be included in NOTES).
A GEM describes settings, events, participant recruitment, or key players and behavior change theory. A GEM includes some evaluation and should describe the evaluation materials and process as well as outcomes. This evaluation must be more than liking the educational material or process. The evaluation should have a statistical significance but statistics may be less rigorous than for RA or RB.Photographs or other visual materials may be included to enhance the description.
GEMs do not require abstracts. However, please provide 2 to 3 sentences summarizing the educational program or tool being evaluated and the results of the evaluation (50-word limit). This summary will be sent to reviewers and will not be part of the GEM's publication.GEMs include an Introduction, which describes why the program or activity is worth reading about. The body or content of a GEM states the target audience and notes the adaptability of the program to different audiences. It also states the purpose/objective of the program/activity, describes how one would implement the program/activity, and explains how the program/activity has been evaluated and with what results. If applicable, it also describes plans for future refinement/use and the application or use of theory and/or models to program design and/or evaluation.
GEMs are required to have review by institutional review board (IRB) when data from humans is collected. If no IRB approval was necessary for this research, please add a statement explaining why. In this statement, include which institution reviewed the study and decided that it was exempt from IRB review (institution should be blinded for review). If it was not reviewed by your university or institution, please provide the documentation that pertains to this type of study, deeming it unnecessary to be reviewed. An example of this may be:
"Review by the institutional review board was not required for this study because human subjects were not involved, as per US Department of Health and Human Services guidelines (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/checklists/decisioncharts.html#c1)."
- Lent M, Hill TF, Dollahite JS, Wolfe WS, Dickin KL. Healthy Children, Healthy Families: Parents Making a Difference! A curriculum integrating key nutrition, physical activity, and parenting practices to help prevent childhood obesity. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2012;44:90-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2011.02.011.
- Rosenkranz RR, Dzewaltowski DA. Promoting better family meals for girls attending summer programs. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2009;41:65-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2008.02.003.
Letters to the Editor are timely and succinct expressions of responsible criticism or reaction to material published in recent issues. A Letter to the Editor may also call attention to topics of general interest to readers. Submission of a Letter to the Editor constitutes permission for JNEB to publish it with or without editing and abridgment. Authors of Letters to the Editor must acknowledge financial and other conflicts of interest within the letter. Authors of the articles referred to in Letters to the Editor will be given an opportunity to respond in a letter for simultaneous publication. General style and form and writing style
JNEB adheres to the style recommendations outlined in the American Medical Association Manual of Style, 10th edition (http://www.amamanualofstyle.com/). Manuscripts should be written in good scientific English (American or British usage is accepted, but not a mixture of these). Authors who feel their manuscript may not conform to correct scientific English may wish to use the English Language Editing service available from Elsevier (http://webshop.elsevier.com/languageediting/) or use another science editing service.
Please note the following additional style requirements and format manuscripts accordingly before submission:
• Abbreviations, acronyms, and initialisms should be spelled out on first use, with the shortened versions immediately following in parentheses. Example: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Manuscripts should be limited to a total of five acronyms, abbreviations, and initialisms to limit reader confusion. Beyond this, all terms must be spelled out. A list of approved terms that may be used in their abbreviated forms on first use is available here.
• Behavior theories or models mentioned frequently in a manuscript should be abbreviated whenever possible. Example: Social Cognitive Theory (SCT).
• “N” and “n” should be used as follows: “N” indicates a whole population or an epidemiological study; “n” indicates a sample or subpopulation.
• Sentences in unstructured abstracts or in the body of a manuscript may not begin with a numeral. Example: “Four hundred thirty-five parents were surveyed […]” not “435 parents were surveyed […]” Sentences in structured abstracts may begin with a numeral (as structured abstracts often contain sentence fragments).
• Decimals should be used only to 1 degree more than the unit of measurement. For whole numbers, decimals need to be rounded to tenths; if precision of measurement is in the tenths, you may use hundredths (eg, with weight measured to the tenth of a pound, means may be expressed as hundredths). Please be sure of your precision: while most software will express results greater than the precision, it is not appropriate to use these figures in tables (eg, 34.1 mg niacin).
