Types of Articles
One or more documents on this Web page is available in Portable Document Format
(PDF). You will need Acrobat
Reader (a free application) to view and print these documents.
Following are brief descriptions of the various types of articles
published by Preventing Chronic Disease (PCD). We recommend that
prospective authors of papers that will require peer review read not only the description of the type of article
they plan to submit but also our Peer
Review
Checklists. These checklists present the criteria by which peer
reviewers judge whether or not to recommend publishing a paper.
Original Research
Subject to Peer Review
These articles present important research results of broad significance
to public health professionals. They explain the value of the research to
public health and the meaning of the findings to chronic disease prevention.
A statement indicating that the research was approved by the appropriate
institutional review board (IRB) must accompany every submission of a report on
original research.
We welcome articles from many disciplines as long as the research results are
pertinent to preventing or reducing the effects of chronic disease. Below
are some examples of suitable articles:
- A demonstration of an Internet-based worksite nutrition education
program
- A randomized trial of a behavioral intervention to reduce the effects
of diabetes
- An examination of a program to increase awareness of signs and
symptoms of stroke
- A focus group analysis of older adult perspectives on physical
activity
Use the following subheadings in the abstract: Introduction, Methods,
Results, Conclusion. Use the following subheadings in the body of the paper:
Introduction
Describe clearly the main purpose of the research and the main
hypothesis to be tested or the main question to be answered. Include
information about what is already published on this topic in the science
literature and what your research will add.
Methods
Describe the methods used to conduct the research. For manuscripts that
report studies involving human participants, state explicitly in the Methods
section that an appropriate independent ethics committee or IRB approved the
study protocol or determined that the investigation was exempt from approval
and why. Include details
about the study design (e.g., randomized, case-control, prospective).
Describe how the research and control subjects were selected and the
criteria used to include them in the final cohort or exclude them from
it. Give information about the setting in which the study was conducted
(e.g., rural, suburban, or urban; health care facility, school,
workplace). Describe the planned outcome measures, but do not give
results.
Results
Describe the findings of the study, but do not discuss or interpret
those findings. For quantitative studies, provide 95% confidence
intervals and the level of statistical significance.
Discussion
Interpret and discuss the implications of the study’s primary
conclusions. If appropriate, point out the limitations of the study and
suggest areas for further research.
We encourage the use of photographs, illustrations, short audio or video
clips, public service announcements, interactive pieces, and other
multimedia. Before submitting your manuscript, we suggest
you check it against the Reviewer
Checklist for Original Research (PDF–119K). Articles reporting results of
randomized controlled trials must conform to the standards of the CONSORT
statement, available at www.consort-statement.org.
Number of words: text, no more than 3000 words; abstract, no more than 250
words.
References: no more than 30.
Back to top
Essays and Editorials
Essays are opinion pieces that provide thoughtful discussion of
contemporary issues in public health. They raise issues of interest to
researchers and practitioners, initiate or focus discussion, or propose a
position or consensus statement. Essays
can report on unusual cases or personal experiences, and they may include
figures, tables, slides, or other supporting graphics. Not suitable are
reviews, methods, how-to papers, or responses to specific published papers.
Essays are not subject to peer review.
Editorials are usually solicited, but unsolicited and solicited
editorials follow the same format as essays. Editorials are not subject to
peer review.
Number of words: text, no more than 2000 words; abstract (for
indexing purposes only), no more than 150
words.
References: no more than 12.
Back to top
Special Topics
Subject to Peer Review
Special topics articles include original material, similar to original
research and community case studies, but vary widely in topic and format. Special topics
have included recommendations from the National Expert Panel on Community
Health Promotion; a genomics perspective on the obesity epidemic; a
theoretical interpretation of the population attributable fraction; a
practice-based evaluation of tobacco cessation interventions; and featured abstracts from the 18th National Conference on Chronic
Disease Prevention and Control. Special Topics are subject to peer
review.
Number of words: text, no more than 2500 words; abstract, no more than 150
words.
References: no more than 25.
Back to top
Letters to the Editor
May be subject to Peer Review
This section is intended primarily for comments on articles published
previously in PCD, but letters reporting
original research or case reports are also welcome. Letters must cite
published references to support the writer’s argument. If warranted, journal
editorial staff will solicit a reply from the author of the corresponding
article; both letter and reply may appear in the same issue. Letters require
statements of authorship responsibility and disclosure of conflicts of
interest. They may include a limited number of figures, tables, slides, or
other multimedia support. Letters should not be divided into sections. List
authors and affiliations at the foot of the letter. Letters may be subject
to peer review, and, as with other articles, they will be edited by PCD editors for clarity,
sense, and style. Authors have the right to refuse publication after
editorial revisions have been made. Please note that some
indexing/abstracting services do not include letters in their databases. Before submitting your manuscript, we suggest you check it against the
Reviewer Checklist for Letters to the Editor (PDF–103K).
Number of words: text, no more than 750 words.
References: no more than 6.
Back to top
Reviews
Subject to Peer Review
These articles provide systematic assessments of literature and data
sources pertaining to our Scope of
Interests. Authors should describe
their methods for performing the review, including ways of searching for,
selecting, and summarizing information. Use a structured abstract with the
following headings: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Conclusion. Meta-analyses
also will be considered as reviews. Minireviews provide brief
historical perspectives or summaries of developments in fast-moving areas
(fewer than 2000 words and 40 references). Before submitting your manuscript, we suggest you check it against the
Reviewer Checklist for Reviews (PDF–102K).
