Further information about each of these components can be found in Sections II through VII.
Once a manuscript is submitted through Editorial Manager, the corresponding author will be notified by e-mail.
Concerns about scientific and publication misconduct have necessitated an increased need for transparency and accountability regarding authorship of papers. Prompting authors to attest to their role in developing and writing a manuscript helps to affirm that those individuals who made appropriate contributions to qualify as an author are so-described, and avoids naming someone as an author who did not.
Each individual who wants to be considered for byline authorship must indicate his or her involvement in the manuscript by completing, signing, and submitting the journal’s author agreement form.
All persons who contributed to the work reported in the manuscript, but not sufficiently to be authors, must be acknowledged in a separate paragraph on the title page of the manuscript. All individuals named in the acknowledgments must give written permission to be named. Documentation of that permission should remain in the author’s files unless requested by the editorial office. By signing the journal’s author agreement form, the corresponding author verifies that permission has been obtained from all named persons.
The following statement should appear in the submission’s cover letter, or be uploaded in Editorial Manager as a separate attachment:
As of January 2017, the journal no longer limits the number of authors appearing in the byline of an article. All authors listed in the byline must meet the criteria recommended by the ICMJE (see I.A). For guidance on assignment of authorship, please see "Addressing Authorship Issues Prospectively: A Heuristic Approach" (available at
"Co-first authors" and notes in the manuscript describing the degree of author contribution are not permitted.
A ghost author is someone who participates in one or more of the following–research, data analysis, or writing of a manuscript–but is not named or disclosed in the author byline or acknowledgments.5 Ghost authorship is prohibited by the journal. Authors must disclose whether any manuscript preparation assistance was received—including but not limited to topic development, data collection, analysis, writing, or editorial assistance—and, if so, who provided and who paid for the assistance (see IV.A).
If authorship is attributed to a group or collective, there must be at least one individual name included. List the names of the individuals in the group or collective in an appendix, which will be published online. A reference to the online appendix will appear in the print journal.
Authors may now enter their ORCID identifier in Editorial Manager. Please go to the “Update My Information” page to enter an existing identifier or to register with ORCID (http://orcid.org/).
Continuing Medical Education
First and second authors of articles published in
Obstetrics & Gynecology are eligible to receive 10 Category 1 continuing medical education credits per article for one article per year.* To receive credit, please e-mail your request with a copy of the published article to
* The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
B. Clinical Trial Registration
Obstetrics & Gynecology complies with the ICMJE requirement that clinical trials be registered in a public trials registry at or before the time of first patient enrollment in order to be considered for publication.6,7,8 Registries approved by the ICMJE are ClinicalTrials.gov or any registry that is a primary register of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP;
Randomized controlled trials that are not registered at or before the time of the first patient enrollment will be editorially rejected without peer review.
Randomized controlled trials that are about behavioral interventions are also required to be prospectively registered.
Provide the trial registry name and URL and the registration number at the end of the abstract.
In the cover letter, the corresponding author must attest to registering the trial and that the protocol they are reporting to
Obstetrics & Gynecology is identical to the posted trial and, if not, precisely where and why it varies. Any changes in protocol should also be discussed in the manuscript itself as well as documented on the trials registry web site. We also encourage you to complete the clinical trials registry information by documenting completion and entry of data.
If you cannot provide this information and wish to be considered for an exception, please contact the Editor directly via e-mail prior to submitting your manuscript (email@example.com).
C. Compliance with NIH and Other Research Funding Agency Accessibility Requirements
A number of research funding agencies now require or request authors to submit the postprint (the article after peer review and acceptance but not the final published article) to a repository that is accessible online by the public without charge. As a service to our authors, the journal’s publisher, Wolters Kluwer, will identify to the National Library of Medicine articles that require deposit and will transmit the postprint of an article based on research funded in whole or in part by the National Institutes of Health, Wellcome Trust, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, or other funding agencies to PubMed Central. The author agreement form provides the mechanism.
D. Database Validation
In order for an administrative database study to be considered for publication in
Obstetrics & Gynecology, the database used must be shown to be reliable and validated. In your cover letter, please tell us who entered the data and how the accuracy of the database was validated. This same information should be included in the Materials and Methods section of the manuscript.
E. Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interests
On submission, the author(s) must identify potential conflicts of interest of a financial or other nature. Authors should err on the side of full disclosure and provide as much information as possible, regardless of dollar amount.
- Identify all sources of financial support of the study, including provision of supplies or services or financial compensation (eg, salary) from a commercial organization on the title page.
- All sponsor names must be provided. Include an explanation of any role the sponsor(s) had in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; the decision to submit the report for publication; or a statement that the sponsor(s) had no such involvement.
- Disclose any financial involvement that could represent potential conflicts of interest by checking the appropriate box on the author agreement form and listing the potential conflicts in an attachment to the author agreement form.