The exception to this is percentages concerning people. For fewer than 100 people, please round to the nearest whole percentage, eg, 95% of participants (n = 80), rather than 95.3% of participants (n = 80).
The past tense of verbs is used to discuss methods and results, as well as existing literature, with the exception of Research Methods, where the future tense should be used. Present tense is only used to refer to general truths and to state conclusions. Active voice is preferred. Jargon and sexist language should be avoided. For preferred usage of terms related to race and ethnicity, see the American Medical Association Manual of Style, 10th edition.
For general statistical guidelines, please read Guidelines for Statistical Methods for JNEB.
When reporting P, values less than .001 should be reported as such: P < .001. Actual values for P should be expressed to 2 digits for P ≤ .01, whether or not P is significant. If P is < .01, there should be 3 significant figures reported (eg, P = .008). Use P values rather than alpha values.Quantitative and Qualitative Research
Authors have access to reviewer guidelines for both quantitative and qualitative research.
All structured and unstructured abstracts are accompanied by a list of 3 to 5 key words for indexing. Key words are selected from the listing of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) outlined by MEDLINE (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/MBrowser.html) that are used for indexing in PubMed. To maximize the likelihood that your paper will be identified appropriately by other researchers, educators, and administrators, it is important to choose MeSH key words whenever possible. Choosing non-MeSH terms will make it more difficult for your article to be appropriately cited.
For submission, each table should be saved and uploaded as a separate file. Number tables consecutively in accordance with their appearance in the text. If there is only one table, then no number is assigned (eg, “Table”). Format tables as follows:
Title: Provide a table number and a descriptive title. Words in the title are capitalized. The title should describe the type of data included and give the sample size (n) unless it varies by measure/variable (in which case, n should be included within the table content).
Example of unacceptable table title: "Descriptive Demographics"
Example of acceptable table title: "Anthropometric and Socioeconomic Data for Adults Enrolled in Healthy Eating Programs (n = 40)"
Content: Not all data included in tables needs to be reported within the text of the manuscript. The most important results should be included in the narrative (text), but repeating results that will not be discussed further is discouraged. Bullets should not be used within a table. For qualitative tables, indentation of text may also be used within a section.
Footnotes: The order of items within the footnote is as follows: abbreviations, then statistical significance, then statistical test used. Any abbreviation used in the table should be spelled out in the footnote. If not included in the table content, statistical significance should be identified with an asterisk (eg, *P < .05; P < .01; P < .001; or *Significance based on 95% CI). Statistical test used (eg, chi-square, logistic regression) and statistical adjustments made to models should also be identified.
The table title, data/content, and footnotes should be complete enough to understand without referring to related text.
Statistics: Report means and standard deviations if the data have a normal distribution; report the interquartile range (IQR) and the median if the data are not normally distributed. Standard error of the mean (SEM) should only be used if multiple samples are gathered (eg, groups of schools). Confidence intervals (CIs) should be included if relative risk or odds ratios are given in the table. The statistical significance (P) may be included as the number (eg, P < .05) or indicated by an asterisk and footnote (see Footnotes section, above). Superscripted lowercase letters may be used if differences among several groups are to be shown. Differences between 2 or more groups should include a column for P or an asterisk to indicate significance, where appropriate.
Refer to the “General style and form and writing style” section above for guidance on the number of decimals places or significant digits to show in tables.
For submission, each figure should be saved and uploaded as a separate file. Number figures consecutively in accordance with their appearance in the text. If there is only one figure, then no number is assigned (eg, “Figure”). Format figures as follows:
Caption: Figure captions should be presented at the end of the manuscript just after the references (captions should not be attached to the figures themselves). Captions constitute a distinct section of the manuscript and should start on a new page. Ensure that each illustration has a caption. A caption should consist of a brief title and a description of the illustration. Figure captions should be written in sentence format.
Example of unacceptable caption: “Body Mass Index (BMI) versus calories.”
