Writing for the BJGP
Detailed guidance is given below for a range of article
types. Please note that much of the information in the
Research section (length of title, styles of references)
applies to all types of contributions:
Research
Debate &
Analysis
Clinical
Intelligence
Editorials
Letters & Discussion
Forum
The Review
Research
We have introduced a paper-short/web-long policy for
articles in the research section of the journal: articles are
published in full online, and as two-page summaries in the print
version. Details for the online and print versions are given
here:
Online version
Title. The title should be a clear description of the
topic of the research and the methods used for the study. It should
not exceed 12 words.
Authors. If you put your name to an article you must
fulfil the standard requirements for authorship (see below).
Abstract. All research articles should have a structured
abstract of no more than 250 words. This should be set out with the
following headings: Background, Aim, Design, Setting, Method,
Results, Conclusion.
Keywords. Up to six keywords may be included, which should
be MeSH headings. Please ensure
that 'primary health care', 'family practice', or 'general
practice' are included where appropriate.
‘How this fits in’. Authors are asked to summarise, in no
more than four short sentences, what was known or believed on the
topic before, and what this piece of research adds, particularly
focusing on the relevance to clinicians.
Main text. Articles should follow the traditional format
of Introduction, Method, Results, and Discussion. The text can be
up to 2500 words in length, excluding tables and figures as
described below. Articles may be returned without review if this
guidance is ignored.
Generic names of drugs should be used wherever possible. We
discourage the use of non-standard abbreviations for medical terms,
except where it would otherwise render the text unwieldy.
Introduction. This should be a succinct and up to
date review of the key publications that have informed the
intellectual background to the study. It does not need to be a
systematic review, but it should avoid obviously selective citation
of the literature.
Method. This section should include a description
of setting, patients, intervention, the time that the study took
place, instruments used to measure outcomes, the statistical tests
applied and the software used for analysis. It should also include
any arrangements for data oversight.
Results. This section should contain all the
information required by reviewers and readers to assess the
validity of the conclusions. For quantitative studies, the section
should include details of the response rates and numbers lost to
follow-up, and trials should include a CONSORT flow diagram. See
Specific guidance for
research papers below for more information.
Statistics: results of statistical analyses should be
reported using estimates and confidence intervals whenever possible
to provide indications of magnitude and precision rather than just
P-values. Where P-values are presented, so that
readers can judge the strength of evidence for themselves, the
exact figure should be quoted to two significant figures down to
P = 0.01; any figure below this can be quoted to one
significant figure down to P = 0.001, below which
P<0.001 will suffice. Examples of presentations are
therefore P = 0.66, P = 0.087, P = 0.002, but not
P = 0.0005.
Discussion. Structure the discussion using these
subheadings:
- Summary of main findings
- Strengths and limitations of the study
- Comparison with existing literature
- Implications for future research or clinical practice
Authors are expected to adopt this structure unless there are
good reasons for not doing so. Additional subheadings can be used
if they are likely to help readers understand the paper.
Tables and figures. Up to six tables or figures
are permitted in an article. Close attention should be paid to
ensure clear presentation of data. This will normally mean keeping
the data in each table (and the number of tables) to the minimum
possible. A rough guide would be no more than five columns and rows
in each table. The same general rule applies to figures. We
encourage use of graphic representation of data; please ensure that
original data are also included for the purpose of redrafting where
necessary. Pie charts are discouraged. All figures and tables must
have a caption.
Additional information. At the end of the text and
before the references we ask authors to report:
- Funding body with reference number where appropriate
- Body giving ethics approval with reference number where
appropriate
- Competing interests
- Acknowledgements – authors should include acknowledgements
of all those who have helped with and contributed to the study
(including the patients) who are not authors of the paper.
Individuals should only be acknowledged with their express
permission.
References are presented in Vancouver style,
with standard Index Medicus
abbreviations for journal titles. References to personal
communications in the text should include the date. Please do not
use the footnote/endnote facility on word processors to indicate
references.
Specific guidance for research papers
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Authors submitting
RCTs should follow the revised CONSORT guidelines,
including a completed CONSORT checklist and flowchart of
participants in the trial. Guidance can also be found at
http://jama.ama-assn.org/ifora_current.dtl#SEC14
or JAMA 2004; 291: 125. Authors should also note the difficulty
outlined in making statements about an intention-to-treat analysis.
We acknowledge that this is a difficult area and ask that authors
are candid about handling the data of patients lost to
follow-up.
Systematic reviews. We welcome systematic reviews, with
or without meta-analysis (up to 2500 words plus data presented
in tables/boxes), on areas of interest and importance to
primary care. They should be written in a style suitable for the
Journal but should aspire to the quality standards set by the
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Authors may find it
helpful to consult the instructions for systematic reviews given on
the Cochrane Collaboration website.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses should conform to the
PRISMA
statement. Reviews should include a structured abstract, a
statement of the question that you are attempting to answer and a
description of the search strategy used to answer it. Authors
should attempt to synthesise results of primary care research
either quantitatively or qualitatively.
Qualitative research. Papers describing qualitative
research should conform to the guidance set out in: Murphy E,
Dingwall R, Greatbatch D, et al. Qualitative research
methods in health technology assessment: a review of the
literature. Health Technology Assessment 1998; 2(16): 1-13.