F. Industry-Sponsored Research
Obstetrics & Gynecology follows the Good Publication Practice (GPP3) for manuscripts that report results that are supported or sponsored by pharmaceutical, medical device, diagnostics and biotechnology companies.9 The GPP3 is designed to help individuals and organization maintain ethical and transparent publication practices. For publication purposes, the portions unique to industry-sponsored research are reprinted below, and adherence to them should be specifically noted in the cover letter and manuscript:
- All authors should have access to relevant aggregated study data and other information (for example, the study protocol) required to understand and report research findings.
- The authors should take responsibility for the way in which research findings are presented and published, be fully involved at all stages of publication and presentation development, and be willing to take public responsibility for all aspects of the work.
- Author lists and contributorship statements should accurately reflect all substantial intellectual contributions to the research, data analyses, and publication or presentation development. Relevant contributions from persons who did not qualify as authors should also be disclosed.
- The role of the sponsor in the design, execution, analysis, reporting, and funding (if applicable) of the research should be fully disclosed in all publications and presentations of the findings. Any involvement by persons or organizations with an interest (financial or nonfinancial) in the findings should also be disclosed.
- All authors and contributors should disclose any relationships or potential competing interests relating to the research and its publication or presentation.
G. Institutional and Ethical Approval
All studies should follow the principles set forth in the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2013, and manuscripts should be approved by the necessary authority before submission. Applicable original research studies should be reviewed by an institutional review board (IRB).10 This review should be documented in your cover letter as well in the Materials and Methods section, with an explanation if the study was considered exempt. If your research is based on a publicly available data set approved by your IRB for exemption, please provide documentation of this in your cover letter by submitting the URL of the IRB web site outlining the exempt data sets or a letter from a representative of the IRB. In addition, insert a sentence in the Materials and Methods section stating that the study was approved or exempt from approval. In all cases, the complete name of the IRB should be provided in the manuscript.
During consideration of a manuscript, it may become necessary to examine original source documents such as signed consent forms, IRB minutes, research data books or logs, and statistical calculations. If the Editor requests any such material, and the author is unable or unwilling to produce it, the manuscript will be withdrawn.
H. Language-Editing Services for Authors
To prevent confusion among our readers and reviewers, manuscripts submitted to the journal must be written in grammatically correct formal English.
The journal's publisher, Wolters Kluwer, in partnership with Editage, offers editorial services to help authors prepare a submission-ready manuscript. These editorial services range from a complete language, grammar, and terminology check to intensive language and structural editing of academic papers. They also include translation with editing, plagiarism check, and artwork preparation. For more information regarding Wolters Kluwer Author Services, please visit http://wkauthorservices.editage.com.
Listed below are other companies that provide language and copyediting services.
Note that appearance in the list of vendors does not represent endorsement by the publisher or journal. Authors are encouraged to investigate each service on their own, as well as seek out additional vendors offering similar services. Costs for these services are the responsibility of the author.
I. Permissions and Releases
Tables and figures should be original. The use of borrowed material (eg, lengthy direct quotations, tables, or figures) is discouraged, but should it be considered essential, written permission of the copyright holder must be obtained by the authors and credit to the original source indicated. Permission is also required for material that has been adapted or modified from another source. Both print and electronic rights must be obtained. A template for use in obtaining permission can be found at
http://ong.editorialmanager.com. Authors must include this documentation with the submitted manuscript (eg, by uploading scanned copies of forms or by e-mailing the forms to the editorial office). In addition, authors must list any material included in your submission that is not original or that you are not able to transfer copyright for in the space provided under I.B on the first page of the author agreement form.
A signed consent form must be obtained from each patient described in a case report. In all cases (photograph or video) in which a human image is shown (in part or whole), written consent must also be obtained. A sample form is available online at
http://edmgr.ovid.com/ong/accounts/release.pdf. It is preferable to give the patient the opportunity to read the manuscript. Please state in the cover letter with your submitted manuscript that you have obtained a signed consent form and that this form will be filed with your records. Unless the editorial office requests that you do so, please do not submit the signed form to the journal.
Plagiarism is the act of presenting “as new or original an idea or product derived from an existing source.”11 The editorial staff now checks all potentially acceptable manuscripts for plagiarism by using the CrossCheck/iThenticate software, which compares the manuscript to material uploaded to CrossCheck’s own database, articles published on PubMed, and text appearing on the Internet. Manuscripts that are to be rejected usually are not checked for plagiarism unless a reviewer has raised concerns about the manuscript.
Please note that CrossCheck/iThenticate also checks for self-plagiarism or redundancy. Authors should be careful to rework and cite text from their previously published works.