Example of acceptable caption: “Body Mass Index (BMI) versus calories consumed after 3-month intervention with 10- to 12-year-olds.”
Figure captions should also explain any abbreviations or statistical tests (eg, chi-square, logistic regression). Keep text in figures to a minimum; instead, use figure captions to explain all symbols and abbreviations used.
Content: Lettering and data symbols must be clear and consistent on each figure. Use uniform lettering and size your original artwork consistently. Only use the following fonts in illustrations: Arial, Courier, Helvetica, Times New Roman, and Symbol. Titles, explanations, and definitions of abbreviations must be noted in the legends, not on the figures themselves.
Consort diagrams should be used to explain recruitment/enrollment/retention of subjects for any intervention (see Williams-Piehota et al. JNEB 2009;41:398-405). Other appropriate figures include maps (see Stone. JNEB 2011;43:S148-S151), scatter grams for continuous data, bar graphs for categorical data (eg, body mass index by gender), and diagrams for spatial and conceptual relationships, such as the Social Ecological Model.For GEMs, it is preferred that authors use 1 to 2 figures that enhance the GEM description (photos should meet this requirement and not simply show authors or participants). Figures must also be referred to within the text. For recognizable photo(s), you must have release form(s) from the subject(s).
In order to maintain a clear separation between the author and any other agency, the editors require that all figures, tables, and photographs be submitted directly by the contributing author and no other source.Reference management software
Most Elsevier journals have their reference template available in many of the most popular reference management software products. These include all products that support Citation Style Language styles, such as Mendeley and Zotero, as well as EndNote. Using the word processor plug-ins from these products, authors only need to select the appropriate journal template when preparing their article, after which citations and bibliographies will be automatically formatted in the journal's style. If no template is yet available for this journal, please follow the format of the sample references and citations as shown in this Guide. If you use reference management software, please ensure that you remove all field codes before submitting the electronic manuscript. More information on how to remove field codes.
Users of Mendeley Desktop can easily install the reference style for this journal by clicking the following link:
When preparing your manuscript, you will then be able to select this style using the Mendeley plug-ins for Microsoft Word or LibreOffice.
Each new reference introduced in the text is numbered sequentially. The reference number appears superscripted immediately following related text. The reference list is double-spaced and numbered to correspond with citations in text. Reference style follows the system described in the American Medical Association Manual of Style, 10th edition, except that issue numbers are not included in journal references. MEDLINE abbreviations are used for periodical titles. If a standard abbreviation is not available on MEDLINE, cite the full title. Examples of different reference types follow:
Olson CM. Tracking of food choices across the transition to motherhood. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2005;37:129-136.
Glanz K, Rimer BK, Lewis FM, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers; 2002.
Baranowski T, Perry CL, Parcel GS. How individuals, environments, and health behavior interact. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Lewis FM, eds. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers; 2002:165-184.
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.
Published, peer-reviewed sources are always preferred, but Internet (web) resources may be used, especially in cases in which government documents are more readily available online than in print. All web links and URLs, including links to the authors' own websites, should be given a reference number and included in the reference list rather than within the text of the manuscript. To cite an online source, provide the following information in this order and format: Name of author/agency. Title of document. URL. Accessed month and date, year. Abstracts are not suitable as references, even if they have been published, since they do not contain enough information to provide suitable support as a reference.Web site
National Cancer Institute. Cancer Health Disparities. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/types/disparities. Accessed September 15, 2008.
If the URL links to a PDF owned by the author(s), the PDF may be submitted as supplementary material (see the "Supplementary Data" section, below).Unpublished material and personal communications are cited in text only with the source and date indicated in parentheses immediately following related material. Examples: (J. A. Doe, unpublished data, 2007); (J. A. Doe, oral communication, 2007).
Software used for data analysis should be cited in text only. Citations should include the software's name and developer, the developer's location, and the year the version used was released. Example: (SPSS version 15.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, 2007) or SurveyMonkey Pro (SurveyMonkey.com, LLC, Palo Alto, CA).
