Ophthalmology - Author Info

More periodicals:

GUIDE FOR AUTHORS

1. INTRODUCTION - Important Basic Information

2. INITIAL MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION OVERVIEW

3. DETAILED SPECIFICS

ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS
ABSTRACT
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
AUTHORSHIP
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
COPYRIGHT
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR DECLARATION
DEVELOPING A MANUSCRIPT
DRUG MANUFACTURE NAMES
ENGLISH EDITING ASSISTANCE
EQUIVALENT VISUAL ACUITY MEASUREMENTS
FIGURES
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
GHOST/GUEST AUTHORS
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
GRAMMAR/LANGUAGE GUIDE*
"IN PRESS" ONLINE RELEASE OF MANUSCRIPT
LEGENDS
MANUSCRIPT TEXT
ONLINE ONLY PUBLICATIONS
ONLINE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS
PERMISSION TO USE COPYRIGHTED MATERIALS
PRÉCIS
REFERENCES
REFERENCE STYLE GUIDE
REJECTION OF MANUSCRIPTS
REPRINTS
STATISTICS
STUDY DESIGN WORKSHEETS
SUBMISSION CHECK LIST FORM
TABLES
TITLE
TITLE PAGE of MANUSCRIPT
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
TYPES OF SUBMISSIONS
USERNAME AND PASSWORD
VIDEO CLIPS

4. ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES FOR EVIDENCE-BASED MANUSCRIPTS

CME DISCLOSURE FORM FOR AUTHORS OF EVIDENCE BASED MANUSCRIPTS

5. REVIEW AND PUBLICATION PROCESS

6. SUBMISSION OF REVISED MANUSCRIPT

7. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

8. EDITORIALS

9. DOWNLOADABLE FORMS

AUTHORSHIP CRITERIA STATEMENT
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR DECLARATION FORM
COPYRIGHT ASSIGNMENT FORM
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM FOR EVIDENCE BASED AUTHORS
SUBMISSION CHECKLIST
STUDY DESIGN WORKSHEET

ACKNOWLEDGMENT: We would like to thank the following contributors to this updated Guide for Authors: Thomas S. Chang, MD, MS, Ann Dawson, Veronica Doyle, Henry Jampel, MD, Richard Alan Lewis, M.D., M.S., Lynn Logan, Don Minckler, MD, David C. Musch, Ph.D., M.P.H., Denis M. O'Day, M.D., Andrew P. Schachat, MD, Anika Trahan

*Excerpted in part from : Annual Meeting Instruction Course How to Read and Write Scientific Manuscripts American Academy of Ophthalmology San Francisco, California

1. INTRODUCTION - Important Basic Information

To submit a manuscript go to

http://ees.elsevier.com/ophtha and log in as an author. This site is also available through the journal (

http://www.ophsource.org/periodicals/ophtha ) or AAO (www.aao.org) websites.

If you have submitted to or reviewed for Ophthalmology since August 2004, a username and password have been provided to you. The username and password are the same regardless of whether you are signing in as an author or a reviewer. If you believe you are in the system already or if you cannot remember your username and password please refer to Username and Password for various ways to verify (prior to registering) whether or not your information is already in the system.

It is the corresponding author's responsibility to keep contact information, especially email address, current. All manuscript communications are done by email, only to the corresponding author.

If you are unable to access the system, please contact the Editorial Office by email at aaojournal@jhmi.edu or by phone at 443-287-2445. Please do not register a second time if you believe your information should already be in the system.

Prior to actually submitting on line, have the following files on your computer ready for uploading: transmittal letterfile, copyright file, file containing the corresponding author declaration page and financial disclosure forms from all authors, manuscript file (including title page, abstract and references), précis file, a file containing your tables, a separate file containing all the figure legends. If submitting a revision you will also need to have a point by point response file containing a word file with your answers or noted changes to the issues raised by the editor, reviewers and/or the editorial office.

We have upgraded our electronic submission system. You may now choose to load each manuscript file individually or to load all your files--figures and all--in a single zip file, which will reduce the size of your upload (and hence the time) it takes to upload your files and complete your submission.
This does not mean you can load everything in one file nor should you compress individual figure files - each piece needs to be in a separate file and those individual files can then be zipped and uploaded. The system will unzip them for you.

If you choose to upload a ZIP file, compress the files needed for your submission or revision using a ZIP program, such as WinZip or StuffIt (free trials of these are available online). Use the Browse button to find the zipped file and then click on the Attach button to upload it. As it loads, it will unzip automatically within the system. Then using the drop down menus and description fields to the left of the file names, select the appropriate items and type in the correct descriptions, E.G. Figure, then Figures 1A through E. Before continuing, use the number boxes to put your files in the following order: transmittal letter*; copyright; corresponding author declaration/financial disclosure, manuscript* (including abstract and reference list); précis*; tables; figures. Required items are marked with an *. When all items have been attached, labeled correctly and in the proper order, click Next.

Please review the manuscript one last time with the mandatory submission checklist at hand to be sure the guidelines have been followed. Complete the checklist BEFORE uploading is started.

Please note that you can stop and return to entering a manuscript at another time. After logging in again, you will find the work done previously under "incomplete submissions" on your main author menu.

We suggest you go to Tutorial for Authors if you have never previously submitted to Ophthalmology for a walk through of the submission process.

2. INITIAL MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION (overview with links to specifics)

In order to submit a manuscript you must go to

http://ees.elsevier.com/ophtha and register or log in as an author. You can also reach this site through the journal (

http://www.ophsource.org/periodicals/ophtha ) or AAO (www.aao.org) websites. If you have submitted work or reviewed for the Journal within the last three years, you may already be a registered user and can select to have your username and password emailed to you. Regardless of whether you are logging on as an author or reviewer, board member or editor, you should only register once and should always use the same email address. If you wish to change any of the data in your profile, log in with your username and password and on the home page click "change details" to update your profile. Be sure to click "submit" on the bottom of the page to save your new information. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to update any contact information in the system.

All authors are requested to submit online. If you are unable to make your submission online, please contact the Editorial Office by email at aaojournal@jhmi.edu, or by phone at 443-287-2445, or by fax at 443-287-2448.

You will want to have separate files already made for the manuscript (including abstract and references), transmittal letter, précis, tables, figures, and legends as well as a file containing the corresponding authors declaration page and financial disclosure forms from all authors. If you choose to scan a copyright form that has been signed by all authors, it also should be in a separate file.

Note that you can stop and return to entering a manuscript at another time by logging in again and you will find it under "incomplete submissions."

STEP BY STEP SUBMISSION (links will take you to detailed information on each section)

1. LOG IN AS AN AUTHOR (see Username and Password)

2. CLICK ON "SUBMIT PAPER"

3. ENTER TITLE OF YOUR MANUSCRIPT

4. ENTER TYPE OF SUBMISSIONS

5. ENTER THE NAMES OFAUTHORS of your manuscript. By initiating the submission process your name will already appear in the author area and make you the corresponding author.

6. ENTER THE ABSTRACT AND TITLE PAGE
Copy and paste the title page and structured abstract from your manuscript into the box. Be sure to reformat the abstract after pasting if needed. Do not cut these items from the full version of the manuscript as they are also required as part of the full manuscript file.

7. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Answer some required information questions regarding prior submission and IRB/ethics committee approval.

8. UPLOAD FILES
The next section in the process starts with the attaching of files. You can upload files in any order but you should sort them in the following order PRIOR TO CREATING YOUR PDF: a) Transmittal Letter b) Submission Checklist c) Copyright d) Corresponding Author Declaration and financial disclosure forms e) Manuscript (including abstract and references) f) Précis g) Tables h) Figures (graphs, photos, etc.) i) Legends and then any other additional special files.

We have upgraded our electronic submission system. You may now choose to load each manuscript file individually or to load all your files--figures and all--in a single zip file, which will reduce the size of your upload and hence the time it takes to upload your files and complete your submission.
This does not mean you can load everything in one file - each piece needs to be in a separate file and those individual files can then be zipped and uploaded. The system will unzip them for you.

If you choose to upload a ZIP file, compress the files needed for your submission or revision using a ZIP program, such as WinZip or Stuffit (free trials of these are available online). Use the Browse button to find the zipped file and then click on the Attach button to upload it. As it loads, it will unzip automatically within the system. Then using the drop down menus and description fields to the left of the file names, select the appropriate items and type in the correct descriptions, E.G. Figure, then Figures 1A through E.

Whether uploading individual files or after a zip file opens, before continuing, use the number boxes to put your files in the following order: transmittal letter, submission checklist, copyright, manuscript (including abstract and reference list, précis, tables, figures, legends and any other special files). Required items are marked with an asterisk. When all items have been attached, labeled correctly and in the proper order, click Next.

9. BUILD a PDF of your submission by clicking "Build PDF for My Approval." The system will prompt you to go to "Submission Waiting for Author's Approval" on your author main menu. You can also leave the system at this time and come back and approve at a later time.

10. APPROVE SUBMISSION In your "Submissions Waiting for Author's Approval." you will view and approve or view and correct your manuscript submission. If changes are required to the content of your uploaded files, you must make changes to the files on your hard drive and upload them again and remove the incorrect file. At the last step when you are ready to approve your submission you must also read and agree to the Ethics in Publishing Statement. A link is provided to the statement and you agree to it by checking off the box on the far right of the submission approval page.

Once you approve the submission you will get an acknowledgment from the Editorial Office. Then a second email will advise you of the manuscript number which should be referred to in all communications regarding your submission.

3. DETAILED SPECIFICS

ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS

Please be sure all abbreviations/acronyms are spelled out at first use in the abstract and again at first use in text. An abbreviation/acronym should appear first in parentheses immediately after the term or phrase to which it refers. Every abbreviation used in any table or figure should be defined in each corresponding legend.

The following abbreviations have been deemed as accepted and understood abbreviations without any further clarification needed. With these acronyms, no definition is required at any point in the text (not even first use) and are also acceptable in titles:

	AIDS	acquired immune deficiency syndrome
	cDNA	copy deoxyribonucleic acid
	DNA	deoxyribonucleic acid
	HLA	human leukocyte antigen
	CNS	central nervous system
	IM	intramuscular(ly)
	LASIK	laser in situ keratomileusis
	mRNA	messenger ribonucleic acid
	RNA	ribonucleic acid

ABSTRACT

All seven sections must appear in your abstract unless it is an Evidence Based Study. Please spend extra time to develop a simple, clear and concise abstract. All abbreviations in abstracts must be defined at first use except for those found in Abbreviations. The abstract should not exceed 350 words and should be submitted on a separate page. Deletion of any required section of the abstract must be justified in the transmittal letter to the Editor-in-Chief

Abstracts serve many purposes; one is to draw readers to your manuscript. Another is to allow a summary of your manuscript to be reproduced in a stand-alone format. Manuscripts without the required structured abstract will not be reviewed until the required abstract is received. The author may select the most appropriate heading for each of the seven abstract sections from the following:

1. Objective or Purpose: concisely states the study goal.

2. Design: identifies the study design using a phrase such as cross-sectional study, clinical trial, evidence based study, etc. New study design types are available in the Ophthalmology's Study Design Scheme and Worksheets section of this guide. Please select a study design from the choices listed there. Worksheet #1 (modified CONSORT agreement) for randomized controlled trials has been required since 1996 and is available online. Use of the other worksheets, while strongly recommended, remains voluntary and updated versions will be available online within approximately 45 days.

3. Participants and/or Controls: states the number of persons or eyes studied and the number of controls if a separate control group is included. If a single case is being described, the study design section should indicate it as a Case Report, modified by "interventional" or "observational", as appropriate. The Participant section may be deleted for a single case report.

4. Intervention or Methods or Testing: describes the principal treatment(s), procedure(s), test(s), or observation(s) performed.

5. Main Outcome Measures: defines the main parameter(s) being measured (e.g., IOP, vision, ERG, inflammation, etc.).

6. Results: briefly summarizes the principal measurements (data) obtained.

7. Conclusions: states the conclusion(s) derived from the data analysis.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

At the request of the author, the Journal will acknowledge those who reviewed, discussed, referred patients, translated references, provided extensive statistical assistance, or provided essential tissue, equipment, or other materials without which the study could not have been completed. (See: Lichter PR. The author wishes to thank... [editorial]. Ophthalmology 1988;95:293-4.) In such cases written permission from the person being acknowledged is required.

The Journal does not print acknowledgments for those who edited, or typed a manuscript, or gave "technical," "helpful," "crucial," or "moral" support or similar collegial aid to the authors. The Journal does not publish acknowledgments of individuals who, by virtue of doing their job, contributed to the implementation of the study, e.g., secretaries, clinic coordinators, technicians, ophthalmic photographers, or technologists.

AUTHORSHIP

Enter the name, degree(s) and affiliated institution for the first 8 authors. No more than 8 authors can be entered, indicating no more than 2 degrees for each. If there are more than 8 authors, list all of them on the title page of the manuscript. Be sure to indicate which author is the corresponding author by checking the appropriate box. All correspondence regarding a submission must come from the corresponding author. The order of the authors can be changed by double clicking on the arrow which points in the direction you want that name moved. It will only move one space each time you click on it.