If the Editors of
Obstetrics & Gynecology discover plagiarism in a submitted or published article, the journal will follow the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics for addressing this type of misconduct.1, 12, 13
K. Presentation at Meetings
The journal will consider a complete report that follows presentation at a scientific meeting (eg, abstract or poster). Researchers who present their work at such a meeting may discuss their presentations with the media. However, offering more detail about the study than was presented in the abstract or poster (eg, providing additional data or copies of tables and figures) is prohibited.9 Indicate such presentations on the title page by providing the full name of the meeting, as well as the city, state, and dates. If your submission to the journal could conflict with a future scientific meeting presentation, please notify the editorial office so that the journal does not unintentionally break the meeting's embargo.
L. Previous Submission
Original submissions will be considered for publication with the understanding that they are contributed solely to
Obstetrics & Gynecology.
If a version of the manuscript has previously been submitted for publication to
Obstetrics & Gynecology, include comments from the peer reviewers and an indication of how the authors have responded to these comments. Manuscripts that are resubmitted to
Obstetrics & Gynecology without a cover letter addressing the previous peer reviewers’ comments will be returned to the author.
If any of the material in the manuscript (other than an abstract of not more than 300 words) is submitted or planned for publication elsewhere in any form (including electronic media), or if the information appeared in a previous publication, identify the other submission in the cover letter and include a copy of that publication. This does not apply to documented materials from other sources such as quotations, figures, and tables. Failure to comply with this stipulation may lead to a judgment of redundant publication. Authors found responsible for redundant publication may be barred from submitting manuscripts for up to 3 years; furthermore, a statement identifying the nature and source of the redundant publication may be printed in the journal.
M. Reporting Guidelines
Responsible reporting of research studies, which includes a complete, transparent, accurate and timely account of what was done and what was found during a research study, is an integral part of good research and publication practice and not an optional extra.
Obstetrics & Gynecology supports initiatives aimed at improving the reporting of health research. We ask authors to use the following guidelines when drafting their manuscripts:
- CONSORT6 (for reporting randomized controlled trials): Please submit a copy of the CONSORT checklist, available at
http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/consort/, and indicate the page number where the required information is provided.
- STROBE15,16 (for reporting observational studies): Please submit a copy of the STROBE Checklist, available at
http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/strobe/, and indicate the page number where the required information is provided.
- PRISMA17 (for reporting meta-analyses and systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials): Please submit a copy of the PRISMA Checklist, available at
http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/prisma/, and indicate the page number where the required information is provided.
- PRISMA for harms18 (for reporting harms in systematic reviews, whether harms are a primary or secondary outcome). Please submit a copy of the PRISMA harms checklist, available at
http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/prisma-harms/, and indicate the page number where the required information is provided.
- STARD19 (for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy): Please submit a copy of the STARD Checklist, available at
http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/stard/, and indicate the page number where the required information is provided.
- MOOSE20 (for reporting meta-analyses and systematic reviews of observational studies): In your cover letter, please describe how you followed the MOOSE guidelines, available at
- CHEERS21 (for reporting economic evaluations of health interventions): Please submit a copy of the CHEERS checklist, available at
http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/cheers/, and indicate the page number where the required information is provided. Of particular importance to articles submitted to
Obstetrics & Gynecology are the following items on the checklist:
- Item 15 (choice of model): Please justify the model used, describe the software, and provide a figure showing a summary of the model. The figure should clearly show how the various factors or processes lead to the outcome of interest.
- Items 16 and 18 (assumptions): Please include a Table citing all assumptions of parameter values, with justification from either references or a footnote explaining the rationale for that value. In addition, please include a description of and justification for the range of values around the parameter estimate.
- SQUIRE 2.022 (for reporting on quality improvement in health care): Please submit a copy of the SQUIRE 2.0 checklist, available at
http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/squire/, and indicate the page number where the required information is provided.
As noted above, we ask authors to address all items recommended by the guidelines (as a minimum); where this is not possible please provide an explanation in the text to give a transparent account of your study. If there are items on the checklist that you cannot attest to, please itemize these in your cover letter with an explanation. For manuscripts that require reporting guidelines, a checklist or explanation in the cover letter must accompany the submission. The manuscript will be returned to the author if this information is not included in the initial submission. Adherence to recommended reporting guidelines will facilitate review of your manuscript, increase the probability of its successful publication, and improve the usability of research findings from your study in further research and clinical practice.
N. Survey Response Rates
The editors of Obstetrics & Gynecology rarely accept a survey study with a response rate of less than 60%. A response rate below 60% increases the risk of a sampling error that can result in irretrievably biased survey estimates. The journal frequently makes exceptions for outstanding studies, particularly when non-responders have been well-characterized and there is clear evidence that non-response is not linked to the information sought in the survey. The authors need to demonstrate that respondents were representative of all those who were eligible to take the survey.
