Guide for Authors

OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE is the official journal of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International. The Journal serves as a focal point and forum for the exchange of ideas for the many kinds of scientists, specialists and practitioners concerned with osteoarthritis and cartilage. One of its aims is to foster the cross-fertilization between clinical and basic sciences of the various disciplines involved. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage publishes manuscripts representing originality and scientific excellence on all aspects of osteoarthritis, cartilage and cartilage repair. The Journal welcomes clinical, epidemiological, experimental, translational and other types of research relevant to osteoarthritis and cartilage. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage aims for an independent, fair and rapid peer review of submitted manuscripts.

Submission of Manuscripts

Effective with manuscripts submitted for publication on or after November 1, 2017, Osteoarthritis and Cartilage is instituting an accepted article fee. The corresponding author of an accepted manuscript will be emailed a link once the article has been accepted enabling them to make the payment of $US400 prior to receiving the page proof. [Note: the accepted article fee applies only to ACCEPTED manuscripts] A DOI number will be assigned when the funds have been received and the article has moved into production. Individual waiver requests will be considered on a case-by-case basis and may be granted in cases of genuine need. Priority for this waiver program will be given to applications by authors from countries eligible for the Research4Life program. Open access article charges are still in effect but are inclusive of the accepted article fee. That is, authors opting for open access will not be asked to pay the accepted article fee. Please contact Ms. Tanya Wheatley ( if you have any questions.

Manuscripts are to be submitted through the Editorial Manager on-line submission and peer-review system. Access to Osteoarthritis and Cartilage submission system is as follows:

In order to access Editorial Manager, mouse click on Register in the upper left corner. Once you have established your Username and Password, you can sign on as an author and enter the information for submitting a new manuscript.

Prepare your manuscript for upload as follows:• Create a file containing just the title page and abstract
• Create a file containing the main text of the manuscript, including all references, excluding the title page and abstract
• Do not include figures within the main text file, but supply these as separate image files

For any additional information, please contact the Editorial Office at:

Submissions become the property of the Osteoarthritis Research Society International.

Please note that Osteoarthritis and Cartilage authors are now able to enhance their submissions by employing the new Content Innovation Tools described in more detail in Section 1.7.13 of this Guide for Authors ? please follow the instructions outlined in that section to use the new Tools.

Please read and follow the instructions to authors outlined below. Failure to follow these instructions will delay processing of the manuscript.


The maximum word count listed for each type of article excludes title page, abstract, tables, figure legends, acknowledgements and contributions, and references.

Manuscript format should comply with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' 'Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals' (

In all matters of style, please consult the Manual of Style (ed. 8) published by the American Medical Association. Number each page sequentially and add line numbers, including the title page, abstract, text, references, figure legends, and tables. Authors are responsible for providing a manuscript written in clear English. Delay or rejection may result when papers are poorly written and in need of extensive editing. Where appropriate, authors should obtain the help of an individual or organization competent in Medical Scientific English, where English is the primary language.

Additional points: insert an extra blank line at the end of headings and paragraphs; type text without end of line hyphenation, except for compound words; be consistent with punctuation and only insert a single space between words and after punctuation.

Avoid abbreviations whenever possible, and never use unfamiliar abbreviations. When use of an abbreviation is customary, list the full word on its first appearance followed by the abbreviation in parentheses. Once identified, the abbreviation should be used consistently throughout the text.

Measurements should be expressed in metric units wherever possible, and along with physical and chemical quantities, should be abbreviated as recommended in the instructions to authors of the current volume of Journal of Biological Chemistry. Symbols of units of measurement must accord with the Système International (SI). Abbreviations for SI units and statistical terms are those in Baron DN (ed.) Units, Symbols and Abbreviations: A Guide for Medical and Scientific Editors and Authors, 5th ed. London: Royal Society of Medicine Press. Preferred alternative units may be given in parentheses.

Generic names should be used for drugs. When proprietary brands are used in research, include the brand name and the name of the manufacturer in parentheses at the first mention of the generic drug name in the methods section.

Guidelines for the reporting of many different types of studies are available through the EQUATOR network (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research;

1.1. Ten Recommendations for OAC Manuscript Preparation

Ten recommendations for Osteoarthritis and Cartilage manuscript preparation, with special attention to enhancing Statistical validity.

These recommendations are intended to provide a framework for a clear, complete, and unambiguous presentation of data, methods, and results. It is of paramount importance, and one of the tenets of good research that published studies and experiments can be reproduced, and that the description of their outcome includes sufficient information to allow a reasonable assessment of unavoidable limitations and weaknesses. In one word: transparency.

These recommendations describe what information should be presented to the reader, and how, in order to facilitate the interpretation of the findings; it is not to specify how authors should evaluate and interpret their data. Additional guidelines and details for specific types of research are available elsewhere in this Guide for Authors.

1. State the research question and the purpose of the study. Is the ambition to describe an observation, to generate hypotheses or to estimate parameters of interest?

2. Describe the source of study participants, patients, cadavers, animals, tissues, cell lines, etc., and how many of these units that have been included in the study. What inclusion criteria did you use? How representative is your sample? To what population do you wish to generalize the findings of your study? Note that direct generalization to other cases than those studied requires information on the variability between independent cases. If all observations have been sampled from one subject, animal or cell line, direct generalization cannot be made beyond this.

3. When observations can be presented individually, either numerically (ex. table with raw data) or graphically (ex. points in figures), this should be preferred. In some cases such presentation could in itself be sufficient, in other cases it may complement the summary measures in the manuscript or in a web supplement. When fewer than 20 observations are presented, graphical representations should display individual data points (e.g. dot plot).