If a Study Group authorship is used and the corresponding author is the Study Chair, please state this in the cover letter. However, if he/she is not the chair, please enclose with the cover letter a statement from the Study Chair that the Group Authorship as stated on the cover page and members of responsible writing committee, if noted, are both correct.

The Journal adheres to the Uniform Requirements set by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (

http://www.icmje.org/ ) for authorship. Each author must meet criteria for authorship. To qualify for authorship, authors must make substantial contributions to the intellectual content of the paper in three categories.

Category 1: conception and design, data acquisition or data analysis and interpretation.

Category 2: drafting the manuscript and or critical revision of the manuscript.

Category 3: statistical analysis, obtaining funding, administrative, technical or material support, or supervision.

Each author must fill out the Authorship Criteria Statement and forward it to the Corresponding Author. THESE FORMS DO NOT NEED TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE EDITORIAL OFFICE. Occassionally, The Editorial Office may request that the corresponding author submit these forms. If requested, these forms can be scanned and emailed, or faxed to the journal office at 443-287-2448. Be sure to include the manuscript number either in the email or on the fax. The Editor may require that the number of authors be reduced if authorship criteria are not met.

NOTE: Once a manuscript has been submitted, the order of authorship (including adding or removing authors) CAN NOT be changed without a written request to the Editorial Office from the corresponding author. This request must include a statement signed by all authors that they are in agreement with the change along with a new copyright form, both signed by all authors. Specifically, if an author is removed, a letter from that author agreeing to his/her removal is required. The new copyright form must show the title and authors' names in the order they should appear in print on the top of the form and include original signatures from each; signature order does not matter. If the original authors are not able to agree among themselves on authorship changes, please withdraw the paper. The Editor and Editorial Office do not choose to arbitrate such debates. AUTHORSHIP CHANGES CAN NOT BE SUBMITTED WITH PROOF CHANGES. The publisher can not approve such changes and it will delay the publication of your manuscript.

The Corresponding Author is the person responsible for a submission and all communication with the journal regarding that submission. The Corresponding Author must advise the editors and editorial office of the following:

- Receipt of the authorship criteria forms from all authors and confirm that all authors qualify;

- Responsible to advise the editors of any ghost or guest writers based on the definition of "guest authorship" as the designation of an individual who does not meet authorship criteria and "ghost authorship" as the failure to designate an individual who has made a substantial contribution to the research or writing of a manuscript (see the paper in JAMA. 2008;299(15):1800-12.);

- Acknowledg receipt of and upload financial disclosure forms from all authors;

- Advise editors whether the submission was funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). Articles accepted for publication in Ophthalmology from authors who have indicated that the underlying research reported in their articles was supported by an NIH grant will be sent by Elsevier to Pub Med Central for public access 12 months after final publication. The version of the article provide by Elsevier is the final accepted version after peer-review but without copyediting.

The Corresponding Author Declaration makes the submission of all the above information simple and concise. This is mandatory part of submission for Manuscripts, AAO Meeting Papers and Evidence Based Study types.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

As of July 1, 2006, the Journal requires reporting of clinical trial registration in all submitted trial-related manuscripts. Human clinical trials beginning enrollment on or after March 1, 2006 should be registered prior to enrollment. Clinical trials started prior to March 1, 2006, will have until September 1, 2006, to register. Please state in the methods section of the manuscript that this was done and where the registration information is publicly available.

The Editor expects that phase 3 trials will be registered and many phase 2 trials are appropriate to register. Most phase 1 trials need not be registered.

Satisfactory public databases include the NIH's at

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov and the site from the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trials at

http://www.controlled-trials.com .

For additional information, please consult:
Registration of Clinical Trials, Leonard A. Levin; Justin L. Gottlieb; Roy W. Beck; Daniel M. Albert; Thomas J. Liesegang; Creig S. Hoyt; Andrew Dick; Robert Bhisitkul; Andrew P. Schachat, Arch Ophthalmo 2005;123:1263 -4

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) has information at

http://prsinfo.clinicaltrials.gov/icmje.html .

Our policies are intended to be very similar to those of The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). The JAMA policy can be viewed at

http://jama.ama-assn.org/misc/authors.dtl . The NEJM summarizes their policy in two editorials: Is this Clinical Trial Fully Registered? N Engl J Med 2005;352:2436-8 Clinical Trial Registration: A Statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors N Engl J Med 2004;351:1250-1

CONFLICT OF INTEREST (SEE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE)

COPYRIGHT

Start circulating copyright forms among authors early so they are completed in time for submission.

The preferred method of submitting your copyright form(s) is to upload it with your manuscript. Type in the agreed upon title and author order on the top of the copyright form(s), print out the form. You can then circulate for signature one or more copies of this form for all authors to sign. Once original signatures are obtained from all authors, scan the form(s) (preferably to PDF format) and upload them at submission time. The manuscript number is not imperative IF you are uploading it with the submission.

If you do not have scanning capabilities, please WAIT until the "author notice of manuscript number" confirmation e-mail is received by the corresponding author from the Journal office. THEN fax the copyright forms(s) WITH THE MANUSCRIPT NUMBER WRITTEN ON IT to the journal office at 443-287-2448. Copyrights received by fax without manuscript numbers will need to be resent with the identifying manuscript number.

The copyright form signed by each author states that you either own the copyright, or have written permission to use all the material in your article. If you are submitting any material to which you do not own copyright, please secure permission to use the copyrighted materials .

As mentioned previously, once a manuscript has been submitted, the order of authorship (including adding or removing authors) CAN NOT be changed without a written request to the Editorial Office

NOTE: Once a manuscript has been submitted, the order of authorship (including adding or removing authors) CAN NOT be changed without a written request to the Editorial Office from the corresponding author. This request must include a statement signed by all authors that they are in agreement with the change along with a new copyright form, both signed by all authors. Specifically, if an author is removed, a letter from that author agreeing to his/her removal is required. The new copyright form must show the title and authors' names in the order they should appear in print on the top of the form and include original signatures from each; signature order does not matter. If the original authors are not able to agree among themselves on authorship changes, please withdraw the paper. The Editor and Editorial Office do not choose to arbitrate such debates. AUTHORSHIP CHANGES CAN NOT BE SUBMITTED WITH PROOF CHANGES. The publisher can not approve such changes and it will delay the publication of your manuscript.

It is the Corresponding Author's responsibility, to the best of his or her knowledge, to check that all authors meet the authorship requirements. The Corresponding Author is required to sign a copyright form as an author as well as checking off the box on the copyright which indicates that he/she has received and reviewed each author's Authorship Criteria Statement and sign again. The authorship criteria forms do not need to be sent with the submission but should be available if requested.

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR DECLARATION

The Corresponding Author is the person responsible for a submission and all communication with the journal regarding that submission. The Corresponding Author must advise the editors and editorial office of the following:

- Receipt of the authorship criteria forms from all authors and confirm that all authors qualify;

- Responsible to advise the editors of any ghost or guest writers based on the definition of "guest authorship" as the designation of an individual who does not meet authorship criteria and "ghost authorship" as the failure to designate an individual who has made a substantial contribution to the research or writing of a manuscript (see the paper in JAMA. 2008;299(15):1800-12.);

- Acknowledge receipt of and upload financial disclosure forms from all authors;

- Advise editors whether the submission was funded by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). Articles accepted for publication in Ophthalmology from authors who have indicated that the underlying research reported in their articles was supported by an NIH grant will be sent by Elsevier to Pub Med Central for public access 12 months after final publication. The version of the article provide by Elsevier is the final accepted version after peer-review but without copyediting.

The Corresponding Author Declaration makes the submission of all the above information simple and concise. This is mandatory part of submission for Manuscripts, AAO Meeting Papers and Evidence Based Study types.

DEVELOPING A MANUSCRIPT

Authors are well advised to plan for eventual publication early in the conduct of their research, including the choice of journal and the order of authorship. The most current Guide/Instructions for Authors for the intended journal should be obtained and read carefully in preparation for eventual manuscript submission. The order of authorship, assuming more than one individual is involved, should be established by mutual consent early in the manuscript preparation process to avoid subsequent conflicts. In rare instances, authors ask for changes in authorship after submission and do not agree themselves what they want. In such cases, the Editor will withdraw the manuscript from consideration and allow the authors to resubmit once they agree, with new and correct copyright transfer forms. For Ophthalmology, a listing as an author implies a substantial intellectual contribution to the conduct of research and preparation of the manuscript (see Guide for Authors regarding authorship, group authorship, and acknowledgments).

Clinical or basic science investigations must be designed (planned) properly and executed rigorously to permit meaningful analysis of resulting data. Appropriate study design experts, biostatisticians, or other advisors as indicated should be incorporated in both the initial planning and/or the authorship for all research publications.

It is strongly recommended that you plan the research, obtain appropriate IRB and or regulatory approval, do the research and then write the manuscript. In other words, prospective research is favored.

A. Ophthalmology's Study Design Scheme

As part of the Structured Abstract, authors are required to describe the design of their study. The specific designation of a "study design" serves several purposes. It forces authors to give careful thought to what they have actually done, it provides an important shortcut for editors and reviewers to use in categorizing the submission, and it provides the busy reader with a useful capsule of the type of study that was performed. Authors are encouraged to consult the worksheets so that they can be sure that their manuscript will contain the necessary information pertaining to their study design. The study design worksheets go hand in hand with the study design designations, so the worksheets are in the process of being revised. Worksheet #1 (modified CONSORT agreement) for randomized controlled trials has been required since 1996 and is available online. Use of the other worksheets, while strongly recommended, remains voluntary. The chart below provides basic information for selecting the appropriate study design.

All of Ophthalmology's study design worksheets will be updated as experience and author-reviewer feedback are received.

	STUDY DESIGN	OPTIONAL MODIFIERS
Reporting observation on a single patient?	CASE REPORT
Reporting observations on multiple patients, with similar findings, or TReated in a similar way, but without a comparison group?	CASE SERIES
Comparing observations or results on similar patients who have been TReated in more than one way? Comparing a TReated and unTReated group?	COMPARATIVE CASE SERIES
Comparing previous exposure(s) between a group of patients with a given disease or outcome and a group without the given disease or outcome?	*CASE-CONTROL STUDY
Determining the prevalence of a symptom, sign, or disease in a group of individuals or examining associations between factors at one point in time?	CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY	Clinic-based, hospital-based, community-based, population-based
Reporting on a group of individuals with defined characteristics before developing a condition or undergoing a procedure, and then observing them over time for the appearance of a disease or surgical result or complication.	COHORT STUDY
Reporting the results of a clinical experiment, that you have registered with clinicalTRials.gov, or a similar database, in which defined groups of subjects receive different TReatments, placebo, or no TReatment?	CLINICAL TRIAL	Randomized, non-randomized, masked, multicenter
Evaluating a diagnostic test or comparing more than one diagnostic test?	EVALUATION OF DIAGNOSTIC TEST OR TECHNOLOGY
Developing a questionnaire or interviewing insTRument?	QUESTIONNAIRE DEVELOPMENT
No human subjects studied (only tissue, biopsies, animals)?	EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
Reporting the available data addressing a specific clinical question?	EVIDENCE-BASED MANUSCRIPT	Systematic review, meta-analysis
Reporting the available data addressing a specific clinical question? Reporting on a phase 4 open-label study, a regisTRy or surveillance system, or an adminisTRative database?	DATABASE STUDY

A thorough review of available literature with appropriate data bases (Index Medicus, PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register (Cochrane Library), EMBASE, LILACS, etc.) is mandatory during the planning phases of a research project to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort and errors in acknowledging credit due others. When you allude to your interpretation of the previous literature, e.g., "we report the first case of..." in the methods section or discussion section be sure to explain the depth and breadth of your search strategy - where you searched, on what search terms, when the search was undertaken, and whether any more than a basic computer search was conducted. Non-English literature should be included with help from library resources as necessary. Ophthalmology requests that authors include only essential references that relate directly to the work being reported and that they verify their accuracy. Refer to references for formatting of various types of references.

To expedite processing, if you are asked to revise your manuscript, you will also be asked to provide a photocopy of the title page (that include publication information-journal name, vol. year, page numbers) of any work cited that was published prior to 1970 in the United States. You will also be asked to submit the title page for all work cited that was published outside of the United States regardless of year. Also include for any books referenced, the book's copyright page and the first page of any chapters referenced. Although not required upon first submission, it is strongly suggested that you make copies of these items during the researching of your manuscript so they are readily available if needed.

C. Organizing Research Data

The Study Design should be defined clearly before data collection is carried out with pre-designed forms/methodology to enable proper preservation and eventual analysis of data collected, regardless of whether data collection is retrospective or prospective.

D. Epidemiological and Statistical Considerations

The Journal's study design worksheets include statistical considerations appropriate for the various study designs. Definitions of relevant terms are provided in the Glossary of Terms.