Back to top
II. ARTICLE FORMATS
Several types of articles can be submitted for publication in
Obstetrics & Gynecology: Original Research, Case Reports, Systematic Reviews, Current Commentaries, Executive Summaries, Consensus Statements, Guidelines, Procedures and Instruments, Clinical Practice and Quality, Personal Perspectives, and Letters. Select article types, such as Editorials and Clinical Expert Series articles, are solicited by the Editors. Stated page limits in II.A–H include all numbered pages in a manuscript (ie, title page, précis, abstract, text, references, tables, boxes, and figure legends). Author agreement forms, checklists, the cover letter, and figures do not contribute to the page limits. See also
Table 1. Manuscript Length At A Glance
Manuscript Word Count*
Maximum Number of Authors
Maximum Number of References†
5,500 words (~22 pages)‡
2,000 words (~8 pages)
6,250 words (~25 pages)
3,000 words (~12 pages)
Executive Summaries, Consensus Statements, and Guidelines
Procedures and Instruments
2,000 (~8 pages)
Clinical Practice and Quality
5,500 (~22 pages)
3,000 words (~12 pages)
~, approximately; NA, not applicable.
* Manuscript length includes all numbered pages in a manuscript (ie, title page, précis, abstract, text, references, tables, boxes, figure legends, and appendixes). Manuscript pages should be double-spaced.
† Suggested limit.
‡ The Introduction should not exceed 250 words; the Discussion should not exceed 750 words.
§ Authors should attempt to be concise and limit the page length and number of references to what is required to sufficiently discuss the topic.
||References are generally not needed in Personal Perspectives articles.
A. Original Research
An original research article is a full-length report of an original basic or clinical investigation. Length should not exceed 5,500 words (approximately 22 manuscript pages;
see Table 1).
1) Abstract: Original research reports should have a structured abstract of no more than 300 words, using the following headings:
Objective: Main question, objective, or hypothesis (single phrase starting with, for example, “To evaluate...” or “To estimate.” [never start with “To determine.”]).
Methods: Study design, participants, outcome measures, and, in the case of a negative study, statistical power.
Results: Measurements expressed in absolute numbers and percentages, and when appropriate indicate relative risks or odds ratios with confidence intervals and level of statistical significance; any results contained in the abstract should also be presented in the body of the manuscript, tables, or figures.
Conclusion: Directly supported by data, along with clinical implications.
Clinical Trial Registration: Registry name, URL, and registration number (if applicable).
Note that abstracts for randomized controlled trials should be structured similarly to the provided example (see
http://edmgr.ovid.com/ong/accounts/sampleabstract_RCT.pdf) and should include the primary outcome and sample size justification in the Methods. The Results should begin with the dates of enrollment to the study, a description of demographics, and the primary outcome analysis.
2) Headings: Organize original research reports in a manner similar to their structured abstract.
Introduction: Orients the reader to the problem(s) addressed by the report, preferably in one page or less, and clearly states the purpose or objective of the research. Avoid a detailed literature review in this section.
Materials and Methods: Describes the research methodology in sufficient detail so that others could duplicate the work. This section should state that an appropriate IRB approved the research (or that the research was exempt from approval) and that the participants gave informed consent. In all cases, the complete name of the IRB should be provided in the manuscript. Identify methods of statistical analysis and, when appropriate, state the basis (including alpha and beta error estimates) for their selection. Cite any statistical software programs used in the text. Express P values to no more than three decimal places. Indicate your study’s power to detect statistical difference. For administrative database studies, identify who entered the data and describe how the accuracy of the database was validated.
Results: Presents the findings in appropriate detail. Tables and figures may be used, but take care to minimize duplication between text and tables or figures. Both clinical studies (observational or randomized) must include a flow diagram describing patient accrual or inclusion. Authors should report outcome data as both absolute and relative effects since information presented this way is much more useful for clinicians. Actual numbers and percentages should be given in addition to odds ratios or relative risk. When appropriate, number needed to treat for benefits (NNTb) or harm (NNTh) should be supplied.23,24 When comparing the cost of two procedures, please express the outcome of the comparison in dollar amounts.
Discussion: Begin with a description of what your study found in relation to the purpose or objectives as stated in the Introduction. Describe rather than repeat results given earlier. Your findings should be compared to previous studies with explanations in cases where they differ, although a complete review of the literature is not necessary. Comment on the limitations of your study. Clearly state the importance of these findings to clinicians and actual patient care. Although some degree of speculation as to the importance of the observations is permissible, avoid making conclusions unrelated to the data presented. Primacy claims purporting that your study is the first or largest of its type should either be supported by a description of your search strategy or omitted. A final summary is not necessary, as this information should be provided in the abstract and the first paragraph of the Discussion. Although topics that require future research can be mentioned, it is unnecessary to state that “further research is needed.” The Discussion should not exceed three pages in length.