4. When presenting descriptive data in aggregated form, always provide the number of included observations (n) as well as adequate measures of central tendency (mean, median, etc.) and dispersion (standard deviation, range, etc.). If repeated measurements or replicates are used, present both the number of independent samples and the number of repeated observations per independent sample.

5. Describe all statistical methods in the Methods section, using well recognized terms such as Student's or Satterthwaite's t-test rather than names that are unique to a particular statistical software package such as "independent groups t-test". You should always identify the statistical software and version used.

6. The validity of the results from statistical models relies on certain assumptions being fulfilled. For example, Student's t-test is based on the assumptions of independent observations, Gaussian distribution and homogeneous variance. Describe in the statistical methods section whether you have examined if these assumptions are fulfilled, how you performed this investigation, and what the results were. When violations of the assumptions are detected, a change to an alternative method or data transformation may be necessary to ensure validity.

7. Generalizations from observed data are often made using statistical models. We recommend that results from statistical analysis are presented with a confidence interval for the quantity of interest. The quantity of interest is typically a difference between means of two groups, risk ratio, hazard ratio, slope of linear regression etc. It is not sufficient to report confidence intervals for within-group parameters, if the conclusions are made about between-group differences. Confidence intervals provide more information on the inferential uncertainty than is included in a p-value because they describe a range of plausible and interpretable values. It is important to recognize that this range of plausible values represents the uncertainty in a generalization, not the dispersion of observed data. While standard deviations and ranges can be used to describe dispersion, confidence intervals and standard error of the means represent uncertainty. When this uncertainty is presented in text and tables, or graphically with error bars, Osteoarthritis and Cartilage recommends using 95% confidence intervals instead of S.E.M.

8. Statistical analysis can also lead to calculation of p-values. P-values describe the inferential uncertainty in terms of risk of a false positive conclusion. It should be recognized that: (1) tested hypotheses always relate to the generalization of an observation, never to the observation itself, (2) that merely because a finding is "statistically significant" does not necessarily imply that it has practical or clinical importance, and (3) that failure to achieve statistical significance in a test does not necessarily indicate similarity. Thus, if any p-values are reported they should be accompanied with an interval estimate of the quantity of interest (ex. confidence interval for mean difference between the groups).

Do not use "statistical significance" (or "significance") to classify or describe your results, as such a label provides no additional information above what is included in the confidence interval (or a p-value if reported). Instead, interpret the values included in the confidence intervals reported and interpret their biological or clinical relevance in light of potential biases present in the study. For further guidance, please see:

9. Please avoid common misconceptions:

a)Statistical nonsignificance(p>0.05, ns, or NS)is NOT evidence of equivalence, non-inferiority, or "no difference".

b) Statistical significance is NOT evidence of clinical or practical relevance. This must be shown by other means than p-values, and the actual relevance of the findings must be clearly articulated.

c) Correcting p-values for the multiple testing of X groups does NOT generally solve the multiplicity problems inherent in testing many endpoints. When using Bonferroni (or another) correction, a strategy for addressing multiplicity issues should be presented and its consequences for the conclusions should be explained.

d) Repeated or multiple measurements per individual are NOT statistically independent (not even if their intraclass correlation coefficient is 0). The statistical analysis needs to properly account for the correlation between the observations.

10. The level of statistical rigor (and remaining inferential uncertainty in the results) should be in parity with the purpose of the study and the author's conclusions. For example, a confirmatory randomized clinical trial has little room for multiplicity issues arising from the testing of multiple endpoints. If such issues exist, they should be properly addressed already in the design of the trial. Hypothesis generating studies, on the other hand, can be analyzed without concerns for multiplicity, and case-reports (studies with very small n) may be entirely descriptive with no need for evaluation of inferential uncertainty.

A brief description of the analysis strategy in the statistical methods section will facilitate the reading of the manuscript. Authors are strongly recommended to save statistical code, output from data analyses, and raw data and raw images for possible review, should the editors request this.

Adherence to these recommendations will greatly facilitate the review of manuscripts, decrease the likelihood of multiple revisions, and improve the chances of acceptance for publication.

Recommended reading:
1. Ronald L. Wasserstein and Allen L. Schirm and Nicole A. Lazar, Moving to a World Beyond "p<0.05". The American Statistician 2019; 73(sup1):1-19
2. Cumming G, Fidler F, Vaux DL. Error bars in experimental biology. J Cell Biol 2007;177:7-11.
3. Vaux D. Ten rules for the presentation and interpretation of data in scientific publications. Australian Biochemist 2008;39:37-9.
4. Ranstam J. Sampling uncertainty in medical research. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009;17:1416-9.
5. Ranstam J. Reporting laboratory experiments. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2010;18:3-4.
6. Ranstam J, Lohmander LS. What's in a number or in a picture? Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2010;18:1003-5.
7. Ranstam J, Lohmander LS. Ten recommendations for OAC manuscript preparation, common for all types of studies. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2011;19:1079-80.
8. Turkiewicz A, Luta G, Hughes HV, Ranstan J. Statistical mistakes and how to avoid them - lessons learned from the reproducibility crisis.

1.1.1 Manuscripts reporting Clinical Trials

All randomized controlled trials submitted for publication in the journal should follow the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines, and include a completed CONSORT flow chart as a manuscript figure. Please refer to the CONSORT statement website at for more information. A copy of the study protocol and statistical analysis plan, if one has been developed, should be included with the submitted manuscript, together with a completed CONSORT checklist. This checklist can be found for downloading on the CONSORT website.