Generally, statistical tests should be applied appropriately with consideration for potentially confounding variables. P-value and/or confidence intervals should be provided as appropriate.

Two key questions should be answered prior to submission of the manuscript:

Is the information adequate to permit interpretation of the results?
Are the conclusions justified?

Cautionary notes about terminology:

Ensure proper use of "procedures" vs. "eyes" vs. "patients" vs. "subjects".
Clarify whether or not the "last" follow-up information or a summary of "interval" information is presented. Interval follow up is preferred. (DiLoreto DA Jr, Bressler NM, Bressler SB, Schachat AP. Use of best and final visual acuity outcomes in ophthalmological research. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121:1586-90.)
Univariate and multivariate analyses are frequently misused in current literature. Their appropriateness should be verified by expert consultation as necessary.
P-values are frequently misused.
"Incidence" describes new cases over some interval of time
"Prevalence" describes cases at one defined interval in time.
Remember to distinguish accurately between "standards" and "standardized" and "computed" and "computerized"
The terms "safety" and "efficacy" are hackneyed and often misused. Please review a pertinent editorial on this: Schachat AP, Chambers WA, Liesegang TJ, Albert DA. Safe and effective. Ophthalmology.2003;110-2073-4.

See Glossary of Terms for more information

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Designs for Clinical Research

Clinical Trials Supported by the National Eye Institute, NIH Publication 93-2910. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1993.
Meinert CL. Clinical Trials: Design, Conduct, and Analysis, New York, Oxford University Press Inc. 1986.
Alltman DG, Doré CJ: Randomisation and baseline comparisons in clinical trials. Lancet 1990; 335:149-153.
Barnes RW: Understanding investigative clinical trials. J Vasc Surg 1989; 9:609-618.
Gauderman WJ, Barlow WE. Sample size calculations for ophthalmologic studies. Arch Ophthalmol 1992; 110:690-692.
Kupfer C: The expanded role of randomized clinical trials. Editorial. Am J Ophthalmol 1996; 122:883-885.
Meinert CL. Clinical Trials: The gold standard for evaluation of therapy. Editorial Ophthalmology 1996; 103:869-870.
Seigel D: Designs for clinical research. Editorial. Arch Ophthalmol 1987; 105:1647-1649.

References to Authorship:

Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. New Engl J Med 1997; 336:309-315.
Rennie D, Flanagin A, Yank, V. The Contributions of Authors . JAMA. 2000;284:89-91.

References to Publication:

Begg CB, Berlin JA. Publication bias and dissemination of clinical research. J Natl Cancer nst 1989; 81:107-115.
Chalmers TC, Frank CS, Reitman D. Minimizing the three stages of publication bias. JAMA 990; 263:1392-1395.
Ederer F. Refereeing clinical research papers for statistical content. Am J Ophthalmol 1985; 00:735-737.
Garfunkel JM, Ulshen MH, Hamrick HJ, Lawson EE. Problems identified by secondary review of accepted manuscripts. JAMA 1990; 263:1369-1372.

DRUG MANUFACTURE NAMES

Use generic names only in the text body. Include the trade name of a particular drug, cited in parentheses, after the first use of the generic name. In the case of equipment, include manufacturer's name, city, state, and/or country in the first use.

ENGLISH EDITING ASSISTANCE

Members of the (United States) Council of Biology Editors (and others) have expressed interest in helping authors of manuscripts submitted to Ophthalmology with English editing. Authors may contact these individuals or services directly by mail, phone, fax, or e-mail. All financial arrangements are strictly between the two parties. Ophthalmology neither endorses nor recommends any specific individual or service. The Journal office may return a submission and recommend professional editing prior to review. Professional editing, while often recommended by the editors or reviewers, does not ensure acceptance or publication of a manuscript.

EQUIVALENT VISUAL ACUITY MEASUREMENTS

FIGURES (illustrations, graphs, photos)

Whether submitting individual images or a composite, please follow the artwork guidelines below. Figures will be included in the final PDF but the figure file names will not be visible to reviewers. Figures, that are not a composite, should be loaded to individual files and clearly identified. For all figures the figure number must be entered in the file description field before the figure is uploaded. This can be done on the "attach files page" by choosing "figure" in the pull down menu. Below it there is the "Description" box; enter the figure number to the right of the word "Figure" before opening and attaching each figure file. Do not enter legends here, just the figure number. For linear art created by a MSOffice or similar type software, the figure number should also be typed on the figure page.

The Journal may provide one page of color illustrations per calendar year for each first author without charge, at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. The criterion generally used is whether the color illustration best conveys the information being illustrated. Additional color pages may be published at the author's expense. Formatting requirements may lead to illustration placement on more than one page, although we try to avoid this as much as possible. The cost varies from $650 to $1200 per additional page and you will be advised of the cost when you receive your proofs.

If a manuscript has been reviewed and accepted with color photos, it must be published with color photos. The author is responsible for page charges for color photos that occupy more than one page, and cannot opt to have them printed in black and white without the permission of the journal office. Please check with the Journal office or the publisher for information.

Clinical photographs (including those generated electronically from machines such as MRIs, fluorescein angiography, visual fields, etc.) must be masked to prevent identification of the patient. Clinical photographs that permit identification of an individual (those exposing anything more than just the eyes) must be accompanied by a signed statement by the patient or guardian granting permission for publication of the pictures for educational purposes. All graphics, including composites (such as clinical photographs, fluorescein angiography, CT, MRI, x-ray, photomicrographs, etc.) should be submitted at the actual size that they would be presented in the journal, 100 % of their print dimensions so that no scaling is necessary, but remember that very few pictures are full page pictures. The width should be no more than 7 inches.

The publisher will not re-draw or rework your photographs or illustrations. Submit all figures in the order they appear in the legends. If there are six or more color pictures, a composite maybe preferred so they fit on a standard journal page and potentially decrease your color figure costs. However, be sure to do this only if the quality of what you are attempting to portray with the figures is not compromised. The completed composite must meet the guidelines for artwork submission. Composites must also be labeled using typed text in a corner of the each image. Composite are encouraged for multipanel figures (e.g., Fig 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E).

* Line art can be submitted in the original file format that it was created (e.g., Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc.)

** If very little or no text - otherwise, print to a PDF

General• The physical dimensions of any artwork must fit within the dimensions of the pages within the Journal. (i.e., width no more than 7 inches)
• Be consistent in the font type and size used in the artwork.
• Artwork must use recommended naming conventions. Some examples include fig1.tif (figure 1 in TIFF format), Always ensure that the file extension is present to ensure quick and easy format identification.

We have upgraded our electronic submission system. You may now choose to load each figure file individually or to take all the individual figures files and zip them into a single zip file, which will reduce the size of your upload (and hence the time) it takes to upload your files and complete your submission. This does not mean you can load everything in one file - each piece needs to be in a separate file and those individual files can then be zipped and uploaded. The system will unzip them for you.

If you choose to upload a ZIP file, compress the files needed for your submission or revision using a ZIP program, such as WinZip or StuffIt (free trials of these are available online). Use the Browse button to find the zipped file and then click on the Attach button to upload it. As it loads, it will unzip automatically within the system. Then using the drop down menus and description fields to the left of the file names, select the appropriate items and type in the correct descriptions, E.G. Figure, then Figures 1A through E.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE - (complete the Financial Disclosure Form and give it to your corresponding author)

The Academy's Board of Trustees has determined that financial interest should not restrict expert scientific, clinical, or nonclinical presentation or publication, provided that appropriate disclosure of such interest is made. Every manuscript shall have a blanket statement of either Any disclosures will be printed with the submission in (First Name, Last Name, code, entity) format

The form uses the following codes to indicate the type of financial relationships you are disclosing either for yourself or for your family. The term "family" shall mean a spouse, domestic partner, parent, child or spouse of a child, or a brother, sister, or spouse of a brother or sister, of the Contributor.

code
table

For purposes of this disclosure, financial interest is defined as any financial gain or expectancy of financial gain brought to the Contributor or the Contributor's family, business partners, or employer by direct or indirect commission; ownership of greater than .01 % (one hundredth of one percent) of the stock in the producing company; stock options and/or warrants in the producing company, even if they have not been exercised or they are not currently exercisable; or involvement in any for-profit or not-for-profit corporation where the Contributor or the Contributor's family is a director or recipient of a grant from said entity, including consultant and travel aid. If you need additional space, please submit a second form.

Every manuscript shall have a blanket statement within the abstract box.; either "None of the authors have any financial interests to disclose." OR "Authors with financial interests or relationships to disclose are listed after the references." Any disclosures will be printed in (First Name, Last Name, code, entity) format. Coding legends will be printed in every issue of the journal.

Authors of Evidence Based Studys should read the special instruction for these types of studies and use the corresponding financial disclosure form

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

adverse event Complication of therapy or disease occurring during a study.
analysis Comparison of study and control groups or examination of outcomes in non-controlled studies. Assessment of data, including primary and secondary comparisons of interest.
assignment Designation of individuals as study or control subjects.
assessment Determination of the results of the investigation.
bias A non-chance event arising from faults in study design or measurement or data collection. Bias may prejudice results in that traditional statistical analysis may be precluded or unreliable. Bias may be introduced into a study by many factors including subject selection, follow-up, study factor choice, unmasked data collection, temporal trends in disease, co-management of disease if not concurrent in time, ecological fallacy, retrieval methods, play of chance, publication choice or prejudice of investigators.
case-control study An observational (non-interventional, usually retrospective) study that begins by identifying individuals with a disease (cases) for comparison to individuals without a disease (controls or reference group), in which analysis proceeds from effect to cause.
case series Case series include those studies describing more than one consecutive or non-consecutive case, studied retrospectively or prospectively, usually with regard to the outcome of an intervention for its efficacy, safety, and complications. Non-comparative case series generally have no control group included but outcome may be compared to that in the literature.
case report Usually a retrospective report of a single interventional or observational case experience, often with clinical-pathological correlation.
clinic-based Term used to define the population studied derived from a single clinic population or set of populations
cohort A group of individuals (subjects) who share a common experience or condition.
cohort study An observational (usually prospective) study that begins by identifying individuals with (study group) and without (control group) a factor being investigated to observe over time with regard to disease outcome; study and control groups may be concurrent or non-concurrent but must be derived from the same well defined cohort; almost always prospective with regard to data collection. Almost always longitudinal in that a particular group of patients is followed forward from a point in time. May or may not be population-based.
comparative study Study including two or more defined groups, compared one to another, to make a judgment about the influence of some factor or treatment.
confounding variables Risk factors that may affect the relationship between a risk factor and an outcome.
control group Reference group or group of individuals similar to treatment group except for exposure to study intervention.
crossover design This type of study compares two or more treatments or interventions in which the subjects or patients, upon completion of one therapy, are switched to the alternative(s).
cross-sectional study An observational study that identifies individuals with and without the condition or exposure being studied at the same time (synonymous with prevalence study). May or may not be population-based.
double-masked study At the times of data collection and analysis, neither evaluators nor subjects know which intervention or test is applied.
ecological fallacy This term applies to summary data which misrepresent a relationship within a larger group. Risk cannot be inferred for an individual based on group results.
epidemiology study Prospective or retrospective observational investigation of disease or characteristics; ideally according to pre-determined protocol; includes prevalence, incidence, and cross-sectional studies.
experimental study No human subjects involved.
extrapolation Drawing conclusions about the meaning of the study for individuals or situations not included in the study.
external validity A study's conclusions may be valid only for a specified external population; (how general are the findings?).
frequency The number of occurrences of an event or the proportion of members of a population or statistical sample falling into a particular class; the number of occurrences of a periodic or recurrent process per unit time or per sample.
genetic terminology Terminology used in genetics manuscripts should conform to Human Gene Nomenclature (HGNC) Guidelines. Please visit the HGNC website for the most current draft version of the guidelines http://www.gene.ucl.ac.uk/nomenclature . Do not submit scrambled pedigrees. If a scrambled pedigree is required, please correspond with the Editor-in-Chief at the time of manuscript submission for a waiver of this policy. Base sequences, such as for PCR primers, should not be included in the text of a manuscript. Authors may opt for an online supplement or provide a URL where the primers can be found or an email address for interested readers. Human or animal tissue examination employing traditional morphologic methods including light, scanning, and transmission electron microscopy.
historical controls A collection of patients used as a comparison group, who were identified and treated or observed in the past in a period that predates the time covered by other study groups.
historical manuscript A manuscript describing prior events, usually in chronological order, or the history of individuals or organizations.
incidence The rate of event or disease occurrence in those at risk in a defined population per unit time.
internal validity The observed differences between index and comparison groups are attributable to the independent variables under study.
interpretation Drawing conclusions about the meaning of similarities and differences found between study and control groups or between studies.
intervention Manipulation(s), treatment(s), test(s), or observation(s) employed to generate data for purposes of achieving the study goals.
interventional study A study that includes an attempt to alter the course of disease by medical or surgical or other therapy.
matched controls Subjects who have specific characteristics similar to cases (study subjects). Commonly used matching characteristics include age, gender, race, and socioeconomic status.
meta-analysis Data gathered entirely from existing literature using statistical methodology to integrate and summarize results of several studies. The data from individual studies may be weighted by the degree of variance or other study characteristics to arrive at a pooled estimate of the relation between a factor and an outcome. Usually now applied only to analysis of previously published randomized controlled trials.
modifiers Terms used to specify details about a study: (comparative, prospective, retrospective, interventional, non-interventional, observational, randomized, non-randomized, controlled, non-controlled, histopathologic, experimental, human, non-human, primate, etc.)
multicenter clinical trial A clinical (human) trial involving two or more clinical centers, a common study protocol, a data center, and a data coordinating center, or coordinating centers to receive, process and analyze study data.
observational study No intervention or attempt to alter the natural course of disease or physical condition.
ocular trauma terminology Terminology used in descriptions of ocular trauma should conform to the recommendations of the United States Eye Injury Registry and the International Society of Ocular Trauma. (See: Kuhn F, Morris R, Witherspoon CD, et al. A standardized classification of ocular trauma. Ophthalmology 1996; 103:240- 3).
odds (of an event)