B. Case Reports
A case report is a brief description of up to three cases of a particular condition that reports an unusual case presentation or novel diagnostic or therapeutic approach. Length should not exceed 2,000 words (approximately 8 manuscript pages;
Table 1).Write the case in a way that preserves the confidentiality of the participants. The report should have a clear purpose and teaching point; simply being the first case reported does not usually justify publication.
1) Abstract: Case reports should have a structured abstract of no more than 125 words, using the following headings:
Background: Importance of the subject matter and specific purpose of the report.
Case(s): Summary of pertinent features of the clinical findings, important laboratory abnormalities, treatment, and outcome.
Conclusion: Summary of the principal finding and why it is unique or worthy of mention, indicating relevance to clinical practice.
2) Teaching Points: Please include a list of one to three lessons for clinical management that derive from your manuscript.
3) Headings: Case report articles have three basic components:
Introduction: Gives a brief background about why the case is important.
Case(s): Describes the case(s) in a narrative format and includes the essential findings and patient management.
Discussion: Includes a brief review of the literature but focuses primarily on the clinical implications of the case(s) presented.
C. Systematic Reviews
A systematic review article is a comprehensive review of publications relating to a specific clinical subject accompanied by critical analysis and conclusions. For author-initiated papers, we only accept systematic reviews and meta-analyses. If you are considering submitting a general review (not a systematic review or meta-analysis), please contact the editor first at
Authors must search, at minimum, MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov). The manuscript should not exceed 6,250 words (approximately 25 pages;
see Table 1). Systematic review articles must follow the PRISMA17,18 or MOOSE20 guidelines (http://ong.editorialmanager.com) and the appropriate checklists and flow diagrams must be submitted, as applicable.
1) Abstract: Systematic review articles should have a structured abstract of no more than 300 words, using the following headings:
Objective: Statement of purpose of the review.
Data Sources: Sources searched, including dates, terms, and constraints.
Methods of Study Selection: Number of studies reviewed and selection criteria.
Tabulation, Integration, and Results: Guidelines for extracting data, methods of correlating, and results of review.
Conclusion: Primary conclusions and their clinical applications.
2) Headings: Review articles should be organized in a manner similar to their structured abstract.
Introduction: Indicates why the topic is important and states the specific objective(s) of the review.
Sources: Identifies what was searched and how; if a computerized system was used, specify the dates searched, the language(s) covered, and the search terms used.
Study Selection: Identifies the number and nature of reports reviewed, the basis of any selection (ie, exclusion and inclusion criteria), and the reports in the final tabulation.
Results: Describes how observations across studies were tabulated and integrated into a cohesive whole.
Discussion: Includes what can be concluded from the exercise, along with clinical implications and need for additional research.
D. Current Commentary
Current Commentary essays address issues, opinions, experiences, or perspectives of clinical relevance to the field of obstetrics and gynecology and obstetrician–gynecologists. Length should not exceed 3,000 words (approximately 12 manuscript pages;
Table 1). The abstract should be a single paragraph that states what was done, what was found, and what the findings mean. Headings are not necessary in the body of the article but may be used if needed.
E. Executive Summaries, Consensus Statements, and Guidelines
Executive summaries, consensus statements, and guidelines should be submitted as drafted by their respective author groups or organizations. Authors should attempt to be concise and limit the page length to what is required to sufficiently discuss the topic. The abstract should be a single paragraph that states what was done, what was found, and what the findings mean. Headings are not necessary in the body of the article but may be used if needed.
F. Clinical Practice and Quality
A Clinical Practice and Quality study article is a full-length report of the implementation of research findings into clinical practice, assessment of a change in clinical practice methods on outcomes, or a focused description of a quality improvement or a quality assessment program. Quality improvement and quality assessment studies are initiatives within a clinical unit or health care system that are designed to improve health care in terms of one or more of the aims for the health care system put forth by the Health and Medicine Division of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine): safe, effective, patient-centered, timely, efficient, and equitable.
The article's length should not exceed 5,500 words (approximately 22 manuscript pages; Table 1). The Introduction and Discussion should not exceed 250 words and 750 words, respectively.
If the IRB at your institution does not require approval of quality improvement studies for either the performance or reporting of the results, please submit a copy of this decision by your IRB. Otherwise, please provide the name of the IRB that approved your study and include it in the methods section. For quality studies, the SQUIRE 2.0 reporting guideline22 is recommended (http://www.equator-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/SQUIRE-2.0-checklist.pdf), and a completed checklist should be submitted.
Abstract: Articles that focus on clinical practice should have a structured abstract of no more than 300 words, using the following headings:
Objective: A single phrase stating the primary objective, question or hypothesis starting with, for example, "To evaluate" or "To estimate."
Methods: Describes the clinical setting, the intervention(s) or practice pattern(s) studied, study design and power calculations if appropriate, participants, and outcome measures.