Osteoarthritis and Cartilage has adopted the proposal from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) which requires, as a condition of consideration for publication of clinical trials, registration in a public trials registry such as or All trials that began enrolling patients after July 1, 2005, must have been registered at or before onset of patient enrollment. Any trial which was still seeing patients on September 13, 2005, should have been registered before September 13, 2005. If the trial was complete before September 13, 2005, the trial should be registered before manuscript submission. The clinical trial registration number should be included at the end of the abstract of the article. Clinical trial manuscripts that do not fulfill these criteria will not enter the editorial process, but will be returned to the authors.

For this purpose, a clinical trial is defined as any research project that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate the effects of health outcomes. Health-related interventions include any intervention used to modify a biomedical or health-related outcome (for example drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioral treatments, dietary interventions, and process-of-care changes). Health outcomes include any biomedical or health-related measures obtained in patients or participants, including pharmacokinetic measures and adverse events. Purely observational studies (those in which the assignment of the medical intervention is not at the discretion of the investigator) do not currently require registration. Further information can be found at Disclosure of Clinical Trial Results. In line with the position of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, the journal will not consider results posted in the same clinical trials registry in which primary registration resides to be prior publication if the results posted are presented in the form of a brief structured (500 words) abstract or table. However, divulging results in other circumstances (e.g., investors' meetings) is discouraged and may jeopardize consideration of the manuscript. Authors should fully disclose all posting in registries of results of the same or closely related work.

1.1.2 Reporting observational studies in epidemiology

Manuscripts submitted for publication in the journal reporting observational studies in epidemiology should conform with the recommendations of the STROBE initiative (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology). Checklists for different types of observational studies are available at Manuscripts reporting observational studies based on electronic register data should comply with RECORD guidelines ( A completed checklist should be submitted with the manuscript. Adherence to these recommendations will greatly facilitate the review of manuscripts, decrease the likelihood of multiple revisions, and improve the chances of acceptance for publication.

1.1.3 Reporting animal and laboratory experiments

To fully understand the context, methods, data and conclusions that relate to an experiment, the reader must have access to appropriate background information. The experiment should be described in a way that makes it possible for the reader to repeat it. A clear description of the chosen study design is necessary for the reader's understanding of both the experiment and the statistical analysis of the data generated by the experiment.

Analysis units. Describe the experimental unit clearly. This is usually the smallest unit that can be independently randomized to a group, i.e. it should be possible to randomize any two experimental units to different groups. The experimental unit should also be the statistical analysis unit. Additional information relevant to the analysis units in basic science can be found in

Experimental design. Describe the randomization procedure (or another procedure used to allocate experimental units to groups), and present the number of randomized units, independent units and the total number of units in the study. Describe clearly which units are dependent and which are independent and how potential dependence was handled in the statistical analysis. Describe if the conduct of experiment and outcome assessment were done blinded or not. Formal experimental designs, like randomized block, latin square, split-plot, etc., have been developed and are described in a number of statistical textbooks. State clearly if one of these formal designs are used. If this is not the case, describe and explain the used design in detail. A useful list of important issues in design and analysis or laboratory studies can be found in RIPOSTE (

Additional information relevant to the high quality reporting of animal model studies in osteoarthritis research may be found in the following OAC publications: Reference 1), Reference 2 and Reference 3

Osteoarthritis and Cartilage supports the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) guidelines to improve standards of reporting of animal experiments and ensure that the data can be fully evaluated and utilized [] (Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG (2010) Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research. PLoS Biol 8(6): e1000412. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412). A completed ARRIVE checklist should be submitted with the manuscript- the checklist form can be found at Adherence to these recommendations will greatly facilitate the review of manuscripts, decrease the likelihood of multiple revisions, and improve the chances of acceptance for publication.

The design and analysis of experiments using microarray technology poses some specific challenges, and authors intending to submit such studies to Osteoarthritis and Cartilage are recommended to read the article "Churchill GA. Fundamentals of experimental design for cDNA microarrays. Nature Genetics suppl. 2002;32:490-5. Doi10.1038/ng1031". Many journals, including Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, now also require, as an example, that authors reporting microarray-based experiments comply with the Minimum Information about a Microarray Experiment (MIAME) checklist as a prerequisite for publication. Similar minimum information guidelines are available for reporting proteomics (MIAPE and other types of 'omics' studies. For further reading on evolving reporting guidelines, see Minimum reporting guidelines for biological and biomedical investigations (MIBBI) (

1.1.4 Reporting studies that utilize machine learning or artificial intelligence

For submissions employing machine learning (ML) or artificial intelligence (AI) methods, we recognize that the community has not reached consensus on appropriate reporting requirements. We emphasize, however, that as a biomedical journal it is our mission is to publish research that furthers the understanding of the biology and clinical care of osteoarthritis. As such, it is imperative that any prediction model be sufficiently open and accessible to permit external validation, and we encourage authors to provide applicable data sets or executable code for review.