Odds = # of patients fulfilling endpoint criterion
# of patients not fulfilling endpoint criterion
odds ratio (relative odds, cross product) = ad/bc where:

Exposed Unexposed

Disease a b

No Disease c d
phase I, II, III, IV (FDA) [US FDA Classifications: (modifiers) applicable to new human therapies, including drugs and devices, under consideration for marketing approval]
Phase I : Safety and dose testing in humans (usually without controls) (Studies a small number of patients to determine tolerated doses [dose escalation] and side effects for risks of new agents, devices)
Phase II : Testing of safety (with or without controls) and efficacy (requires controls) in affected subjects,
Phase III : Testing of efficacy and safety (with controls) (randomized controlled trial)
Phase IV : Post-market surveillance (with or without controls)]
[retrospective, comparative studies of interventions, drugs, devices]
placebo An inert (pharmacologically inactive) medication, which lacks a therapeutically active ingredient.
population-based A study including all individuals in a defined geographical area or otherwise clearly defined subgroup of the population. A study conducted on a randomly selected representative group (10%, 20% etc.) of the population at risk.
prevalence The proportion of subjects with a particular disease or condition at a point in time (best estimate of the probability of disease before performing the test or intervention).
prevalent This term implies a characteristic which is widespread.
prospective study Data are collected before and/or after interventions, measurements or events by using previously defined protocols.
protocol deviation Departure from the planned sequence of testing, interventions follow-up, or analysis during a study.
publication bias Negative studies are unlikely to be published and are less likely than positive studies to be available for detailed literature reviews or meta-analyses. Studies which duplicate previous studies are also less likely to be published.
randomized (controlled) trial A trial (human or non-human) that involves at least one experimental treatment group and one control group, concurrent enrollment, and follow-up of the test and control groups, and in which the assignment to experimental and control groups is by a randomization process. Neither the subjects nor the persons responsible for treatment can influence the assignments, and the assignments remain unknown to the subjects and staff until eligibility has been determined.
referral based The subjects studied are accumulated through an intermediary (referred).
relative frequency The average rate of occurrences of a particular event in a large number of repeated trials.
relative risk

The Relative Risk (RR) = risk of disease in treatment group
risk of disease in control group
retrieval bias Retrieval bias may occur when data is not obtained from all relevant cases or studies.
retrospective study Data collected and analyzed after all measurements, interventions, or events have taken place.
review A manuscript which summarizes the scientific history and current understanding of a topic, procedure, or disease.
risk The risk in a defined population and time equals:

# patients fulfilling endpoint criterion
total # patients
sham procedure A deliberately ineffective intervention.
single masked study The subjects or the evaluators, but not both, know which intervention is applied.
study size: (for Ophthalmology Data base Coding)
(Total number of study subjects)
small series = n < 10
medium series = 10 > n < 30
large series = n > 31
systematic review A detailed review and analysis of previously published literature.
triple masked study All participants are masked to the intervention. None of the investigators, the subjects, the data and safety monitoring committee, nor the biostatisticians know which intervention or analysis is applied.

Reference Sources:
1. Riegelman RK, Hirsch RP: Studying a Study and Testing a Test, 2nd Ed., Little Brown, Boston, 1981.
2. Meinert CL and Tonascia S: Clinical Trials, Design, Conduct, and Analysis. Monographs in Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Vol 8, New York, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1986.
3. Hennekens CH, Buring JE: Epidemiology in Medicine, Little Brown and Company, Boston and Toronto, 1987.
4. Last JM: A Dictionary of Epidemiology, Oxford University Press, Third Ed., New York, 1995.

GRAMMAR/LANGUAGE GUIDE

Good writing supports and augments good research. Clear, concise language is highly desirable in scientific communications and consistent with good scholarship. Sentence structure should be grammatically correct and language use should incorporate a reasonable breadth of vocabulary. Obfuscation, circuitous verbiage, and poor logic devalue the communication and only increase the risk of confusing the reader. Redundancy of text or duplication of text points in tables wastes precious space and unnecessarily complicate a manuscript. Authors should plan to do several revisions before submission to shorten and to focus an article. Clear writing itself greatly enhances the impact of research findings. If the following does not answer your basic issues, you may wish to submit your paper to an English Editor.

Examples of specific flaws in language use to avoid include:

a. Passive Voice: Active voice is much preferred to passive voice, which should be used sparingly. Passive voice tends to "depersonalize" the subject and remove the author(s) from active responsibility (or bias?) for his/her work. Active voice is generally more concise than passive voice and saves space and time. Passive voice may force the reader to stop and think about whom is doing the action. It does not relieve the author of direct responsibility for observations, opinions, or conclusions (e.g., "The problem of blood flow was investigated..." vs. "We investigated the problem of blood flow..."; "A slow gradual subsidence of the swelling and normalization of visual acuity was found." vs. "The swelling subsided gradually and visual acuity returned to normal.")
b. Impersonal Passive: Many authors "cheat" the passive voice with weak sentence openers that are literally active but functionally passive. Avoid phrases such as: "It is...", "There is...", "It is important to note that...", "It is essential that...". Removing such phrases permits more succinct and clear thought. (e.g., "Although there is evidence suggesting involvement of genetic factors, the exact role of such factors and mode of inheritance remain to be elucidated fully." The same point is stated more clearly as: "The role of genetic factors is unknown.")
c. Subject/Verb Separation: Remember that a reader can hold the subject of a sentence in his consciousness only so long. Sentences in which the subject sits many words away from its verb may force the reader to reread the entire paragraph to understand the thought. For example: "The smallest of the URFs (URFA6L), a 207-nucleotide (nt) reading frame overlapping out of phase the NH2-terminal portion of the adenosinetriphosphatase (ATPase) subunit 6 gene, has been identified as the animal equivalent of the recently discovered yeast H+ - ATPase subunit 8 gene." In this 41-word sentence, 23 words separate the subject "smallest" from its verb "has been identified." A possible revision would appear: "The smallest of the URFs (URFA6L) has been identified as the animal equivalent of..."
Keep subjects and verbs reasonably close together.
d. Abstruse, Obtuse, Arcane, or Numerous Abbreviations/Acronyms: A reasonable balance must exist between the introduction of an unconventional abbreviation and the use of the full term. Many authors tend to use abbreviations/acronyms for any phrase that has two or three words in it, in titles, captions, and text. When these abbreviations/acronyms are multiple and repetitive, reading becomes analysis of shorthand. In general, minimize use of abbreviations. Tables and figures need to make sense on their own so readers should not need to click back to the main text and search out definitions of abbreviations/acronyms. Abbreviations/acronyms need to be defined parenthetically in each figure and in a legend for each table. Similarly, they need to be defined in the précis and abstract since there things also need to make sense on a "stand alone" basis. Abbreviations should defined again at first use in the main text. There is a brief list of abbreviations/acronyms that have become "accepted" overtime and these are the only ones that do not need defining and the only ones that can be used in titles.
e. Improper Subject-Verb Agreement: Rules of prescriptive grammar require the agreement of subject(s) and verb(s) in person and number and the agreement of pronouns and antecedents in number, person, and gender. Subjects and verbs must agree. "Data" is always plural.

• "My own experience and that of my colleagues argue that..."
• "This datum from this study suggests that 1000 cGy of external beam photon therapy is not beneficial in treating CNV."
• "The linkage data and haplotype data are presented."
• "The majority of cases is considered to be multifactorial in origin."
f. Avoid split infinitives: "My mother told me to never split an infinitive." should be "My mother told me never to split an infinitive."
g. Non-Agreement of Verb Tenses: The use of both past (or imperfect) and present tenses in the same sentence or paragraph can be awkward. (e.g., "On last examination, her visual acuity is 20/40 and further surgery was refused.")

Harmonize tenses in a paragraph or presentation.
h. Redundancies: Repetition weakens a thought or presentation and sometimes can lead to amusing results • "[Glaucoma] is caused by alterations in the sieve-like trabecular meshwork."
• "The entire tumor was excised completely."
• "For more information, communicate with the Director by writing him at..."
• "An area encompassing a 2 disc diameter radius centered on the foveal center was graded for each eye."
• "We examined a large number of patients after a fairly long, and standardized, follow-up period."
• "The family studied has twice previously been reported in the literature."
i. Human Characteristics Attributed to Disease Processes: Insensitivity and jargon often cause us to attribute human senses to a disease (e.g., "We have no explanation for the tumor's predilection for younger females.".)
j. Circumlocution and Compression (too many words vs too few): Sometimes, in an attempt to be brief, a compressed thought will yield a bizarre statement.

• "Sudden death from heart block may require early cardiac pacing."
• "Blood shortages in Houston hit dangerously low levels."
• "The eye with the more severe pathology was used in patients with bilateral clinically significant macular edema."
k. Misplaced Modifiers: When an adjective or adverb directly precedes or follows the word that it modifies, the connection cannot be mistaken. But a modifier in an unusual position may fall into the wrong company and form an unsuitable attachment. The momentary misreading distracts from the substance of what you are saying. (e.g., "Forty-five patients were entered into the linkage analysis twenty-four of whom were affected.")

Read each sentence and thought carefully and place the modifiers precisely.
l. Hyperbole of Emphasis: An author can make a point with a powerful word alone. Adding an emphatic modifier, an intensive adverb (e.g., very, really, truly, actually, etc.), attenuates the phrase and defeats the purpose. It reduces the adjective to conversational pablum, depriving it of force. The repeated superlative or modified adjective indicates extreme positions (e.g., "absolutely no justification", "much more frequently").
m. Hyperbole of Thought: Don't use big words! Keep it simple versus; "When promulgating your esoteric cogitative or articulating your superficial sentimentalities and amicable philosophical and psychological observations, beware of platitudinous ponderosity. Let your verbal evaporations have lucidity, intelligibility, and veracious vivacity without rodomontade or thespian bombast. Sedulously avoid all polysyllabic profundity, pompous propensity, and sophomore vacuity."
n. The Dangling Participle: Participles, verb forms functioning as adjectives, may detach themselves from the formal subject that they should qualify. In other words, they dangle. (e.g., "Having expressed a direct interest in our institution, we have enclosed the materials that you requested with an application form."); The most common and misused dangling participle in medical and scientific literature is "using." Inexplicably, reviewers and editors have tolerated the admission of the dangling participle "using" in text and title. In these examples, who or what is "using"?

• "Genotyping was performed using a semi-automated fluorescence scanning system."
• "Linkage analysis was performed using both genetic model-dependent and model-independent methods."
• "The present study measured vision using the ETDRS protocol with standardized refraction."
• "Patients with useful vision in the fellow eye were treated using a lateral field, entering at a 45-degree angle, using a 45-degree couch rotation to achieve this."

Substitute a preposition as appropriate, or rewrite the phrase.

o. Stating the Obvious: "The development of this tumor probably precedes its clinical appearance." Do we really need to be so informed?
p. Slang, Jargon, and Colloquialism: "This gene probably plays some role in "run-of-the-mill" glaucoma..."