Results: Reports observed associations between the interventions and relevant contextual elements and the primary outcome(s), and important secondary outcomes when appropriate. Provides measurements expressed in absolute numbers and percentages and when appropriate indicates relative risks or odds ratios with confidence intervals and level of statistical certainty. Any results contained in the abstract should be also be presented in the body, tables, or figures of the manuscript.
Conclusion: Describes key findings or conclusions. Is directly supported by the data. Provides clinical implications when appropriate.
Headings: Clinical practice study reports should be organized in a manner similar to the structured abstract.
Introduction: Orients the reader to the clinical setting and research finding(s) implemented into practice or the clinical practice method being assessed. Ends with a clearly stated primary outcome or hypothesis, followed by secondary outcomes if appropriate. Avoid a detailed literature review in this section.
Materials and Methods: States the type and time-frame of study of the study and describes the research methodology in sufficient detail so that others could duplicate or adapt the work to their settings. This section should state that an appropriate IRB approved the work or determined the work to be exempt. If it was exempt from IRB approval, state the reason why. In all cases, the institutional affiliation of the IRB should be provided. Identify methods of statistical analysis and when appropriate, state the bases (including alpha and beta error estimates) for their selection. Cite any statistical software programs used in the text. Express
P values to no more than three decimal places. Where appropriate, indicate the study's intended power to detect statistical differences in the primary outcome, and pre-specified key secondary outcomes. For studies that include data obtained from administrative database, identify who entered the study and how the accuracy of the database was validated.
Results: Presents the findings in appropriate detail. Tables and figures may be used and should be able to be understood on their own; duplication between these and the text should be minimized. Actual numbers and percentages should be given in addition to odds ratios or relative risks. When appropriate, number needed to treat for benefit (NNTb) or harm (NNTh) should be supplied.
Discussion: Begins with a description of, without detailed repetition of, what the submitted study found in relation to the study's primary outcomes first, followed by any secondary outcomes. Describes, but does not repeat, the results. Describes how the research implementation or clinical practice change affected care, costs, workflow, or satisfaction for patients, providers, or the health care system(s). The discussion should compare the study's findings with those of previous relevant studies, with explanations in cases where they differ; avoiding a complete review of the literature. Primacy claims indicating that the study is the "first" or "largest" should be avoided, unless supported by a description of the search strategy to support the claim. A final summary is not necessary.
Quality Improvement and Assessment1) Abstract
: Articles describing quality improvement and quality assessment should have a structured abstract of no more than 300 words, with the following headings:
Objective: Describes the nature and significance of the local problem and the purpose of the project and this report (in no more than two sentences).
Methods: Describes the clinical setting, intervention(s), approach chosen, measures for reporting the processes and results, and analytic methods.
Results: Reports observed associations between the interventions and relevant contextual elements and the primary outcome(s), and important secondary outcomes when appropriate. Provides measurements expressed in absolute numbers and percentages and when appropriate indicates relative risks or odds ratios with confidence intervals and level of statistical certainty. Any results contained in the abstract should be also be presented in the body, tables, or figures of the manuscript.
Discussion: Describes key findings or conclusions. Is directly supported by the data. Provides clinical implications when appropriate.
Headings: Quality improvement and quality assessment studies should be organized in a manner similar to the structured abstract and should use elements found in the SQUIRE 2.0 reporting guideline.22 A completed checklist should be submitted.
Introduction: Describes why the study was performed and includes the nature and significance of the local problem, the framework used to explain the problem, and the assumptions used to develop the intervention. This should be one page or less and should end a clearly stated purpose of the project with a clearly stated primary outcome or hypothesis. Avoid a detailed literature review in this section.
- Materials and Methods: Describes the contextual elements such as the clinical setting (eg, inpatient versus outpatient, size of unit, purpose of the clinical setting, number and type of staff and patients, hospital vs non-hospital setting), and time-frame of study. Describes the intervention in sufficient detail so that others could adapt the work to their settings, and describes the specifics of the team involved. Describes the measures for studying the processes and outcomes, data collection, and analytic methods. Identifies methods of statistical analysis and when appropriate, states the bases (including alpha and beta error estimates) for their selection. Cite any statistical software programs used in the text. Express
P values to no more than three decimal places. Where appropriate, indicate the study's intended power to detect statistical differences in the primary outcome, and pre-specified key secondary outcomes. For studies that include data obtained from administrative database, identify who entered the study and how the accuracy of the database was validated. This section should state that an appropriate IRB approved the work or determined the work to be exempt. If it was exempt from IRB approval, state the reason why. In all cases the institutional affiliation of the IRB should be provided in the manuscript.