For authors' convenience, we endorse the CLAIM checklist, However, until such a consensus has been reached, we will accept adherence to any of the published guidelines proposed by mainstream organizations, such as the RSNA (Bluemke DA et al.,, theNeurIPS Reproducibility Program (, or the TRIPOD Statement (

1.1.5 Reporting Mendelian Randomisation studies

Mendelian Randomisation (MR) analyses are commonly categorized into two forms in the literature: one-sample (or single-sample or individual-level) and two-sample (or summary-level). Initial MR analyses, mainly published before 2014, used individual-level data, where genotype, exposure, and outcome data were all available in the same population. Modern summary-level techniques simply require summary statistics from a GWAS of the exposure and outcome, not on the same sample but assuming the GWAS populations are generated from the same underlying population. A summary-level MR analysis must ensure that the two study populations are drawn from the same underlying population, or that the instrument-exposure association is the same in both samples, while reducing sample overlap. Due to chance connections between the instrument and confounders of the exposure-outcome relationship, overlap in samples can correlate SNP-exposure and SNP-outcome estimates. (see Hartley et al.

We are only interested in two sample MR studies that investigate something novel related to OA

  • if there are one or more MRs already published on the topic, the authors need to explain what is novel or relevant in their study.
  • if there are no clinical or mechanistic insights (e.g. specific pathways involved in the relationship between OA and a given trait) derived from the study, the manuscript might get a lower priority, therefore, we encourage authors to investigate or address such aspects.
  • we are not interested in MR studies that investigate the bidirectional causal links between OA and OA symptoms unless there are clear mechanistic or clinical insights.
  • for any traits that have a strong link to obesity or body mass, the authors need to give details explicitly (not merely state that the IVs were selected to avoid pleiotropy) about how links to BMI were accounted for and preferably show that indeed any causal links they report are not BMI-driven.

In addition, we require authors to fill out the STROBE-MR checklist (, and explain that studies should be sufficiently powered and be innovative as per the points described above.

1.2 Full length original research article

Full length original articles should amount to no more than 4000 words, 8 figures and tables, and 50 references. Each of the following sections should be included in the manuscript in this order: Title page, Abstract, Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion, Acknowledgments, Author contributions, Role of the funding source, Conflict of interest, References, Figure legends, each individual Table, each individual Figure. Specific recommendations relating to these manuscript sections follow below.

1.3 Brief report of original research

Brief reports may be submitted for the rapid communication of results of significant interest and novelty. Brief reports should follow the general manuscript format described above, but not exceed an abstract of 250 words, a main text of 2000 words, 15 references, and 2 figures and/or tables.

1.4 Editorial and Commentary

The purpose of an editorial is to stimulate discussion and thought in a brief format. As such, it may contain personal opinion and comment as supported by evidence. Editorials often provide perspectives linked to an article in the same issue. Editorials also provide a forum for the editors to inform readers of updates or changes in editorial policies. Submissions of Editorials are typically invited by the Editors.

The purpose of a Commentary is similar to an Editorial, however these may be unsolicited and need not be invited contributions. They typically involve areas of interest that may be controversial or for which the evidence base is less secure. Authors are encouraged to obtain approval from the Editors prior to submitting Commentaries. Papers accepted as Commentaries may be sent to content authorities in the field to provide short (250 words) responses. These mini-commentaries will be published in conjunction with the original Commentary, and will serve both as "open" peer review and to stimulate discussion in the community.

Editorials and Commentaries should be no longer than 1500 words with a maximum of 2 figures and/or tables and 15 references. Recommendations relating to relevant sections of this article type follow below.

1.5 Narrative Reviews, Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses'

The suggested word count is 4000, a maximum of 8 tables and/or figures and 100 references. Reviews should include an abstract. Recommendations relating to relevant sections of this manuscript type follow below.

Reviews may come in different formats. The Systematic Review format is preferred wherever possible and appropriate. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses should be reported following the recommendations of the PRISMA statement ( . Osteoarthritis and Cartilage strongly recommends that a completed PRISMA checklist accompanies the submitted manuscript and that the study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis and network MA investigating the effect on humans and most scoping reviews be registered in the public database PROSPERO SYRCLE could be used for ANIMAL studies For systematic reviews on other topics, including meta-epidemiology/methodology, we strongly recommend pre-registration in Open Science Framework Following these recommendations will greatly facilitate the review of manuscripts, decrease the likelihood of multiple revisions, and improve the chances of acceptance for publication.

1.6 Letter to the Editor

Comments regarding articles published in the Journal, or other current matters, are solicited and should be submitted as 'Letter to the Editor'. Such Letters, which should not be original research communications (see Brief Report the appropriate format for such manuscripts), are subject to editorial review. When a published article is subjected to comment or criticism, the authors of that article will be invited to submit a letter of reply.

Letters are no more than 800 words, no abstract, no tables or figures, and maximum 8 references. Recommendations relating to relevant sections of this form of article follow below.

1.7 Supplementary data

Osteoarthritis and Cartilage now accepts electronic supplementary material to support and enhance your scientific research. Supplementary files offer the author additional possibilities to publish supporting applications, movies, animation sequences, high-resolution images, background methods and datasets, sound clips and more. Supplementary files supplied will be published alongside the electronic version of your article, including ScienceDirect: In order to ensure that your submitted material is directly usable, please ensure that data is provided in one of our recommended file formats. Authors should submit the material in electronic format together with the article and supply a concise and descriptive caption for each file. For more detailed instructions please visit:


This journal encourages and enables you to share data that supports your research publication where appropriate, and enables you to interlink the data with your published articles. Research data refers to the results of observations or experimentation that validate research findings. To facilitate reproducibility and data reuse, this journal also encourages you to share your software, code, models, algorithms, protocols, methods and other useful materials related to the project.

Below are a number of ways in which you can associate data with your article or make a statement about the availability of your data when submitting your manuscript. If you are sharing data in one of these ways, you are encouraged to cite the data in your manuscript and reference list. Please refer to the "References" section for more information about data citation. For more information on depositing, sharing and using research data and other relevant research materials, visit the research data page.