Avoid wordy and colloquial expressions such as:

- a majority of (= most)		- at the present time (= now)
- due to the fact that (= because)		- in the event that (=I f)
- it is clear that (= clearly)		- it is suggested that (= I think)
- prior to (= before)		- take into consideration (= consider)
- with respect to (= about)

q. Run-on Sentences: Sentences should be reasonable in length and convey one primary thought or relationship. not Presenting several thoughts or relationships in one sentence often is confusing and create questionably inter-related concepts. While brief is better, avoid one sentence paragraphs except in rare circumstances. Usually, the thought can be appended to the preceding or following paragraph.
r. Spelling Errors: In the modern era of electronic spell checkers, typographical and spelling errors should be less frequent. Remember that spell checkers and grammar checkers have their limits and nothing replaces a good, careful final read of the manuscript. Read the manuscript (again!). Private editing is a good investment. Even ask a colleague or spouse to read the manuscript before it is submitted to the Journal.
s. Its, It's, and Its': Its conveys possession. It's is a contraction of it is. Its' is not in use.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

1. The AMA Manual of Style, 8th ed., Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins, 1988.
2. Cook, CK. Line by Line: How to Improve Your Own Writing, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, 1985.
3. Day RA. How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper. 4th ed., Phoenix, Ariz. Oryx Press, 1994.
4. Huth EJ. How to Write and Publish Papers in the Medical Sciences, 2nd ed., Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins, 1990.
5. King LS. Why Not Say It Clearly: A Guide to Expository Writing. 2nd ed. Boston, Little Brown and Co., 1991.
6. Lichter PR. Good writing supports good scholarship. [Editorial] Ophthalmology 1989; 96:1581-1582.
7. Strunk Jr. W, White EB. The Elements of Style, 3rd ed., New York, Macmillan Publishers Inc., 1979.
8. Williams JM. Toward Clarity and Grace, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1990.
9. Style Manual Committee, Council of Biology Editors: Scientific Style and Format: The CBC Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers, 6th ed., Chicago, Council of Biology Editors Inc., 1995.
10. Truss, Lynne. Eats, Shoots, and Leaves, Gotham Books, Penguin Group, USA, New York, 2003.

"IN PRESS" ONLINE RELEASE OF MANUSCRIPT

As of September 1, 2007, manuscripts are AUTOMATICALLY available on line as "In Press" articles AFTER completing the proofing process. This early online release is not a draft version since it is produced after all editorial and author corrections are made; however there is a disclaimer in case a critical error is found. No routine editing will occur once this is online. The "in press" version is not meant to be a last editing opportunity for authors, however if a major, critical error is found we may be able to make corrections prior to publication or an erratum will be published in a future issue. This "In Press" version is removed as soon as the monthly issue is available online.

It is the corresponding author's responsibility that all editing be done at the time the original proofs are received from the publisher and that the publisher be notified immediately if the authors do not wish to have the "in press" article released online. All notifications regarding proof approvals, proof corrections or requests that an article not be released "in press" prior to publication must come from the corresponding author to l.traynor@elsevier.com.

LEGENDS

Figure legends (photos, drawings, graphs) should follow figures. Figures must be numbered consecutively as they appear in text. Histological figures, stains and magnifications should be noted in the legends. Any figure that has been published elsewhere should have an acknowledgment to the original source; a copy of the release to publish the figure, signed by the copyright holder, must also be submitted. Legends must identify all symbols, abbreviations, acronyms or letters that appear on the prints.

Table legends should be within the table. All abbreviations in each table must be defined even when repetitive to each other.

MANUSCRIPT TEXT

Double space the entire manuscript after the title page. Turn on line numbers and page numbers before uploading your manuscript for ease of referencing by reviewers and editors. The average published manuscript in Ophthalmology, including references, is up to printed 6 pages in length. This corresponds, depending on font size and printing, to between 16-20 pages of double-spaced draft.

1. Introduction: Without a heading, the introduction should refer only to the most pertinent past publications and should not be an extensive review of the literature.

2. Intervention or Methods or Testing : This section should be written with sufficient detail to permit others to duplicate the work. Also required are the following, as appropriate within the methods section:

FOR HUMAN SUBJECTS:

• Informed Consent - Manuscripts reporting the results of experimental investigation on human subjects must include a statement to the effect that informed consent was obtained.
• HIPAA - For studies conducted in the United States a statement that the work is HIPAA-compliant is required (See Ophthalmology 2003; 110:1074-5.)
• IRB/Ethics Committee Human subjects/materials/medical records - If the study being reported involved human subjects, human derived materials, or human medical records, please include one of the two following statements in the Materials/ Patients and Methods section:

Institutional Review Board (IRB)/Ethics Committee approval was obtained
OR
IRB/Ethics Committee decided approval was not required for this study.

• Declaration of Helsinki - A statement is required that described research adhered to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki
• Clinical Trial Registration - A statement should be provided in the methods section of the manuscript that this was done and where the registration information is publicly available. (see Clinical Trial Registration for more detailed information)

FOR ANIMAL SUBJECTS:

If animals were used in a study, the notice of approval by the appropriate Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee should be included in the methods section of the manuscript

3. Results: Results must be concise.

4. Discussion: The discussion should be restricted to the significant findings presented. Digressions and theorizing are not appropriate.

ONLINE ONLY PUBLICATIONS

Some manuscripts are not accepted due to lack of space rather than lack of science and in some cases an author may be given an option of having their entire manuscript printed "online only." If the Editor deems it appropriate, you will be given the option of having your manuscript published online only. There will be no printed version of this manuscript BUT it will appear in the table of contents under a new section called "Online Only Articles"¹ and it shall be citable just like any other online resource. We are told that Pub Med and other similar databases will pick it up as an online citation. Submission guidelines are the same as they would be for acceptance in the print edition. Color figures in an online only publication will be at no cost to the author.

¹ Online-Only Articles (full text available only at aaojournal.org)
Article about the ABCs
John E Smith, MD, Warren Right, PhD
A brief description of the alphabet with related Sesame Street
character interpretations of the learning curve.

ONLINE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

Space in Ophthalmology is highly competitive and sometimes good manuscripts or data cannot be published due to space limitations. For articles that ARE ACCEPTED for publication in the journal but whose authors have agreed to cut back on the amount of material provided due to space considerations, we now offer online only supplements to printed articles. Such supplements will generally include tables, charts, figures, etc. that would further enhance a published article but for which there is insufficient room in a given issue to print it. The availability of this additional information will be noted in the Table of Contents by an icon. The information will not appear in the printed version but will be archived with the online version on the publisher's website

http://www.ophsource.com/periodicals/ophtha and accessible through Medline and other online databases. In the printed manuscript, on the cover page and in the appropriate, corresponding section of your text, there will be a notation that "Supplemental materials are provided at the end of the online version of this manuscript".

If you opt for an online supplement, add a reference to it in parenthesis after the mention of the information to appear online: For example, "as shown in Table N (see online supplemental material)." Then add a statement to the title page that should read similar to: "This article contains additional online-only material. The following should appear online-only: Figures X, Y, Z and Table N." The materials will not appear in the printed version but will be archived with the online version on the publisher's website

http://www.ophsource.com/periodicals/ophtha and accessible through Medline and other online databases.

The supplemental materials must follow all the same rules and regulations as if they were to appear in print. For example, tables must be able to stand alone with all abbreviations, references, etc. identified. Table legends would include definitions for the abbreviations, if any. Color figures that might appear online only are at no cost to the author.

PERMISSION TO USE COPYRIGHTED MATERIALS

Permission to use materials published in Ophthalmology

Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier's Global Rights Department, Oxford, United Kingdom; phone: 44-(0)1865-843830; fax: 44-(0)1865-853333; e-mail: healthpermissions@elsevier.com. Requests may also be completed online via the Elsevier homepage (

http://www.elsevier.com/permissions).

Single photocopies of single articles may be made for personal use as allowed by national copyright laws. Permission of the publisher and payment of a fee is required for all other photocopying, including multiple or systematic copying, copying for advertising or promotional purposes, resale, and all forms of document delivery. Special rates are available for educational institutions that wish to make photocopies for nonprofit educational classroom use.

Permission to use materials to which others hold copyright in your submission to Ophthalmology

The copyright form that you sign and submit with your manuscript states that you either own the copyright, or have written permission to use, all the material in your article. If you are submitting any material to which you do not own copyright, please secure permission from the copyright holder to publish or reprint this material. Examples of such materials could be a clinical image/chart that was published in another ophthalmological journal or in a book or a photo of an ophthalmic device that you obtained from a pharmaceutical company. In most cases, permission can be easily obtained by e-mailing the publisher or company and explaining specifically what you want to use, where (print and online versions of Ophthalmology) and why (in my article entitled XXXXX.) Most copyright holders will reply with a "Permission Granted" letter which you should upload along with your submission. Give yourself ample time to request and receive permission, usually 3-6 weeks.

PRÉCIS

All manuscripts must include a précis of 35 words or less summarizing the main finding/outcome of the study. The précis should not duplicate the abstract conclusion. Please respect the 35-word limit as formatting requirements lead to strict application of the word limit. If the paper is published, the précis will appear under the title in the Table of Contents. The précis is submitted as a separate file and should not be included the manuscript file. Try not to use abbreviations/acronyms in the précis so that the words are not used up in defining them; remember the précis has a 35 word limit.

REFERENCES

If you use automated reference numbering software or bibliography software, turn it off before submitting the manuscript.

References should follow text and begin on a separate page. They should be double-spaced and numbered consecutively in order of appearance in the text. In text, designate references by superscript numbers following all punctuation (except semicolons).

List only references that you have read and that are pertinent to the manuscript. For reference formatting examples, please go to the Reference Style Guide.

Cite only published studies as references. Any references (including books or articles) that have been accepted for publication, but not yet published, should have the term "in press" in the reference in place of volume and page numbers. These should be updated prior to publication, if possible. Unpublished data, submitted articles, abstracts oral or poster presentations should be noted in parentheses within the text.

References used in tables and figures should be numbered sequentially, in order of their first mention, and listed in the main reference list at the end of the manuscript. In other words, number the references in a table or figure at first mention of the table/figure just as if they were the next reference in the text and list them in the main reference list. If a reference to be used in a table or figure was used previously in the text, use the previously assigned number in the table/figure.

This includes online only tables and figures. Since these tables and figures are accessible at the end of the manuscript to which it relates, the manuscript's main reference list is immediately available.

A signed permission letter must accompany reference to a "personal communication." The comment should be cited within parentheses in the text.

Software references depend on the context in which they are mentioned, please refer to the Reference Style Guide for more detailed information.

To expedite processing, if asked to revise your manuscript, you will also be asked to provide a photocopy of the title page (that include publication information-journal name, vol. year, page numbers) of any work cited that was published prior to 1970 in the United States. The same will be requested for all work cited that was published outside of the United States regardless of year. Also include for any books referenced, the book's copyright page and the first page of any chapters referenced. Although not required upon first submission, it is strongly suggested that you make copies of these items during the researching of the manuscript so they are readily available if needed.

REFERENCE STYLE GUIDE

1. Journal abbreviations should conform to those used by the National Library of Medicine as found in Index Medicus (

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/libprog.html ). If in doubt as to the correct abbreviation, cite the complete journal name.
2. Include subtitles (Title: subtitle.)
3. Use volume numbers. Only use issue numbers or months when pagination is not consecutive throughout a year. Add (suppl) if supplement.
4. Delete digits when in the same range: 231-7 or 1800-27.
5. Do not add a discussion to a reference. If the author provides a page range that includes the discussion break it out as: 23-5, discussion 26-8.
6. Suffixes such as Jr, Sr, and III follow author's initials: Wilson JA Jr, Boxer Wachler M III.
7. No periods between journal title and year published.
8. No period in use with initials anywhere.
9. No spaces after colons and semi-colons in date;vol:pages.
10. Use italics for gene, genotype, and locus symbols and animal genetic terms
11. Cite all authors if 4 or fewer; if 5 or more, list the first three and replace all others with et al.

ABSTRACTS AND UNPUBLISHED DATA, LECTURES, POSTERS, ETC.

Published abstracts and unpublished data must be cited within parenthesis in the text

Abstract: (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 28 [Suppl]:54,1989) Data: (Jones, unpublished data)

Unpublished presentations, posters, and lectures should be cited within parenthesis in the text. Cite in text: (Smith AB. Quality of life after LASIK. Paper presented at: AAO Annual Meeting, November 15, 2002; New Orleans). Once published, they should be treated as a regular reference for a book, journal etc. as shown below.

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Journal:
Davis JT, Allen HD, Powers JD, et al. Population requirements for capitation planning in pediatric cardiac surgery. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1996;150:257-9.

With no volume #:
Taulbee P. Maryland Quality Project puts new focus on processes of care. Rep Med Guideline Outcomes Res. June 1994;10-1.

Supplements:
Davis JT, Allen HD, Powers JD, et al. Population requirements for capitation planning in pediatric cardiac surgery. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1996;150(suppl):257-9.

In Press (accepted by a journal):
Davis JT, Allen HD, Powers JD, et al. Population requirements for capitation planning in pediatric cardiac surgery. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. In press.

A discussion:
Allo MD. In discussion of: McKindley DS, Antibiotic pharmacokinectics following fluid resuscitation from traumatic shock. Arch Surg 1994;272:1825-31.

Foreign titles:
Please provide English titles whenever possible. When a translation is not printed from the published article but supplied by MS author: Kolmos HJ. Antibiotika i almen praksis [Antibiotics in general practice]. Ugeskr Laeger. 1996;158:258-60.

When a translation is printed on the published article or in PubMed:
Kolmos HJ. Antibiotics in general practice [in German]. Ugeskr Laeger. 1996;158:258-60.

Journal available only online:
Hussain N, Clive J, Bhandari V. Current incidence of retinopathy of prematurity, 1989-1997. Pediatrics [serial online] 1999;104:e26. Available at

http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/104/3/e26 . Accessed July 12, 2002.

Letter:
Davis JT, Allen HD, Powers JD, et al. Population requirements for capitation planning in pediatric cardiac surgery [letter]. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1996;150:257-9.