Results: Reports the initial steps of the intervention and their evolution over time; details of the process measures and outcomes in appropriate detail. Tables and figures may be used and should be able to be understood on their own; duplication between these and the text should be minimized. Actual numbers and percentages should be given in addition to odds ratios or relative risks. When appropriate, number needed to treat for benefit (NNTb) or harm (NNTh) should be supplied. The report should include information regarding unintended outcomes and details about missing data. Finally, address racially equitable outcomes.25
- Discussion: Describes the key findings, relevance to the rationale and specific aims of the study and particular strengths of the study. Describes the associations between the intervention and the outcomes and considers the approach used to establish whether or not a cause-effect relationship was established. The discussion should compare the study's findings with those of previous relevant studies with explanations in cases where they differ; avoiding a complete review of the literature. Primacy claims indicating that the study is the "first" or "largest" should be avoided, unless supported by a description of the search strategy to support the claim. Considers outcomes in terms of the framework for quality assessment from the Health and Medicine Division of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine). Considers the costs and strategic trade-offs involved in the intervention and the limitations of study, including generalizability, and how the achieved gains can be sustained or spread to other contexts in the current or other settings. Includes ethical aspects of thework and how these were addressed. A final summary may suggest next steps if appropriate.
G. Procedures and Instruments
Procedures and Instruments articles detail novel methods or applications of methods, treatments, interventions, instruments, or applications of instruments for clinical care or research in obstetrics and gynecology. Length should not exceed 2,000 words (approximately 8 manuscript pages;
Table 1). Authors are strongly encouraged to include a video suitable for posting on the
Obstetrics & Gynecology web site.
1) Abstract: Procedures and Instruments articles should have a structured abstract of no more than 200 words, using the following headings:
Background: Information as to why the technique may be important.
Technique (choose one): A summary description of what is being reported.
Experience: A summary of the author’s experience with the technique.
Conclusion: A simple statement of what can be concluded from the report.
2) Headings: Procedures and Instruments articles have four components:
Introduction: Outlines the need for the new development.
Technique (choose one): Describes the innovation, usually with illustrations and video.
Experience: Reports experience with the technique and what the general outcomes were.
Discussion: Describes the implications of the findings.
H. Personal Perspectives
Personal Perspectives essays offer insights into the practice of medicine, with an emphasis on the unique physician–patient relationship. Essays from various viewpoints— physician, nurse, patient—are welcome. A short essay for light reading addressing a topic pertinent to the discipline, including humor or satire, is also appropriate for this section. Poetry m ay also be considered. Length should not exceed 3,000 words (approximately 12 manuscript pages; Table 1). Abstracts are not included in this feature, and headings are not needed in the body of the article.
Letters posing a question or challenge to an article appearing in
Obstetrics & Gynecology within 8 weeks of the article’s print publication will be considered for publication. Letters received after 8 weeks will rarely be considered. Letters addressing official documents of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (eg, Committee Opinions or Practice Bulletins) should be submitted directly to the College’s Practice Department (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Submit letters through the Internet at
http://ong.editorialmanager.com (Editorial Manager). Letters are limited to a maximum of 350 words, including signatures and 5 references. A word count should be provided. A corresponding author should be designated. All authors’ full names, degrees, and affiliations (including city, state, and country) should be included. The corresponding author’s address, telephone number, and e-mail address should appear at the end of the letter. A signed author agreement form is required from all authors before publication.
Letters will be published at the discretion of the Editor. The Editor may send the letter to the authors of the original paper so their comments may be published simultaneously. The Editor reserves the right to edit and shorten letters.
Back to top
III. STAND-ALONE VIDEO GALLERY
The editors encourage the submission of videos for inclusion in the journal’s stand-alone video player. These videos will undergo review before being posted online, and authors must sign the journal’s author agreement form.
If you are interested in submitting a video for consideration, please submit your written proposal to the editorial office at
Back to top
IV. MANUSCRIPT STRUCTURE
All manuscripts must be submitted as Microsoft Word (.doc or .docx) or Open Document word processing (.odt) files. All manuscript pages (including references, tables, and figure legends) must be double-spaced. Use a standard, 12-point typeface such as Times New Roman or Arial. Top, bottom, and side margins should be set at 1 inch. The first author’s name should appear in the header on each page, and each page and line must be numbered consecutively, beginning with the title page. The use of subheadings is discouraged in all but the most complex of papers. Footnotes are not allowed except in tables or figures. For direct quotations, acknowledge the author and source. Authors must include the following in the manuscript file:
A. Title Page
The title page should list:
- The manuscript title, which should contain no more than a total of 100 characters (counting letters and spaces) and should not be declarative or pose a question; do not use abbreviations or commercial names in the title.
- All author name(s), institutional, corporate, or commercial affiliations, and up to two major degree(s).
- Corresponding author’s name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address (the corresponding author will be responsible for all correspondence and other matters relating to the manuscript).