1.8.1 Data linking

If you have made your research data available in a data repository, you can link your article directly to the dataset. Elsevier collaborates with a number of repositories to link articles on ScienceDirect with relevant repositories, giving readers access to underlying data that gives them a better understanding of the research described.

There are different ways to link your datasets to your article.

When available, you can directly link your dataset to your article by providing the relevant information in the submission system. For more information, visit the database linking page .

For supported data repositories a repository banner will automatically appear next to your published article on ScienceDirect.

In addition, you can link to relevant data or entities through identifiers within the text of your manuscript, using the following format: Database: xxxx (e.g., TAIR: AT1G01020; CCDC: 734053; PDB: 1XFN).

1.8.2 Mendeley Data

This journal supports Mendeley Data, enabling you to deposit any research data (including raw and processed data, video, code, software, algorithms, protocols, and methods) associated with your manuscript in a free-to-use, open access repository. Before submitting your article, you can deposit the relevant datasets to Mendeley Data. Please include the DOI of the deposited dataset(s) in your main manuscript file. The datasets will be listed and directly accessible to readers next to your published article online.

For more information, visit the Mendeley Data for journals page.

1.8.3 Data statement

To foster transparency, we encourage you to state the availability of your data in your submission. This may be a requirement of your funding body or institution.

If your data is unavailable to access or unsuitable to post, you will have the opportunity to indicate why during the submission process, for example by stating that the research data is confidential. The statement will appear with your published article on ScienceDirect. For more information, visit the Data statement page.

1.9 Manuscript sections

1.9.1 Title page
Title page should include affiliations and email addresses for each co-author, and full contact details for the corresponding author.
When appropriate include a separate running title.

1.9.2 Abstracts

Abstracts should be no more than 250 words. The abstract should be structured into sections, at least including the following: (1) Objective; (2) Design - if clinical to include setting, selection of patients, details on the intervention, outcome measures, etc.; if laboratory research to include details on materials and methods; (3) Results; (4) Conclusions. For further detail on how to construct an abstract please refer to the guidelines published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA 2004;291:125-9).


Immediately after the abstract, provide a list of 3-6 keywords, using English spelling and avoiding general and plural terms and multiple concepts (avoid, for example, `and?, `of?). Be sparing with abbreviations: only abbreviations firmly established in the field may be eligible. These keywords will be used for indexing purposes.

Running headline

A running title of not more than 40 characters (including spaces), suitable for page headings, should be provided at the bottom of the title page if the full title is longer than 40 characters.

1.9.3 Introduction

Introduction should be brief, to the point, and contain the background that motivated the study. You may assume that the reader is familiar with e.g. the fact than osteoarthritis is a common joint disease, there's no need to repeat that in this journal.

1.9.4 Method

Methods shall contain details relevant to the conduct and interpretation of the study. This includes a description of statistical methods sufficiently detailed so that an investigator with access to the data can verify the results (see section below on statistics). Classification criteria should be reported on patients (where relevant) by a brief description of the clinical features of patients, and by reference to the criteria used. Use of subheadings that aid clarity is encouraged.

1.9.5 Results

Avoid undue repetition of data in text and tables. Brief comments on the significance of the results is appropriate, but broader aspects of interpretation is reserved for discussion. Use of subheadings to aid clarity is encouraged.

It should be recognized in the results presentation that a statistically significant effect or difference not necessarily is of interest, it may be too small to be relevant. It is therefore better to specify the effect size/standardized response mean, and presenting the uncertainty with a 95% confidence interval, than describing an effect as statistically significant, or not statistically significant. P-values should be presented numerically, without categorization, e.g. write p = 0.15, not ns, and p = 0.03, not p < 0.05. When computer printout says p = 0.0000, write p < 0.0001. Confidence intervals should be presented as (lower limit, upper limit).

1.9.6 Discussion

Discussion section should contain a concise discussion of the findings in context of relevant published data. Which of your results are confirmatory, which are novel? Specifically, how do your results advance this field of research? A section on limitations of interpretation of results due to the selection of methods, materials or patients is often recommended. Avoid lengthy extrapolation and speculation.

1.9.7 Acknowledgements

All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship as defined below should be listed here. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support. All persons acknowledged must give their written permission.Authors should disclose whether they had any writing assistance and identify the responsible entity and who paid for this assistance.

1.9.8 Contributions

The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

(1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND

(2) Drafting the work or reviewing 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.

In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.

All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors.

The link to the relevant ICJME page can be found at:

Each manuscript should be accompanied by a declaration of each author's contributions relating to sections (1), (2), (3) and (4) above. This declaration should also name one or more authors (including email addresses) who take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to finished article. These declarations will be included in the published manuscript.

A declaration of contributions can include the following points, to be modified as appropriate:

• Conception and design
• Analysis and interpretation of the data
• Drafting of the article
• Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content
• Final approval of the article
• Provision of study materials or patients
• Statistical expertise
• Obtaining of funding
• Administrative, technical, or logistic support
• Collection and assembly of data

Any change in authors, author order or contributions after initial submission must be approved in writing by all authors, and changes must be explained to the editor.

1.9.9 Role of the funding source

All sources of funding should be declared in this section. Authors should declare the role of study sponsors, if any, in the study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; and in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. If the study sponsors had no such involvement, the authors should state this.

1.9.10 Competing interests

At the end of the manuscript text, under a subheading "Competing interest statement" every author must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could potentially and inappropriately influence (bias) their work and conclusions. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and research grants or other funding.