Study Groups:
Please cite authorship as seen on published article, not on PubMed.
Cite study group as author if no individuals are named, or after individual named authors, following et al if necessary.

When authors listed:
Crist WM, Garnsey L, Beltangady MS, the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Committee. Prognosis in children with rhabdomyosarcoma: a report of the intergroup rhabdomyosarcoma studies I and II. J Clin Oncol 1990;8:443-52.

No authors listed other than the study group:
Fluorouracil Filtering Surgery Study Group. Fluorouracil filtering surgery study: one-year follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol 1990;109:613-6.

BOOKS

Book:
Miller NR. Walsh and Hoyts Clinical Neuro-Ophthalmology. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins; 1991:xx-xx. (include specific inclusive pagination for material being referenced)

Article or chapter in book:
Hollis S, Rozakis GW. Complications, special cases and management. In: Rozakis GW, ed. Refractive Lamellar Keratoplasty. Thorofare, NJ: SLACK Inc.; 1994:111-22.

Edited book:
Letheridge S, Cannon CR, eds. Bilingual Education: Teaching English as a Second Language. Vol. 1. 3rd ed. New York: Praeger; 1980:xx-xx.

Article in edited book, reprint from another source:
Sluzki CE, Beavin J. Symmetry and complementarity. In: Watzlawick P, Weakland JH, eds. The Interactional View. New York: Norton; 1977:711-30. Reprint from: Acta Psiquiatr Psicol Am Lat 1965;11:321-30.

Proceedings published as a book:
Chaddock TE. Gastric emptying of a nutritionally balanced liquid diet. In: Daniel EE, ed. Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on Gastrointestinal Motility. Ames, IA: Mitchell Press; 1974:83-92.

Book without authors or editors:
College Bound Seniors. Princeton, NJ: College Board Publications; 1979:xx-xx.

Several volumes in a multi-volume edited work:
Wilson JG, Fraser FC, eds. Handbook of Teratology. Vol. 1-4. New York: Plenum Press; 1977-88.

English translation of a book:
Luria AR. The Mind of a Mnemonist [Solotarof L, trans]. New York: Avon Books; 1969:xx-xx. [original work published 1965].

URL (ELECTRONIC CITATION)

Whenever possible, if resources are available online (that are identical to the referenced printed version) we provide the URL for the resource in the reference. We ask that you provide a date of online access informing readers that as of that given date the link was still live. This date can be either the date you accessed it for your research or the date you verified it was still a live link.

Health Care Financing Administration. 1996 statistics at a glance. Available at: http://www.hcfa.gov/stats/stathili.htm. Accessed December 2, 1996.

SOFTWARE

Mention of use
If context is mention-of-use of software only (mentioned in passing) then cite manufacturer and manufacturer location parenthetically in text after first mention of software, e.g. Epi Info (Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, GA).

Subject of report
If software is the subject of the report, cite in main reference list: Epi Info [computer program]. Version 6.0. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 1994.

Citing software manual
Software Manual cite in references: Dean AG, Jean JA. Epi Info, Version 6: A Word-processing Database. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 1994:xx-xx.

GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS

Klein R, Klein BE. Beaver Dam Eye Study. Manual of Operations (Revised). Report for 16 Jun 87 - 31 May 92. Springfield, VA: US Dept of Commerce; 1991:xx-xx. NTIS Publication PB91-149823.

REJECTION OF MANUSCRIPTS

By Other Journals

Rejection by another journal will not compromise a review by Ophthalmology. Authors are encouraged to inform the Editor-in-Chief of rejection by another journal and to include copies of the previous review commentary and author responses.

Appeals Regarding Manuscripts Rejected By Ophthalmology

Any appeals regarding rejected manuscripts must be made by the corresponding author to the Editorial Office by email prior to resubmitting the manuscript. DO NOT RESUBMIT UNTIL YOUR ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT IS RELEASED BACK TO YOU (this is known as "Initiating Rebuttal"). THIS ASSURES THAT YOUR MANUSCRIPT IS PROCESSED UNDER THE SAME MANUSCRIPT NUMBER, KEEPING THE HISTORY TOGETHER.

Occasionally the Editor may suggest that a full length paper that is rejected, for various reasons, might be resubmitted as a Letter to the Editor. In these circumstances you should advise the editorial office of your decision to resubmit so that we can release the original manuscript back to you so that the history stays together under the same manuscript number. However, when resubmitting please remember to change the document type from "manuscript" to "MS to LTR". Your letter should generally follow the guidelines for Letters to the Editor , allowing for any exceptions granted by the Editor- in-Chief.

REPRINTS

A reprint order form will either be e-mailed or accompany your copyedited manuscript and page proofs. You must return this form to the publisher with your corrected page proofs, whether or not you order reprints. The cost of reprints increases significantly if they are ordered after the initial print run. Reprints, except special orders of 100 or more, are available only from authors.

STATISTICS

Statistical methods must be identified in table footnotes, illustration legends, or text explanations. Software programs used for complex statistical analyses must be identified to enable reviewers to verify calculations. For manuscripts in which the study conclusions infer equivalency in treatment effect, a sample size calculation and power analysis should be included. Levels for alpha and beta errors should be clearly stated in the Methods section of the Abstract and text. Authors should state the clinically significant difference that was used to determine the power calculation. The Journal strongly advises statistical consultation about data collection and analysis.

A. OPHTHALMOLOGY'S STUDY DESIGN SCHEME

As part of the Structured Abstract, authors are required to describe the design of their study. The specific designation of a "study design" serves several purposes. It forces authors to give careful thought to what they have actually done, it provides an important shortcut for editors and reviewers to use in categorizing the submission, and it provides the busy reader with a useful capsule of the type of study that was performed. Authors are encouraged to consult the worksheets so that they can be sure that their manuscript will contain the necessary information pertaining to their study design.

The study design worksheets go hand in hand with the study design designations, so the worksheets are in the process of being revised. Worksheet #1 (modified CONSORT agreement) for randomized controlled trials has been required since 1996 and is available online. Use of the other worksheets, while strongly recommended, remains voluntary. The chart below provides basic information for selecting the appropriate study design.

*Case-control study design must meet these criteria. If you have simply compared a group of cases and selected a control group, the design is most likely "Comparative case series".

SUBMISSION CHECKLIST

The submission checklist is an aid to both the authors and the editorial office. It assures that the guidelines have been followed prior to submission so that there are fewer delays and returns to authors for missing sections or information required prior to moving a manuscript forward to reviewers. Using it as a guide early in your manuscript writing process will be very helpful.

TABLES

Tables require substantial space; please give careful consideration to the number of tables submitted. The information should not be extensively reiterated in the text. Place the information in the text or in a table but not both.: Each table must be titled and numbered consecutively as mentioned in the text. Each column must have a heading. Terminology used within tables should be able to stand independently, without the requirement of explanation from the text so all abbreviations must be explained in the table legend. Please do not type more than one table per page. References for tables should be included in the main reference list. If unpublished data or abstract need to referenced in a table, place it as a footnote.

TITLE

The title should be meaningful and as brief as possible. No longer than 135 characters. Declarative titles should not be used. Do not use abbreviations/acronyms in titles other than those listed in Abbreviations/Acronyms.

TITLE PAGE of MANUSCRIPT
(see also ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES FOR EVIDENCE-BASED MANUSCRIPTS )

The title page should include the following information.

1) Title: The title should be meaningful and as brief as possible. No longer than 135 characters. Declarative titles should not be used. Do not use abbreviation in titles other than those approved in Abbreviations.

2) Authors: Provide first name, middle initial, last name and no more than two advanced degrees or professional certifications. The Journal does not print society affiliations. Also indicate each author's affiliation during the course of the study in footnotes on the title page using superscript numbers, not symbols (e.g., Ronald Smith¹).

The Journal expects each author to have made a significant intellectual contribution to the research project and/or to the writing of the manuscript. Authors must take full responsibility for their contributions and must have approved the final manuscript. (Lundberg GD, Glass RM. What does authorship mean in a peer reviewed medical journal? ([Editorial] JAMA 1996;276:75). All authors must have made substantial contributions to the intellectual content of the paper and each must fill out the Authorship Criteria Form and forward it to the Corresponding author.

If a Study Group authorship is preferred, without listing one or more individuals on the title page, the individual or individuals (writing committee) responsible for the text must be clearly identified in an appendix or include a reference to previous listing of the members. If the corresponding author is the Study Chair, please state this in the cover letter. If not, please enclose with the cover letter a statement from the Study Chair that the Group Authorship as stated on the cover page and the members of the responsible writing committee as noted are both correct. If the individual members of the study group are listed, then each one must sign the copyright.

3) Meeting Presentation: If the material is under consideration for presentation or has been previously presented, supply the name, place, and date of the meeting. (e.g., the American Academy of Ophthalmology Annual Meeting, November, 2003). This is especially important for AAO Meeting papers as we have first right of refusal on these papers.

4) Financial Support: - Identify all sources, public and private. On the title page please state "Financial Support: None" or Provide the agency name and city, company name and city, fellowship name, and grant number.

If there is financial support provide also one of the two following statements:

The sponsor or funding organization had no role in the design or conduct of this research.
OR
The sponsor or funding organization participated in (list those that are appropriate: the design of the study, conducting the study, data collection, data management, data analysis, interpretation of the data, preparation, review or approval of) the manuscript.

5) Conflict of Interest: - A blanket statement that "No authors have any financial/conflicting interests to disclose" OR "Authors with financial/conflicting interests are listed after references" must appear on the cover page and will be printed at the bottom of the abstract box.

All authors must provide the corresponding author with a financial disclosure form which will be uploaded with submission.

If any commercial connection between any author(s) and the topic may be suspected, authors must make disclosure of any conflict of interest and supply a proprietary interest statement. Each author is expected to disclose any type of financial interest that is related to the manuscript. Authors should disclose any individual or family investments, stock or business ownership exceeding 1% of a company's worth, consulting, retainers, patents, or other commercial interests. The involvement in the marketing of any product, drug, instrument or piece of equipment discussed in the manuscript that could cause, or be perceived to be a conflict of interest should also be disclosed. Mutual funds, retirement accounts, and so forth need not be mentioned. Such disclosure will not affect the review of the manuscript.

6) Running head: The running head, also known as the short title, which appears on the top of each right hand published page of your manuscript, should be no longer than 60 characters.

7) Address for reprints

TRANSMITTAL LETTER

The transmittal letter should include the following information:

1. First and Corresponding Author(s): A letter must accompany each submission to the Editor-in-Chief. It must identify the corresponding author and supply the phone and fax numbers for the corresponding and first author(s). E-mail addresses must also be provided. If a Study Group authorship is used and the corresponding author is the Study Chair, please state this in the cover letter. However, if he/she is not the chair, please enclose with the cover letter a statement from the Study Chair that the Group Authorship as stated on the cover page and members of responsible writing committee, if noted, are both correct.

2. Academy Papers And Posters: The Academy's journal, Ophthalmology, is eager to receive manuscripts based on Annual Meeting presentations. Although speakers are no longer required to submit a manuscript to the Journal; the Academy and the Journal retain an indefinite legal right of first refusal for the primary manuscript based on your paper or poster presentation. You are encouraged to submit a manuscript to the Journal before, during or after the Annual Meeting. Be sure to note in the cover letter that it is an Annual Meeting paper or poster. Since the Journal holds a right of first refusal, these manuscripts can only be submitted elsewhere if the Journal declines to accept them or a waiver is granted from the Editor-in-Chief. Documentation that the manuscript has been declined will be in the form of a "rejection" letter or e-mail from the Journal office granting the waiver. ANY manuscript based on a paper or poster presentation from an Academy Meeting, be sure to select "AAO Meeting Paper" for the document type; DO NOT USE "Manuscript" in these instances.

3. Abstract Exceptions: There are two types of structured abstracts. For most submissions it is the seven section abstract. The only exception is the Evidence Based Study which has a specific format to be followed.

Deletions of required sections in an abstract must be justified in the transmittal letter to the Editor-in-Chief. Please note that during electronic submission, you will be asked to submit the abstract in two places. One copy will go to reviewers (along with the title page) when they are asked if they are willing to review. Be aware that when an abstract is copied and pasted from the manuscript file reformatting may be necessary. You may type your abstract in directly. The other copy of your abstract is the one within the manuscript text.

4. Prior and Repetitive Publication: The Journal will not consider manuscripts that have appeared, in part or in total, in other publications, except in special circumstances approved by the Editor-in-Chief. Likewise, updates of previously published studies that add little data to an existing publication will not be considered. Overlap between patient groups described in serial manuscripts must be acknowledged, and references to previous publications that include the same patients must be provided. Authors uncertain as to whether or not specific data represent prior or repetitive publication should alert the Editor-in-Chief in the transmittal letter and include copies of the publications in question.

The only exception is for AOS theses which, by special arrangement, need to be a condensed version for publication in Ophthalmology and conform to journal formatting. Authors should keep in mind the time needed to review and publish in Ophthalmology as this condensed version must appear in Ophthalmology prior to the full TrAOS publication. Be sure to note in the cover letter that the submission is an AOS thesis.