Illustrative quotes should be included in the results section of
the text where the themes are described. Since the quotes are, in a
sense, equivalent to the tables and figures of quantitative papers,
they should be excluded from the word count, so that the limit of
2500 words applies to the text with the quotes removed. To help the
process of counting words, it is acceptable to put the illustrative
quotes in text boxes when submitting a paper for the first time,
but you will be asked to move them into the text as part of the
revision. The size of these boxes should not exceed two pages of
the print journal (1500 words in total).
Diagnostic tests. Authors submitting studies on the
evaluation of diagnostic tests should follow the STARD guidelines.
Print version
On acceptance authors will be asked to write a two-page
(800 words) summary of their research paper which will appear in
the print journal, and the full-length version will be posted, as a
citable publication, on the BJGP website. The abbreviated paper
version should be structured as follows:
- Background: explain what is already known, what the outstanding
questions are, and what this study is designed to answer.
- Method: sufficient detail of the study design, setting, and
planned analysis to convey the essence of the research.
- Results: the main findings of the research summarised in the
text and up to one figure and either one box or one table. In order
to fit the summary onto two pages of the print journal, these
figures should not, together, exceed half a journal page in
size.
- Discussion: set the main findings in context and explain how
they relate to the previous research and existing
knowledge/practice/policy; describe the strengths and limitations
of the study; and state the implications of the study for research,
policy, or practice.
- References will appear in the online version only.
Debate & Analysis (previously 'Discussion papers')
Papers in this section can be up to 2500 words in length.
They need to be a statement of a new idea or controversial matter
where the opinion being expressed is at least partly based on
published evidence. Unlike reviews, there is no obligation for
authors of Debate & Analysis papers to be impartial in citing
the available literature. They should include a non-structured
abstract.
Clinical Intelligence
Clinical Intelligence includes summaries of guidelines, Tips for
GP Trainees, and health technology assessments, most of which are
commissioned, as well as Case Reports. We’re always interested in
new ideas for this section. Potential authors should contact the
editorial office before submitting an article: journal@rcgp.org.uk.
Case reports
Case reports enable everyday experiences to stimulate debate and
education. They should describe a patient or patients with common
diagnoses where the presentation or management has prompted a
question likely to interest the BJGP’s readership, or an unusual
presentation which raises more general issues of diagnosis and
management. The format should be a brief description of the problem
accompanied by a discussion informed by published literature,
citing up to six references. Where possible, the text should follow
the evidence-based medicine format (Sackett DL, Richardson WS,
Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence-based medicine. Edinburgh:
Churchill Livingston, 1997), including a statement of the question
being asked, the search strategy used, and the conclusions drawn
from the papers identified.
They should be approximately 800 words in length, excluding
references, and may include up to two photographic images. It is
essential to obtain permission from any patients whose story is to
be used as the basis for a case report and to maintain patient
confidentiality. A signed statement of informed consent to publish
(in print and online) patient descriptions, photographs, and
pedigrees from all persons (parents or legal guardians for minors)
who can be identified is required. Such persons should be offered
the opportunity to see the manuscript before its submission.
Download the Patient Consent form (PDF
24KB).
Editorials
These are statements of informed opinion and not short
systematic reviews. Most are commissioned, but we also welcome
unsolicited editorials. Authors considering submitting an editorial
should either contact the Editor via the BJGP office and discuss
it, or submit it to journal@rcgp.org.uk so that
we can advise you whether it is likely to be welcomed, and whether
someone else is already working on that topic. Editorials should be
up to 1200 words in length and have no more than 12 references. We
are happy to hear from authors with suggestions for topics we
should cover in an editorial.
Letters & Discussion Forum
Letters can be used to respond to published articles,
report original research, or raise any other matter of interest to
the primary care community. The best letters are brief, lively, and
provocative. They may contain data or case reports, but should be
no longer than 400 words. All letters are subject to editing and
may be shortened. Letters are given DOIs and receive PubMed
listings, and we aim to publish these online ahead of print: these
Fast-Track letters can be viewed via Recent issues. All letters will also be
published on the online Discussion Forum.
Postings directly to the online
Discussion Forum may include responses
to articles in the journal or any other issues of relevance to
primary care. The advantage of posting to the Discussion Forum is
that your comments will published online shortly after submission,
and as long as your comments are relevant and non-defamatory we
will accept these. Comments should be no longer than 500 words.
Letters not published in the Journal
may be posted on the Discussion Forum. If you do not wish your
letter to appear on the Discussion Forum, please notify us when
submitting the letter.
How to submit a Letter or
Discussion Forum posting
Letters can be sent to the BJGP office by email, addressed
to journal@rcgp.org.uk (please
include your postal address). Alternatively, they may be sent by
post. Discussion Forum postings can be made directly to the
Discussion Forum. All readers'
comments will be considered for publication in the Letters section
and Discussion Forum, so readers can submit their comments through
either route. We regret that we cannot notify authors regarding
publication.
The Review (previously the 'Back pages')
Please see our section on Writing for The
Review for more information.
Go to Submissions
Go to Information for authors