The existence of competing interests is common and often inevitable. Competing interests are not inherently unethical, but not declaring them is. If there are no conflicts of interest, please state this beneath the subheading.

1.9.11 Declaration of generative AI in scientific writing

The below guidance only refers to the writing process, and not to the use of AI tools to analyse and draw insights from data as part of the research process.

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. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control, and authors should carefully review and edit the result, as AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete or biased. AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be listed as an author or co-author, or be cited 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.

Authors should 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.

Disclosure instructions
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 Generative 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.

1.9.12 References

References should be listed in numerical sequence as they are cited in the text. Names of the first six authors are to be provided. The reference style is based on the 'Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals' ( Both journal and book references should contain inclusive page numbers.

Use of DOI is highly encouraged. A DOI can be used to cite and link to electronic articles where an article is in-press and full citation details are not yet known, but the article is available online. A DOI is guaranteed never to change, so you can use it as a permanent link to any electronic article.

Personal communications and unpublished data should be cited in parentheses in the text, and not included in the numbered reference listed at the end of the article. Such citations from someone other than the authors (e. g., personal communication) can only be published if a signed letter of permission if provided.

References to abstracts should be included only when essential, and then only if the abstract is from a readily accessible periodical (e.g., Federation Proceedings: FEBS Abstracts). Such references must contain the word (Abstract) after the title.

References in the text should be identified by superscript numbers, inside punctuation at the end of the sentence, and numbered in order of appearance. Along with the entire manuscript, references should be double spaced.

Examples of References

Journal Articles

1. Standard Journal Articles (List all authors when six or less; when seven or more, list the first six and add et al. Do not repeat page numbers).
Wailing HW, Raggatt LJ, Irvine DW, Barmina OY, Toledano JE, Goldring MB, et al. Impairment of the collagenase-3 endocytotic receptor system in cells from patients with osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 2003;11:854-63.
2. Corporate Author
FDA Document: Guidelines for industry. The extent of population exposure to assess clinical safety: for drugs intended for long-term treatment of non-life-threatening conditions, ICH-EIA, March 1995; Federal Register March 1, 1995 (60FR11270).

1. Personal Author(s)
Moskowitz RW, Howell DS, Altman RD, Buckwalter JA, and Goldberg VM. Osteoarthritis: Diagnosis and Medical/Surgical Management, Third Edition. Philadelphia, W. B. Saunders 2001.
2. Corporate Author
Drug Information for the Health Care Professional. Volume 1 USP DI. Micromedex, Thomson Health Care. Quebecor World. Taunton, MA, XXII 2002.
3. Editor, Compiler, Chairman as Author
Favus MJ. Primer on the Metabolic Bone Diseases and Disorders of Mineral Metabolism, IV. An official publication of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia 1999:1-502.
4. Chapter in BookLozada CJ, Altman RD. Management of osteoarthritis. In: Arthritis and Allied Conditions, Koopman WJ, Ed. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins 2001:2246-63.

Data References

This journal encourages you to cite underlying or relevant datasets in your manuscript by citing them in your text and including a data reference in your Reference List. Data references should include the following elements: author name(s), dataset title, data repository, version (where available), year, and global persistent identifier. Add [dataset] immediately before the reference so we can properly identify it as a data reference. The [dataset] identifier will not appear in your published article.

1.9.13Figure legends

Legends for illustrations should be included on a separate page at the end of the manuscript. A legend must accompany each illustration.

1.9.14 Plain Language Summaries

Plain language summaries (or Lay Language summaries) are optional features that are aimed at a lay audience. These should be constructed in a manner that will be understood by general non-scientist readers. They must reflect the actual information reported in the published study and are strictly the responsibility of the submitting authors.

An example of an effective Plain Language Summary is available at: Further information on the format of such summaries, as well as tips for producing these are available at a variety of sources. A few examples of online resources include the following:,,

    Rules for Plain Language Summaries (PLS):

1.PLS will be optional for all papers published by OAC. They will appear online only, as supplementary material alongside the main article and should be submitted with the main article.
2.The PLS will only be immediately Open Access if the main article is; otherwise, the PLS will be publicly available after 12 months.
3.PLS will be accepted after Editorial review but without peer review.
4.Authors should note that PLS files will be reviewed by the Editors to ensure accuracy but will not be edited or typeset - they will appear online exactly as supplied by the authors, and must be supplied in an acceptable file format -EPS, PDF, TIFF or JPEG, or Microsoft Office files (Word, PowerPoint, Excel.5). For more detailed information regarding the submission of supplementary material, please refer to section 1.7 in the Guide for Authors.

1.9.15 Illustrations and Tables

Suggested position of figures and tables in the text should be marked in the manuscript and cited in the text in order of appearance. Arabic numbering should be used for both figures and tables. Each figure and each table should be submitted on a separate page.

Each table should be appropriately numbered and typed on a separate page. Table legends should be typed above each table.

Figures, especially charts, graphs and line drawings, are generally reduced in size for publication. Consider print page and column format when designing your figures and tables. All numbers, letters and symbols should be large enough that when reduced they will remain legible. Arrows should be added to radiographs, histology and other illustrations for clarity. Measures should be included in histology images to indicate magnification. Figures not properly prepared will be returned to the contributor for revision.

Please refer to ethics and scientific misconduct section: regarding modifications of original images.

When preparing their manuscript, authors should consider the most appropriate format to present their data. Certain graphics formats, such as bar graphs, often have low information content, and data and statistics may often be best presented in a table. The editors may request authors to revise graphics or change data presentation format prior to publication of accepted manuscripts.