Likewise, equipment used in data collection should be cited in text only. Citations should include the equipment's model name and developer, the developer's location, and the year the model used was released. Example: stadiometer (SECA model 222, SECA Corp., Hamburg, Germany, 2008).
The Digital Object Identifier (DOI) may be used to cite and link to electronic documents. The DOI consists of a unique alpha-numeric character string that is assigned to a document by the publisher upon the initial electronic publication. The assigned DOI never changes. Therefore, it is an ideal medium for citing a document, particularly "articles in press" because they have not yet received their full bibliographic information. A correctly formatted DOI takes the form http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2013.01.025, where the prefix "10.1016/" identifies the publisher (in this case, the Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior) and the suffix "j.jneb.2013.01.025" is the unique article identifier. The prefix is preceded by http://dx.doi.org to make the complete DOI into a permanent URL to locate the document online. When you use a DOI to create links to documents on the web, the DOI is guaranteed to never change.Relevant JNEB references should be included in citations. Search http://www.jneb.org for specific topics.
Footnotes are not permitted except in tables. In tables, footnotes are superscripted; lowercase letters (or other common designators) are used to indicate significant differences within rows (see the "Tables" section, above).
JNEB accepts video and animation sequences to support and enhance your research. Authors who have video or animation files as part of their manuscript are encouraged to include links to these files within the body of their article. All submitted files should be properly labeled so that they directly relate to the video file’s content. Please provide files in one of our recommended file formats, with a maximum file size of 150 MB. Video and animation files will be published online in the electronic version of your article (eg, on ScienceDirect). Please provide a “still” image (any frame) from your video to use instead of the standard video icon, which will personalize the link to your video data. For detailed instructions, please visit our video instruction page at http://www.elsevier.com/artworkinstructions. Note: Because video and animation cannot be embedded in the print version of your article, please provide text for both the electronic and print versions for the portions of the manuscript that refer to the video content.
Ancillary and supplementary data
Data collection instruments such as tests, surveys, interview scripts, and observation forms used in the study may be included with submissions along with overlapping or related manuscripts in review, in press, or published. Including these materials with the original submission will expedite review of the manuscript. Reviewers will have access to data collection materials (ie, ancillary materials) but not to related or overlapping manuscripts included in the submission. It should be noted that ancillary materials are for the review process only; they will not be published.
• Avoid “you should” and “you need to” in messages for teens (see Hingle et al. JNEB 2013;45:12-19)
Authors may submit up to 3 Practice Points for consideration, of no more than 140 characters each. Within the manuscript, the Practice Point is identified by enlarged text. During submission, the Practice Points should be in a separate file labeled Practice Points. Please include the character count of each Practice Point on the submitted file, as well as the location where each Practice Point should be placed within the manuscript text. Practice Points are not required as part of the submission and may or may not be published.Submission, Peer-Review, and Publication Process
Submission to this journal proceeds online at http://ees.elsevier.com/jneb, and you will be guided stepwise through the creation and uploading of your files. The system automatically converts source files to a single PDF file of the article, which is used in the peer-review process. Please note that even though manuscript source files are converted to PDF files at submission for the review process, these source files are needed for further processing after acceptance, and PDF files cannot be uploaded. All correspondence, including notification of the Editor's decision and requests for revision, takes place by e-mail, removing the need for a paper trail.
JNEB uses a double-blind review system. Therefore, authors should blind all authors’ names and corresponding institutions from the manuscript, including references to their institutions' Institutional Review Boards, if applicable. If an author’s name appears within a reference, all authors’ names should be blinded from that reference (all other information within the reference should remain as is). Authors may blind additional areas, such as program titles or cities/countries of reference, but are not required to do so. JNEB recommends blinding by omission, using "x" or "blinded" rather than a black highlight over words. JNEB accepts most word processing formats, although Microsoft Word is preferred. Always keep a backup copy of the electronic file for reference and safety. Save your files using the default extension of the program used.Information to help prepare the Blinded Manuscript: Besides the obvious need to remove names and affiliations under the title within the manuscript, there are other steps that need to be taken to ensure the manuscript is correctly prepared for double-blind peer review. To assist with this process the key items that need to be observed are as follows:
- Use the third person to refer to work the authors have previously undertaken, e.g., replace any phrases like "as we have shown before" with "… has been shown before [reference numeral]". Mentions of these naturally referenced papers do not need to be blinded.