5. Precedence: Authors who claim precedence for an idea, observation, or therapy are well advised to review existing literature thoroughly and also to include an appropriate disclaimer in the cover letter--"We were unable to find any previous report of this in the literature" or "As far as we are aware, this has not been previously reported." Some widely read journals might not currently be included in databases, such as that of the National Library of Medicine.

6. Request or reason for exclusion of IRB statement, HIPAA statement or clinical trial registration in studies with human subjects or Declaration of Helsinki in animal studies. Please refer to instructions for the "methods" section in the text of your manuscript for guidelines on these important statements.

7. Ghost/Guest Authors
Based on the definition of "guest authorship" as the designation of an individual who does not meet authorship criteria and "ghost authorship" as the failure to designate an individual who has made a substantial contribution to the research or writing of a manuscript (see the paper in JAMA. 2008;299(15):1800-12.), the use of any ghost/guest authors need to be disclosed on the Corresponding Author Declaration Page. If ghost writers were used, prior discussion must occur with the Editor-in-Chief.

The Corresponding Author Declaration Page allows for the following three disclosures:

There are no authors other than those listed on the title page of this manuscript There is a guest author(s) who is not listed as an author. We have recognized that contribution in our acknowledgment section and have their permission to do so. A letter or e-mail confirming this acknowledgement is included with our submission.

There is/are ghost writer(s) and I have discussed this with the Editor prior to submission as outlined in the transmittal letter. The Editor will advise us how this must be disclosed. If we are not willing to disclose this in a manner satisfactory to the Editor we agree to withdraw the manuscript.

TYPES OF SUBMISSIONS

Choose from one of the following types for your submission:

• Manuscript - general manuscripts which don't fall into any of the following categories.
• AAO Meeting Paper - manuscripts written that have or will be presented at an American Academy of Ophthalmology Annual Meeting as poster or presentation. Ophthalmology always has right of first refusal on these manuscripts.
• Evidence Based Study - manuscripts submitted which are the results of evidence based studies and have additional and some different requirements than those of general manuscripts (Additional Guidelines for Evidence-Based Manscripts)
• AAO Product - results of Academy functions such as Ophthalmic Technology Assessments or joint papers with other academies.
• Editorials - papers written at the request of the Editor on specific topics.
• Letters to the Editor - commentaries and critiques by readers of various articles, often with responses from authors.

USERNAME AND PASSWORD

The Elsevier Electronic System (EES) that is used for all manuscript processing hinges on correct e-mail addresses for all authors and reviewers within the system. YOUR USERNAME AND PASSWORD IS THE SAME REGARDLESS OF YOUR ROLE AS AUTHOR OR REVIEWER.

DUPLICATE REGISTRATIONS CREATE SERIOUS PROBLEMS. PLEASE FOLLOW, ACCORDING TO YOUR NEEDS, THE STEPS BELOW TO UPDATE THIS IMPORTANT INFORMATION. BE SURE TO SAVE ANY CHANGES BY CLICKING "UPDATE" OR "SUBMIT" AS APPROPRIATE BEFORE EXITING

IF YOU KNOW YOUR USERNAME AND PASSWORD:

1. Log into the home page (

http://ees.elsevier.com/ophtha/ ) using your user name and password and HIT ENTER
Do not choose a role button.

2. Click on "change details" (top of screen) and review your contact information:
Preferred method of contact should stay on e-mail for everyone.
If you wish you can list two current e-mail addresses as long as you separate them by a semi-colon (e.g., home and office e-mail).
Review/revise your personal classifications as needed and be sure to hit "submit" on that page before exiting. It is generally easier to use the full page view for this listing.
If you agree, be sure "Are you available to review?" at the bottom of the page is checked off as "yes."

3. Change data as needed - Be sure to click "update" on the bottom of the page.

IF YOU DO NOT KNOW YOUR USERNAME AND PASSWORD BUT BELIEVE YOU ARE IN THE SYSTEM:

4. Log into the home page (

http://ees.elsevier.com/ophtha/ )

5. Click on "register" (at top of screen) and fill in your first name, last name and e-mail address. If you are already in the system it will offer to send your username and password to your e-mail address. When you receive it, follow the directions #2 and #3 above.

6. If you have moved within the past year, we suggest you also try putting in your previous e-mail address so that you do not generate duplicate registrations within the system. If your old e-mail is in the system (and it is still accessible to you) click on "register" and follow the steps in #5 above.

IF YOU HAVE NEVER REGISTERED BEFORE IN ANY ROLE:

7. If you have never been in the system in any role (author or reviewer) go to the home page at

http://ees.elsevier.com/ophtha/ click on register and follow the steps provided at the website.

If for any reason you cannot access your information or are not sure if you are in the system, please send an e-mail to vdoyle@jhmi.edu with your first name, last name, city and state or city and country as appropriate and your old and any new -email addresses. The Editorial Office will update your information and then send you an e-mail with your user name and password so you can log in and access your contact data and personal classifications and update as needed.

VIDEO CLIPS

If you opt for to submit a video as an online supplement, add a reference to it in parenthesis at an appropriate place within the the text of the manuscript. Also, add a statement to the title page that should read similar to: "This article contains a video as additional online-only material. The following should appear online-only: Clip 1, Clip 2 and Clip 3" The materials will not appear in the printed version but will be archived with the online version on the publisher's website

http://www.ophsource.com/periodicals/ophtha and accessible through Medline and other online databases.

We do not have video editing software, but a website with useful tips on reducing file size can be found at

http://www.deskshare.com/Resources/articles/dmc_ReduceFileSize.aspx

1. Maximum: 8 minutes total. We recommend several smaller clips that total no more than 8 minutes.
2. Size: no larger than 10 MB for each file
3. File extension types: .MPG (MPEG-1 or 2), .AVI, .MOV
4. Audio commentary, describing what is being shown is highly recommended. Do not use copyrighted music.
5. Within the submission, there must be a brief legend describing the contents of the video and the indicating the viewing order.
6. Video files should be loaded with your submission into the Electronic Submission System. File names should correspond to video legends.
7. On the title page add: "This manuscript contains (number) video clips.
8. Load them into your submission using the "multimedia" file type

4. ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES FOR EVIDENCE-BASED MANUSCRIPTS

The journal is eager to receive evidence-based manuscripts. These papers incorporate a systematic review of the literature and summarize clinical recommendations using the structured format outlined below. Authors interested in submitting these manuscripts are encouraged to correspond with the Editor-in-Chief in advance to be sure that the topic is of interest. The main text of these articles will conclude with summary recommendations for testing or therapy of the clinical problem discussed. Each recommendation will include author-designated and peer reviewed ratings displayed in superscripts (see definitions below) indicating the importance of recommendations to clinical outcome (A, B, C) and the overall strength of evidence of supporting literature (I, II, III). The strength of evidence ratings will be based on author judgment as to the quality and validity of the existing fund of peer-reviewed or other published literature. Authors and co-author methodologists with special expertise in the topic may be recruited by the Journal Editor to write these summary updates.

Authors will be expected to conduct thorough literature searches (systematic reviews) of national and international peer-reviewed publications utilizing available databases and other sources as necessary. In many topic areas no recent high-quality studies may be available, in which case the discussion should emphasize to clinicians what studies are needed and the inadequacy of the evidence that justifies current management.

Completed articles will be reviewed using the usual Journal peer-review process, including author-assigned ratings for the importance of clinical recommendations and the strength of supporting evidence. Publication may be scheduled, after revisions as indicated through peer-review, and articles will be placed in regular forthcoming issues at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

Definitions of Superscript Ratings:
Superscript ratings for clinical recommendations:
"A" indicates that the recommendation is considered very important or crucial to a good clinical outcome
"B" that the recommendation is considered moderately important to clinical outcome
"C" that the recommendation may be relevant but cannot be definitely related to clinical outcome.

Superscript ratings for peer reviewed or other cited evidence:
"I" indicates strong evidence in support of the statement. In general, the study or studies cited used designs which allowed the issue to be addressed, were performed in the population of interest, were executed in a manner to produce reliable and accurate data, and were analyzed using appropriate statistical methods. The study or studies produced either statistically significant differences between control and experimental groups or showed no statistically significant differences, despite a design, which had high statistical power to detect differences and/or narrow confidence limits on the parameters of interest.

Strong evidence includes well-done randomized controlled clinical trials designed to address the issue in question, especially regarding the efficacy of treatment or the superiority of one treatment over another. Well-done meta-analyses (retrospective reviews of previously published randomized controlled trials) may also constitute level "I" supporting evidence.

"II" indicates there is substantial evidence in support of the statement but the evidence lacks some qualities, thereby preventing its justifying the statement without qualification. Deficiencies might include unavailability of well-done randomized trials, or studies lacking other elements of high-quality evidence such as adequate control groups, sufficiently long follow up, good compliance with therapy, or acceptable loss to follow up.

Nonrandomized comparative trials involving sufficient subjects to demonstrate statistically significant differences between study and control groups might provide strong evidence for the efficacy of a therapy. Noncomparative case series or case reports might be justifiably included as strong evidence for linking complications or adverse events to a specific therapy without stating the probability of their occurrence.

Observational studies, including control groups such as Cohort studies and Case-control studies, might provide strong evidence for or against therapy in terms of longitudinal data about disease natural history, outcome of therapy, adverse events, or specific anatomical or functional outcomes. Well-done cross-sectional studies might provide strong evidence for the importance of the clinical problem. Well-done systematic literature reviews or meta-analyses might also provide moderately strong evidence for or against a test or therapy.

Even an otherwise well-done randomized controlled trial dealing with the issue of interest might have been performed using too select a population and may not be clearly applicable to a broader population of interest, or it might have produced only marginally statistically significant differences between control and experimental groups. A large consecutive case series might also fit into this category if it compares outcome only to a historical control group from the same clinical setting.

"III" indicates a weak body of evidence insufficient to provide support for or against the efficacy of a test or therapy and would generally apply to panel consensus or individual opinions, small noncomparative case series, and individual case reports. Noncomparative studies (without controls), cohort studies with variable follow up across the patient population studied, retrospective chart reviews with missing data, or even randomized controlled trials evaluating highly subjective outcome data would be examples of weak forms of evidence.

Authors of evidence-based manuscripts should follow the guidelines outlined in the Instructions for authors unless specifically stated below:

: 1. Title Page
The title should clearly describe the main topic and indicate the manuscript is an evidence-based summary. (Example: Management of nonsymptomatic retinal tears and lattice degeneration: an evidence-based summary.) The title should include the phrase: evidence-based review or evidence-based update.: 2. Précis
The précis should indicate what new insight the article offers or what principal controversy persists.: 3. Structured Abstract
Abstracts for evidence-based manuscripts must be limited to 250 words and include the following five sections:

a. Topic: identify the specific clinical problem and therapy to be evaluated.
b. Clinical relevance: characterize the magnitude/importance of the problem/disorder and define the current standard of care.
c. Methods/literature reviewed: describe the sources of peer-reviewed materials utilized and dates of publication.
d. Results: summarize the materials identified and obvious contrasts with prior and current standards of care.
e. Conclusion: summarize the strength of evidence for the recommended therapy or test.

4. Text
The text should utilize standard Journal formatting as described in Ophthalmology's
Instructions for Authors and be divided into five distinct sections:

a) The introduction/background (unlabeled) should clarify the magnitude of the clinical problem, (prevalence or incidence) and provide perspectives on the importance of its management to patient well-being and quality of life.

b) The Sources and Methods of Literature Search (titled) should identify the databases and/or specific journals searched and the dates of publication. The methodology of the literature search, including criteria utilized for selection and inclusion, should be listed in sufficient detail to permit duplication of the effort. If only poor quality supporting evidence exists, author comments should emphasize this in the discussion, in addition to assigning appropriate overall ratings for the strength of supporting literature.

Suggested sources for literature searches include, for example, PubMed (

http://www.pubmed.com ) and Medical Matrix (

http://www.medmatrix.org ). The Cochrane Library is an additional excellent source of high quality reviews of general medical information, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, including some eye topics (

http://www.cochranelibrary.com ).

c) The Summary of Evidence (titled) should summarize the findings in text or tables.

d) The Clinical Recommendation(s) (titled) should be listed in order of importance, and each separate recommendation accompanied by bracketed superscripts "A,""B," or "C," indicating the author's impression as to its importance to clinical outcome. Superscripts "I,""II," or "III" will also be used to indicate the author's judgment about the overall (average) veracity of supporting literature. When appropriate, recommendations should include typical clinical scenarios. (Example of clinical recommendation and author-designated superscripts: A symptomatic superior horseshoe retinal tear with a cuff of surrounding subretinal fluid should be promptly encircled by several rows of laser burns. [A, I]). Please indicate appropriate crosschecking with AAO products (PPPs, Pro-Vision Series, Focal Points, Basic and Clinical Science Course Books) to avoid or acknowledge inconsistencies in clinical recommendations.

e) References should be limited to the highest quality studies available, regardless of the study type. One set of complete copies of all cited references should be included. Duplicates will be sent to peer reviewers upon request. For reference formatting examples, please go to References and Reference Style Guide

5. REVIEW AND PUBLICATION PROCESS

It is the corresponding author's responsibility periodically to check on the status of their manuscript. An email with a decision will be sent and instruct the corresponding author to go to the online submission site if a resubmission is warranted.