Number of words: text, no more than 3500 words; abstract, no more
than 250 words.
References: no limit.
Back to top
Community Case Studies
Subject to Peer Review
These articles describe disease prevention activities such as community
programs, community-based interventions and evaluations, and field
observations. They emphasize the context (community) in which the activity
occurs and should offer special insight and commentary. Simple descriptions
of events such as conferences or health fairs are not suitable for this
category. Community Case
Studies must use the following structure:
Abstract
Use the following subheadings in a structured abstract:
background, context, methods, consequences, and interpretation.
Background
Briefly describe the scientific knowledge on the
disease and the intervention, including a few references. For example, an
article that describes a physical activity program for women might report
the frequency of physical activity by women in the state or in the
community. It might also include examples of other physical activity
programs that were reported as effective for women.
Context
Describe the context of the topic within the community illustrated in your
article; characteristics of the local population; other aspects of the
community that might be relevant to the program described (e.g., economic
base, recreational facilities, common diet, support systems); and the
reasons that the health problem is so prevalent in the community.
Methods
Describe the program, activities, or intervention; provide a timeline.
Describe participant recruitment, staffing skills required, materials used
to educate or reward, and program evaluation.
Consequences
Describe what got better, what got worse, and how health in the community changed. Describe
the barriers or advantages encountered, especially unexpected ones. Include
what was learned through evaluation or field observation, actions taken
on the basis of findings, and how feedback was provided to the community.
Interpretation
Discuss whether the activity was worthwhile and how you would do
things differently next time. Describe how context affects consequences,
and offer advice to other communities interested in setting up a similar
program.
Before submitting your manuscript, we suggest you check it against the
Reviewer Checklist for Community Case Studies (PDF–123K).
We encourage the use of photographs, illustrations, newspaper clippings,
short video or audiotapes (up to 5 minutes), multimedia, or other information that
complements the article and that can be delivered or linked to via the Web.
Number of words: text, no more than 3000 words; abstract, 250 words.
Number of
references: no more than 20.
Back to top
Tools & Techniques: Practical Problem Solving
These are instructional materials for professional development that
focus on the practical application of methods. Sample topics include how to
develop a logic model as a tool for program planning and evaluation; how to
design and implement legal frameworks that can broaden the range of
effective public health strategies; how to use geographic information
systems to assess environmental supports for physical activity; and
how to organize a regional coalition to coordinate efforts to reduce the
public health burden of stroke. These articles are not subject to peer
review.
Number of words: text, no more than 3000 words; abstract, no more than 250
words.
Number of references: no more than 40.
Back to top
Step-by-Step: Making Your Communities Healthier
These articles are intended to provide lay community leaders with
practical information on promoting health in their communities. Authors
may use examples from their own community, but these examples
should illustrate a general point, or “step,” that is likely to work in
readers’ communities. Authors should write these articles in plain language and avoid technical
terms and jargon. In general, we expect that authors of these articles will
be members of the community rather than health care professionals. We encourage the
inclusion of audio/visual/multimedia materials. Insert
references where appropriate.
If selected books for lay audiences are useful, indicate where these
can be found. These articles are not subject to peer review.
The recommended structure is:
Background: Provide a brief description of your organization. When
was it established, and by whom? How is it funded (e.g., private charitable
donations, government funding)? What is your mission? What is your approximate annual budget? How
many staff do you have? Why did you decide to focus on the problem you
chose? Do data support your decision (e.g., from Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, Youth
Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System,
Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results)? Who is the target group audience? Why did you choose the intervention you chose?
Does evidence exist to support your belief that it
will provide the best solution for helping to solve your problem?
Implementation: Describe the program,
budget, and sources of funding.
Impact: What was the reaction of the
community to the program? What worked well?
What could be improved?
Conclusion: What challenges were associated with this
program? If the program is ongoing, what would you modify going
forward? What are future plans for the program? What advice would
you offer to another community interested in implementing this type of
program?
References or reading lists are useful. However, these should be
materials that lay readers can obtain and understand, such as information
readily available on
Web sites or in bookstores or public libraries.
Number of words: text, no more than 2000 words; abstract, 150
words.
Number of
references: no more than 20.
Back to top
Book Reviews
We welcome short reviews (500 to 1000 words) of soon-to-be-released and recently
(within 6 months) published
books on issues related to public health and the prevention of chronic disease.
As part of the evaluation, answer these questions: Who is the intended
audience (e.g., physicians, scientists, public health practitioners, general
public)? What is the author’s purpose for writing the book, and is his or
her argument convincing? Is the factual evidence correct, and does it
support the author’s argument? Does the author present an objective point of
view? Provide an evaluation
of the book’s overall quality relative to similar works, and support any negative or positive comments
with evidence. Please include the name of the book, name of the author, publisher’s
name and location, number of pages, price, and ISBN.
Back to top
Announcements
We welcome brief announcements (25 to 75 words) of events of interest to
our readers. In this section, we also include information (no more than 100
words) about upcoming conferences related to preventing chronic disease.
Announcements should list the topics to be covered during the conference and
may refer readers to a Web site with a full description of conference
activities. These announcements will be put on our Web site within 2 weeks
of approval for publication. All announcements must be submitted through Manuscript
Central.
Back to top
|