- Do not eliminate essential self-references or other references but limit self-references only to papers that are relevant for those reviewing the submitted paper.
- Do not use the phrase "additional details on methods can be found…". Your paper should contain all the necessary methodological components so that it can "stand alone". If the authors feel this is not possible due to page and word constraints, authors should include [Additional details on methods can be found in ancillary materials as blinded PDF]. This blinded PDF should not be the publication the authors would like to refer to, but a non-published description of the methods. If the manuscript is accepted, the appropriate reference can be inserted. If the authors would like to save that reference space, [Additional details on methods can be found in ancillary materials as blinded PDF currently and to be reference (numeral) upon publication].
- For blinding in the reference list: '[Anonymous 2007] Details omitted for double-blind reviewing.'
- For in-text citations such as "…has been shown before…[reference numeral]", mentions of these naturally referenced papers do not need to be blinded.
Before submitting, please ensure that one author has been designated the corresponding author (include his or her e-mail address, full postal address, and phone and fax numbers). Additionally, check that all necessary files have been uploaded and that they contain key words, figure captions, and tables. Ensure that references are formatted correctly for JNEB and that permission has been obtained for use of copyrighted material from other sources (print or online).
Items (and the preferred order of files) when submitting a manuscript for review include:
- cover letter (save as a separate file)
- suggested reviewers (include in cover letter)
- reviewers who should not be assigned to the manuscript due to potential conflicts of interest (include in cover letter)
- title page (save as a separate file)
- abstract (save as a separate file)
- manuscript (main text, references, and figure legends; save as a separate file)
- tables (save as individual files)
- figures (save as individual files)
- ancillary materials (eg, tests, surveys, interview scripts, observation forms; must be blinded for review)
- supplementary material (eg, any of the above, as well as supporting applications, movies, animation sequences, high-resolution images, background datasets)
Files should be labeled with appropriate and descriptive file names (eg, Manuscript.doc, Fig1.eps, Table3.doc). Upload text, tables, and graphics (figures) as separate files. You can compress multiple figure files into a ZIP file and upload it in one step; the system will then unpack the files and prompt you to name each figure. Do not import figures or tables into the text document, and do not upload your text as a PDF. Complete instructions for electronic artwork are available at http://ees.elsevier.com/jneb.
Authors who are unable to provide an electronic version or have other circumstances that prevent online transmission of manuscripts must contact the editorial office prior to submission to discuss alternate options. The publisher and editors regret that they are not able to consider submissions that do not follow these procedures.Submission items
Cover letter: The cover letter (save as a separate file for submission) indicates the type of manuscript being submitted (see the categories described above); describes why the manuscript would be of interest to JNEB readers; specifies that the manuscript, or parts of it, have not been and will not be submitted elsewhere for publication; notes overlapping or related manuscripts under review, in press, or published; identifies the corresponding author; states that all authors have reviewed and approved the complete manuscript (including tables, figures, and ancillary material, where applicable); indicates the manuscript's complete page count and word count (including text, acknowledgments, references, tables, figures, and other illustrations); lists suggested reviewers with expertise in the subject matter (but who would not present a conflict of interest with the authors).
Title page: The title page includes the title of the manuscript (good titles are short, use the active voice, and capture key findings; avoid trite titles and question marks); the section of the journal for which the manuscript is intended; the names of all authors, their academic degree (eg, PhD, listing only the highest degree), professional credentials (eg, RD), and affiliations; the name, full postal address, telephone number, fax number, and e-mail address of the corresponding author; the name and address of the institution at which the work was conducted if it differs from the present affiliation of the first author; and then the Acknowledgments section (for Research Articles, Research Briefs, Research Methods, Reports, Systematic Reviews, and Perspectives only).Title “Acknowledgments” on the title page: Acknowledgments identify sources of financial support for the work reported in the manuscript, sources of substantial technical assistance, and sources from which some or all of the data were taken (eg, a thesis, dissertation, presentation, or report). Acknowledgments should not be numbered or referred to in the text.