Figures should be appended in a readily available format (e. g., BMP, TIF, or PDF). There is no charge for a limited number of color figures. Submitting your artwork in detailed electronic format helps us to produce your work to the best possible standards, ensuring accuracy, clarity and a high level of detail. In general, figures in JPG or PPT do not provide sufficient detail in reproduction. A detailed guide on electronic artwork is available on the Elsevier website:

Although not essential at the time of submission, written permission from publishers and authors to reproduce or adapt previously published illustrations and tables will be needed at time of acceptance and prior to the manuscript being forwarded to the publisher (


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.


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. In addition to this definition guidance and the SAGER guidelines, the resources on this page offer further insight around sex and gender in research studies.

If you have any queries, please contact Agnieszka Freda at:



See section 1.8.8

Competing interests

Every author must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could potentially and inappropriately influence (bias) their work and conclusions. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and research grants or other funding. Each co-author must declare competing interest by completing and uploading* the ICMJE form available in word format or in pdf format.

The existence of competing interests is common and often inevitable. Competing interests are not inherently unethical, but not declaring them is.

A separate statement must be submitted, signed by all authors, referable to validity of authorship, financial disclosure and the participation of those in the acknowledgment. The author disclosure form can be found here


Ethics approval of research on humans or animals

Authors, in compliance with the Uniform Requirements, are required to include a statement (in reports of clinical trials or other experimentation on humans) whether "the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000". The reason for this statement is that some ethics committees are regulated by national law, not the Helsinki Declaration. They therefore sometimes approve studies that violate the principles of the Helsinki Declaration, and such studies should, according to both the Helsinki Declaration and the CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences not be accepted for publication.

Studies involving experiments with animals must state that their care was in accordance with institution guidelines.

Approvals as detailed above in this section must be explicitly stated in the submission cover letter. Approvals must also be explicitly stated in the manuscript, including the name and location of the approving ethics committee(s).

Patient consent

Manuscripts involving research on human subjects should contain a statement that they gave informed consent to the work.

Patients have a right to privacy. Therefore identifying information, including patients' images, names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be included in videos, recordings, written descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and you have obtained written informed consent for publication in print and electronic form from the patient (or parent, guardian or next of kin where applicable). If such consent is made subject to any conditions, Elsevier must be made aware of all such conditions. Written consents must be provided to Elsevier on request.

Even where consent has been given, identifying details should be omitted if they are not essential. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic pedigrees, authors should provide assurance that alterations do not distort scientific meaning and editors should so note.

If such consent has not been obtained, personal details of patients included in any part of the paper and in any supplementary materials (including all illustrations and videos) must be removed before submission.

Scientific misconduct

The editors of Osteoarthritis and Cartilage consider very seriously all possible forms of misconduct. We follow guidance and definitions provided by e.g. the Committee on Publication Ethics ( the World Association of Medical Editors ( and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) ( Submitted manuscripts are subjected to randomly selected computerized screening for plagiarism and redundancy.

Note: the use of preprint services is considered to be acceptable, and is NOT considered to represent redundant publication.

The WAME definition of scientific misconduct includes the following behaviours:

Falsification of data: ranges from fabrication to deceptive reporting of findings and omission of conflicting data, or wilful suppression and/or distortion of data.
Plagiarism: The appropriation of the language, ideas or thoughts of another without crediting their true source and representation of them as one's own original work.
Improprieties of authorship: improper assignment of credit, such as excluding others, misrepresentation of the same material as original in more than one publication, inclusion of individuals as authors who have not made a definite contribution to the work published or submission of multi-authored publications without the concurrence of all authors.
Misappropriation of the ideas of others: an important aspect of scholarly activity is the exchange of ideas among colleagues. Scholars can acquire novel ideas from others during the process of reviewing grant applications and manuscripts. However, improper use of such information can constitute fraud. Wholesale appropriation of such material constitutes misconduct.
Violation of generally accepted research practices: serious deviation from accepted practices in proposing or carrying out research, improper manipulation of experiments to obtain biased results, deceptive statistical or analytical manipulations, or improper reporting of results.
Material failure to comply with legislative and regulatory requirements affecting research: including but not limited to serious or substantial, repeated, wilful violations of applicable local regulations and law involving the use of funds, care of animals, human subjects, investigational drugs, recombinant products, new devices, or radioactive, biological or chemical materials.
Inappropriate behaviour in relation to misconduct: this includes unfounded or knowingly false accusations of misconduct, failure to report known or suspected misconduct, withholding of information relevant to a claim or misconduct and retaliation against persons involved in the allegation or investigation.
Manipulation of images Manipulation of images is regarded as falsification of data. The editors of Osteoarthritis and Cartilage concur with the principles described in e.g. the Journal of Clinical Investigation (Neill, U., and Turka, L.A. 2007. Navigating through the gray (and CMYK) areas of figure manipulation: rules at the JCI. J. Clin. Invest. 117:2736; and Neill, US. All data are not created equal. J Clin Invest 2009;119:424) and the Journal of Cell Biology (Rossner, M., and Yamada, K.M. 2004. What's in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation 166:11-15. Authors are recommended to read these articles before submission to OAC.

A good summary rule is provided by the following quote from the article by Rossner and Yamada in the Journal of Cell Biology: "No specific feature within an image may be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced. The grouping of images from different parts of the same gel, or from different gels, fields, or exposures must be made explicit by the arrangement of the figure (e.g., using dividing lines) and in the text of the figure legend. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if they are applied to the whole image and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Nonlinear adjustments (e.g., changes to gamma settings) must be disclosed in the figure legend."