Each manuscript submission will be acknowledged in the order received in the Journal office. The acknowledgment letter will note the number assigned to the manuscript. All subsequent inquiries about the manuscript must indicate the manuscript number. Usually two and sometimes several reviewers will participate in the review of a manuscript. The Journal does not reveal the identity of its reviewers but does send pertinent comments back to the corresponding author. Re-review may be required after revision if, in the judgment of the Editor-in-Chief, sufficient modification of the manuscript or data justifies another review cycle or if one (or both) of the reviewers requested to see the revision. Point by point response is required to the reviewers' comments.

Once a paper is accepted based on scientific content, a "Preliminary Acceptance" letter is generated. This means that the Editors have accepted your paper for publication and it will now process through final format and reference checking. Once returned from the reference checker, another email will advise that either there are some final reference, editorial or format issues for you to address or the manuscript is complete, accepted and has been forwarded on to the publisher.

If the submission is accepted, the corresponding author will receive typeset page proofs online. Each corresponding author is expected to proofread all pages carefully and answer all queries posed by the copy editor. Page proofs should be reviewed by more than one person. All page proofs must be returned to the publisher within 72 hours of receipt to avoid delay in publication. The publisher does not send reminders; responding to the publisher with responses to author queries and requested changes is the corresponding author's responsibility. The Journal reserves final editorial approval for style, format, and grammar.

Any appeals regarding rejection of a manuscript must be made by the corresponding author to the Editorial Office by email prior to resubmitting the manuscript. DO NOT RESUBMIT UNTIL THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT IS RELEASED BACK TO YOU. This is known as initiating rebuttal and is also done via email to the corresponding author. THIS ASSURES THAT THE MANUSCRIPT IS PROCESSED UNDER THE SAME MANUSCRIPT NUMBER, KEEPING THE HISTORY TOGETHER. Occassionally the Editor may suggest that a full length paper that is rejected, for various reasons, might be resubmitted as a Letter to the Editor. In these circumstances, please advise the editorial office of your decision to resubmit so that the original manuscript can be released back to the corresponding author so that the history stays together under the same manuscript number. However, when resubmitting please remember to change the document type from "manuscript" to "MS to LTR". Your letter should generally follow the guidelines for Letters to the Editor , allowing for any exceptions granted by the Editor in Chief.

6. SUBMISSION OF REVISED MANUSCRIPTS

If asked to revise your manuscript, an email that contains the revise decision as well as the reviewer and/or editor comments will be received by the corresponding author. Log into

http://ees.elsevier.com/ophtha/ with your username and password and click on author button. The manuscript will be in the author menu under "submissions needing revision". Separate files can be accessed by clicking on the "download files" button. It is much easier to work from the "downloadable files" than to work from "view submission".

To submit a revised manuscript, first make changes to the text, figures, etc. in the files that you downloaded onto your computer from the website. These will have the contents of what was sent to the journal office originally. In the "revise" notification email there may be mention of our having added to the submission a PDF file with editors track changes or comments. This often is not a complete PDF of the manuscript file but only the pages that were marked by the Editor. Review the PDF and, as appropriate, make changes to the downloaded manuscript file, tables or figures, etc. When all files are revised as needed, go to

http://ees.elsevier.com/ophtha/, log in as an author. Under "Revisions" select "submissions needing revision" and click on "submit revision".

Step by step instructions will guide you through uploading the revised files in place of the old ones. Briefly, in the attach files section there is a listing with check boxes on the right side for mandatory files for a resubmission. Unclick any of those which will be replaced with the revised version recently made on your computer. Leave the boxes checked for those files where no changes from the original submission are needed. For example, a précis often does not change during a revision so that would remain checked and the computer will use the file from the original submission and automatically put the file into the revised version. However, the manuscript file has changed and by unchecking the box the space is being emptied allowing the revised version to be inserted. Click "next" to load your revised files. The point by point response (which should list each comment followed by a response for each reviewer or editor) should be uploaded as the Point by Point Response. The response should explain where changes were made in the text or figures and why, or a defense of your disagreement with the reviewer.

The attached files screen will give you the opportunity to upload the files to which changes were made per reviewers/editors comments. The files that were not unchecked will be forwarded from the original submission and be included in the revised PDF. Be sure to put the files in the correct order.

A final opportunity is provided to review the completed revised version, with all its files, before clicking the final button "submit to journal office." Be sure to read and acknowledge the Ethics in Publishing before your final submit.

IF FOR ANY REASON YOU DECIDE NOT TO REVISE YOUR MANUSCRIPT AND NOT TO FURTHER PURSUE PUBLICATION IN OPHTHALMOLOGY, BE SURE TO GO INTO THE SYSTEM AS AUTHOR AND HIT THE "DECLINE TO REVISE" BUTTON.

REMEMBER:

1) Point by point response is required to editor and reviewers comments.

2) References At first revision (and if you don't see a file called "manuscript after reference check) we ask that you take this opportunity to review the reference format style guide and be sure your references are in the correct format for Ophthalmology.

To expedite processing, if asked to revise your manuscript, be sure to provide a photocopy of the title page (that include publication information-journal name, vol. year, page numbers) of any work cited that was published prior to 1970 in the United States. Also submit the title page for all work cited that was published outside of the United States regardless of year and include for any books referenced, the books copyright page and the first page of any chapters referenced. These can be loaded in a copyright type file titled reference photocopies.

Often at final acceptance stages, the most recent manuscript file submission in the downloadable files section is in a file called "manuscript after reference check." This is the same exact file as you sent us but the reference checker has gone through your references and made changes as needed and possibly added some author queries for you to address. Generally we shall accept the mandatory format changes entered by the reference checker prior to returning the file to you and leave only author queries for your response. If you have duplicate references or for any other reason need to renumber the references and hence the text, we ask that you do this to be sure it is done correctly - only you have the detailed knowledge to do this correctly.

3) Figures Please note any changes to figures in the response letter.

If applicable, the revision letter will provide direction to prepare your figures to meet specific artwork guidelines for the publisher. If you cannot meet these guidelines, contact the editorial office before submitting your revisions. If there are color figures in the submission, please state in your point by point letter that you understand and agree to the following:

The journal provides one free page of color per first author per year.
Any additional images will be charged to the authors starting at $650.

In order to save money on color costs you have a few options:

a) create a composite (multiple figures on a single page - usually not more 6 figures). HOWEVER, be sure that you don't reduce the image too much and lose the integrity of the image. Also be sure to identify each picture (e.g. A, B, C) with a corresponding legend.
b) convert the images to grayscale (e.g. black and white) assuming the information that you are communicating with this figure would still be evident in black and white.
c) convert some figures to "online only supplemental material". If you choose option C you need to insert into the text at the first mention of the supplemental figures "(available at http://aaojournal.org)" and well as a mention on the cover page of which figures are to be online only supplemental materials

The publisher can make composites but is apprehensive in reducing or cropping images. The authors (perhaps with the help of a professional), on the other hand, can creatively reduce and crop images to best communicate the information, e.g. some authors can fit as many as ten images per 8.5 x 11 print. These changes can only be made during the revision and review process. Occasionally, despite our best efforts, formatting requirements may lead to illustration placement on more than one page by the publisher

If a manuscript has been reviewed and accepted with color photos, it must be published with color photos. The author is responsible for page charges for color photos that occupy more than one page, and cannot opt to have them printed in black and white.

If you would like to remove, make a composite, or convert any of your images to black and white, or convert revision is the only time to do so. The criterion generally used is whether color illustration is imperative to conveying the information being illustrated. You can also have non-critical color figures, charts or tables put online as online supplemental materials, at no cost. These would be noted within your text, not printed in the journal and available online. Refer to figures for acceptable figure formats.

4) Authors As with the original submission process, you will be prompted to review your title, type, authors, and abstract. Make changes as needed and save; if no changes are required hit "next". Any changes to authors (including order) must be explained in the cover letter and be accompanied by a new copyright. If anyone is being deleted, a letter with their acknowledgement of this removal should also be provided in the copyright file.

5) Copyright When reviewing the downloadable files be sure there is a copyright file. If there is not then the Editorial office has not yet received your copyright which is required for any further processing of your manuscript. See copyright for further details.

7. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

General: Letters to the Editor should be concise comments focusing on an article published in the Journal within the last six months. The letter should offer alternative perspective, elucidate a flaw in methodology or a perceived misinterpretation of data, addressing no more than two major points. The letters should start with "Dear Editor" and the article being commented on should be referenced in the first paragraph of the letter. Gratuitous comments such as "I commend the author for their fine study" or overly critical remarks are not necessary or appropriate. Letters should end with the name, degree and location(city, state or city, country) for each author. For example Andrew P. Schachat, MD, Baltimore, Maryland.

Format: Letters should be limited to 700 words, double-spaced and no more than five references. Please note that letters do not have tables or figures published with the letter but rather as online supplemental material. The information will not appear in the printed version but will be archived with the online version on the publisher's website www.ophsource.com/periodicals/ophtha and accessible through Medline and other online databases. Therefore, in the appropriate location where you mention your table, graph, figure or chart please insert "(available at http://aaojournal.org)."

Although figures (photos, charts, graphs, tables) are not included in publication, the online version needs to conform to the same requirements regarding legends and identifying all abbreviations in each figure. Copyright forms must be scanned and included with the submission after original signatures are obtained.

Submission: Only the text of the letter and a signed copyright need to be submitted. You can add anything you wish the editor to know in the comments section. The title should be limited to 40 characters. Copyright forms should be scanned as a PDF after original signatures are obtained and uploaded. If you cannot scan an upload, please fax the copyright (443-287-2448) after receipt of the confirmation email from the journal office which provides the manuscript number and be sure it is written on the faxed copyright form(s).

Process: Upon receipt a letter to the editor is reviewed by the Editor in Chief, and, in some instances, by outside reviewers. If the letter is to be accepted for publication, it is forwarded to the corresponding author of the article which it addresses for the opportunity to respond. If the invitation is accepted, both letter and reply are edited and reference checked and published together. If the invitation to reply is declined the original letter will be processed and published by itself. The titles of all letters are limited to 40 characters. If needed, the Editor will create titles to fit this limit.

If anyone should write a Letter to the Editor addressing an article on which you were the corresponding author, you may receive an email Invitation to Reply to a Letter to Editor. It is imperative that you log onto the system as an author and accept this invite immediately and then upload and submit your reply letter within 14 days to the Editorial Office.

Occassionally, you may be told by the Editorial Office that a manuscript is rejected but the option to reformat and resubmit it as a Letter to the Editor is suggested. This can only be done at the Editor's discretion. If you decide to reformat your paper as a Letter to Editor you should send it as a new, separate submission. WHEN UPLOADING, USE THE "MS TO LTR" SELECTION AS THE TYPE OF SUBMISSION. Also be sure in the "Additional Comments" section to advise us of the manuscript number of this original paper you are reformatting so we can make reference to it if necessary. All other Letter to the Editor guidelines (700 words, double-spaced, etc) apply.

8. EDITORIALS

General: A two-page editorial is usually published in each issue of Ophthalmology. Editorials are generally solicited by the Editor- in-Chief, although unsolicited submissions will also be considered. Editorials may deal with clinical or non-clinical topics in summary form and must not exceed 1400 words, including references. Often editorials are linked with a particular manuscript awaiting publication and, therefore, adherence to deadlines is critical and mandatory. Although discouraged, if a figure is absolutely necessary, decrease the word count by approximately 200.

Submission: Only the text of the editorial and a signed copyright need to be submitted - you can add anything you wish the editor to know in the comments section. Figures are generally not included in these types of submissions; however, if figures are used please submit following the same criteria for manuscripts outlined above. Copyright forms must be scanned as a PDF after original signatures are obtained or faxed (443-287-2448) to ensure integrity of signatures, electronic submissions or signatures are not acceptable.

Process: Editorials undergo peer review regardless of whether they are solicited or unsolicited submissions. Once received, an Editorial is assigned a number of which the author is advised. The paper will go through the usual review process, often with some specific insight or guidelines offered to reviewers by the Editor. The author is then advised of any changes which need to be made and references are checked. Upon return of the revised paper, the editor gives his approval and it goes to the publisher.

9. DOWNLOADABLE FORMS

• AUTHORSHIP CRITERIA STATEMENT
• CORRESPONDING AUTHOR DECLARATION FORM
• COPYRIGHT ASSIGNMENT FORM
• FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM
• FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM FOR EVIDENCE BASED AUTHORS
• SUBMISSION CHECKLIST

STUDY DESIGN WORKSHEETS

Worksheet 1: Randomized Controlled Trial

Updated May 2008