Title "Notes" on the title page (GEMs only): The "Notes" on the title page must include approval from a human subjects committee if the GEM report evaluation results involve subjects. For all projects with IRB approval other than exempt, authors should include how consent was obtained. If no institutional review board (IRB) approval was necessary for this research, please add a statement explaining why. In this statement, include which institution reviewed the study and decided that it was exempt from IRB review (institution should be blinded for review). If it was not reviewed by your university or institution, please provide the documentation that pertains to this type of study, deeming it unnecessary to be reviewed. An example of this may be:
"Review by the institutional review board was not required for this study because human subjects were not involved, as per US Department of Health and Human Services guidelines (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/policy/checklists/decisioncharts.html#c1)."
Note: Because JNEB employs a double-blinded review process, please include author information and acknowledgments only on the title page of your manuscript. Save the title page as a separate file. You will be asked to upload the title page file when you submit your manuscript online.Abstract page: The abstract page should contain the abstract, abstract word count, and key words (saved as a separate file). All manuscripts must include an abstract word count, which should be written in parentheses immediately following the abstract's last line.
When a manuscript is uploaded to the online peer-review system, an e-mail confirming receipt is sent to authors. The handling editor may return a manuscript to the author without review if it does not conform to the guidelines presented here, is outside the scope of the journal, or overlaps substantially with related manuscripts in review, in press, or published.
The review process takes approximately 5 weeks, depending on the availability of reviewers. Authors receive blinded reviewer comments, along with a letter from the handling editor. The reviewers may submit confidential comments to the editor, which are not available for review by the author. The editor may accept or reject a manuscript or request that it be revised before a final decision is made.
One set of page proofs (as PDF files) will be sent by e-mail to the corresponding author, or a link will be provided in the e-mail so that authors can download the files themselves. Elsevier now provides authors with PDF proofs that can be annotated using a full version of Acrobat or the free Adobe Reader version 7 (http://get.adobe.com/reader). Instructions on how to annotate PDF files will accompany the proofs. If you do not wish to use the PDF annotations function, you may list the corrections (including replies to the Query Form) and return them to Elsevier in an e-mail. Please list your corrections quoting line number. If for any reason this is not possible, then mark the corrections and any other comments (including replies to the Query Form) on a printout of your proof and return by fax, e-mail (with scanned pages as an attachment), or regular mail. Please use this proof only for checking the typesetting, editing, and 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. We will do everything possible to publish your article quickly and accurately, so please return corrections within 48 hours. Proofreading is solely your responsibility. Journal staff also review typeset pages and return corrections to the publisher.
Enquiries concerning manuscripts that arise after acceptance of the manuscript, especially those related to proofs, should be directed to the Managing Editor. Authors can track the progress of their accepted article and request e-mail alerts informing them of changes to their manuscript's status by using the "Track a Paper" feature of Elsevier's Author Home at http://www.elsevier.com/authors.
The corresponding author will, at no cost, receive a customized Share Link providing 50 days free access to the final published version of the article on ScienceDirect. The Share Link can be used for sharing the article via any communication channel, including email and social media. For an extra charge, paper offprints can be ordered via the offprint order form which is sent once the article is accepted for publication. Both corresponding and co-authors may order offprints at any time via Elsevier's Webshop. Corresponding authors who have published their article gold open access do not receive a Share Link as their final published version of the article is available open access on ScienceDirect and can be shared through the article DOI link.
Visit the Elsevier Support Center to find the answers you need. Here you will find everything from Frequently Asked Questions to ways to get in touch.
You can also check the status of your submitted article or find out when your accepted article will be published.
Thank you for considering the Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior for potential publication of your work. We look forward to receiving your manuscript.
For more information, contact:Managing Editor
Tel: (217) 356-7641
Web site: http://www.jneb.org