All manuscripts submitted to Osteoarthritis and Cartilage are peer reviewed, internally and or externally. A significant proportion of the submitted articles are rejected after a first review by one of the editors-in-chief and one or more editors for reasons of insufficient originality, scientific flaws, or an absence of message important to the readers of the Journal. This decision is forwarded to the authors within 1-2 weeks. The remaining manuscripts are by the deputy editors assigned to one of the associate editors who is responsible for selecting one or more external experts for a detailed review of the submitted work. Manuscripts are in addition reviewed by the biostatistics deputy editor when appropriate.

Reviewers and editors advise the editors-in-chief, who are responsible for the final decision on a manuscript. The decision of the editors-in-chief is final. Any correspondence relating to manuscript decisions should be directed to the editors-in-chief using the email address

As a part of their submission, the author should indicate closely related papers or manuscripts that have been submitted or published elsewhere in a note to the Editor.

When received, Editorial Manager system will notify you of the manuscript number. This number is to be used in all correspondence with the editor.

Only one major revision is allowed per manuscript, unless specific circumstances suggest otherwise and at the discretion of the Editors. In other words, a second major revision recommendation by the reviewers is the same as a reject decision by the editors, while minor revision is allowed following a major. Authors should therefore very carefully consider and respond to all the comments and suggestions of the reviewers. A revised manuscript should be accompanied by a separate detailed and carefully worded point-by-point response, detailing the 'comments' and 'actions' of the authors to each point raised by the reviewers.

Peer review of papers submitted by Osteoarthritis and Cartilage editorial team

Research articles authored by a member of the OAC editorial team are independently peer reviewed, and the member blinded to access to reviews and decisions in the Editorial Manager system. An editor will have no influence on decisions relating to the article.



Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be asked to sign a "Journal Publishing Agreement" (for more information on this and copyright see Acceptance of the agreement will ensure the widest possible dissemination of information. An e-mail (or letter) 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 (please consult

Open Access

This journal offers authors a choice in publishing their research:

Open access
• Articles are freely available to both subscribers and the wider public with permitted reuse
• An open access publication fee is payable by authors or their research funder. The open access publication fee for this journal is USD 2588, excluding taxes. Learn more about Elsevier's pricing policy:

• Articles are made available to subscribers as well as developing countries and patient groups through our access programs (
• No open access publication fee

All articles published open access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. Permitted reuse is defined by your choice of one of the following Creative Commons user licenses:
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY): lets others distribute and copy the article, to create extracts, abstracts, and other revised versions, adaptations or derivative works of or from an article (such as a translation), to include in a collective work (such as an anthology), to text or data mine the article, even for commercial purposes, as long as they credit the author(s), do not represent the author as endorsing their adaptation of the article, and do not modify the article in such a way as to damage the author's honor or reputation.
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.

To provide open access, this journal has a publication fee which needs to be met by the authors or their research funders for each article published open access. Your publication choice will have no effect on the peer review process or acceptance of submitted articles .

Funding Body Agreements and Policies

Elsevier has established agreements and developed policies to allow authors who publish in Elsevier journals to comply with potential manuscript archiving requirements as specified as conditions of their grant awards. To learn more about existing agreements and policies please visit

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 begins from the publication date of the issue your article appears in. This journal has an embargo period of 12 months.

Elsevier supports responsible sharing

Find out how you can share your research published in Elsevier journals at:


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: please download these from


Corresponding authors will receive an e-mail with a link to our online proofing system, allowing annotation and correction of proofs online. The environment is similar to MS Word: in addition to editing text, you can also comment on figures/tables and answer questions from the Copy Editor. Web-based proofing provides a faster and less error-prone process by allowing you to directly type your corrections, eliminating the potential introduction of errors.
All instructions for proofing will be given in the e-mail we send to authors, including alternative methods to the online version.
We will do everything possible to get your article published quickly and accurately. 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. It is important to ensure that all corrections are sent back to us in one communication. Please check carefully before replying, as inclusion of any subsequent corrections cannot be guaranteed. Proofreading is solely your responsibility.

The corresponding author, at no cost, will be provided with a PDF file of the article via e-mail. The PDF file is a watermarked version of the published article and includes a cover sheet with the journal cover image and a disclaimer outlining the terms and conditions of use.

The Journal will consider fast track publication requests. Note your request in the cover letter of your submission, and clearly motivate your request. If possible, contact the editorial office and the Editors-in-Chief in advance of your submission. A decision on publication will be reached within 2 to 3 weeks from submission. On-line publication will be within 5 days of acceptance, and rapid print publication can be accomplished within a month or two.


Title Page
• Title
• Names, initials and appointment held by each author; name of the department or institution to which the work should be attributed and name and contact details of the author responsible for correspondence.
• 250 word abstract structured into the following sections: (1) Objective; (2) Design (3) Results and (4) Conclusions.
• 4-6 keywords

Manuscript Preparation – Text
• At end of discussion text add statements as appropriate regarding acknowledgements, contributions, declaration of funding and role of funding source, competing interests, and studies involving humans or animals.
• Double spacing of entire text, including abstract and references
• Liberal margins
• Number pages sequentially
• References should be listed in numerical sequence as they are cited in the text.

Appended to Manuscript
• Figure Legends
• Figures
• Tables
• Supplemental Text/Video
• Cover Letter
• Author Disclosure Form
• Conflict of Interest Statement