- Source(s) of the work or study.
- Disclosure of any source of financial support of the study, including provision of supplies or services from a commercial organization (see
section I.E for more information).
- Disclosure of funding received for this work from any of the following organizations: National Institutes of Health, Wellcome Trust, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and other(s).
- A short title of no more than 45 characters (40 characters for case reports), including spaces, for use as a running foot.
- Acknowledgments, which should list:
- All financial support of the study (refer to
sections I.E and
I.F for more information).
- Any and all manuscript preparation assistance (refer to
section I.A for more information). Such acknowledgments must identify the entities that provided and paid for this assistance, whether directly or indirectly.
- All persons who contributed to the work reported in the manuscript, but not sufficiently to be authors, must be acknowledged (refer to
section I.A for more information). (Note:Obtain written permission from all individuals named in the acknowledgments. Acknowledgment permissions need not be submitted to the journal; rather, the corresponding author should keep them on file. By signing the journal’s author agreement form, the corresponding author verifies that permission has been obtained from all named persons.)
- Information about presentation at a meeting, including the dates and location of the meeting (see
On the second page, authors should provide a précis for use in the Table of Contents. The précis is a single sentence of no more than 25 words, written in the present tense and stating the conclusion(s) of the report (ie, the bottom line).The précis should be similar to the abstract’s conclusion. Do not use commercial names, abbreviations, or acronyms in the précis.
Abstracts should appear on the third page of the manuscript. All information in the abstract should be consistent with the information in the text, tables, or figures. Avoid use of commercial names in the abstract. See
Section II for more information on how to format the abstract based on article type.
TheEditors encourage the authors of case reports to also consider submitting a video abstract, highlighting the teaching points in their article. Sample video abstracts may be viewed online: http://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/Pages/collectiondetails.aspx?TopicalCollectionId=111.
The main body of the article appears after the abstract. See
Section II for more information on how to format the body based on article type. Consecutive line numbering should be used throughout the text. Authors should also keep the following style considerations in mind:
Abbreviations and Acronyms. Only standard abbreviations and acronyms are allowed. A selected list is available online at
http://ong.editorialmanager.com. Abbreviations and acronyms cannot be used in the title or précis. Abbreviations and acronyms must be spelled out the first time they are used in the abstract and again in the body of the manuscript.
Commercial Names. The commercial name (with the generic name in parentheses) may be used once in the body of the paper; use the generic name at each mention thereafter. Commercial names should be be used in the title, précis, or abstract.
Use references found published in peer-reviewed publications that are generally accessible. Unpublished data, personal communications, statistical programs, papers presented at meetings and symposia, abstracts, letters, and manuscripts submitted for publication cannot be listed in the references. Information from such sources may be cited, if necessary, in the text with the sources given in parentheses. Papers accepted by peer-reviewed publications but not yet published (“in press”) are not acceptable as references.
References are numbered consecutively in the order in which they appear in the text (note that references should not appear in the abstract) and listed double-spaced at the end of the manuscript. The preferred method for identifying citations is using superscript, but citations that are cited on the line within parentheses are also acceptable.
Authors are responsible for the accuracy of all references. Examples of specific types of references are available online (http://ong.editorialmanager.com).
Authors are strongly encouraged to become familiar with the format of tables published in
Obstetrics & Gynecology by reviewing recently published tables. For more information on how to format your tables for the journal, see the tables checklist online at
G. Figure Legends
Each piece of art should have an accompanying legend. Group all legends on a single, separate page of the manuscript, not on the figure itself. A sentence or two is usually sufficient. Identify any abbreviations or symbols in the legend. In the case of photomicrographs, provide magnification and stain data.
Back to top
If the submission includes figures, art saved in digital format should be submitted. Figures must be submitted as individual files separate from the document file in Editorial Manager. Refer to the digital art guidelines and artwork checklist on the journal’s web-site for more direction on digital art preparation and examples of acceptable art (http://ong.editorialmanager.com). Source files, EPS or PDF files, or higher-resolution TIFFs may be requested. Art that is low resolution, digitized, adapted from slides, or downloaded from the Internet will not reproduce well. Graphs created in Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, or Excel should be submitted as .doc or .docx, .xls or .xlsx, or .ppt or .pptx files, but no graphs or images should be pasted into PowerPoint or Word. Original, high-resolution or editable files are needed. Unacceptable art may be redrawn or removed from the article.
Back to top
VI. SUPPLEMENTAL DIGITAL CONTENT
Authors may submit supplemental digital content to enhance their article’s text and to be considered for online-only posting.
Supplemental digital content may include the following types of content: text documents, graphs, tables, figures, graphics, illustrations, audio, and video.
A. Guidelines for Supplemental Digital Content
Cite all supplemental digital content consecutively in the text as “Appendix 1,” “Appendix 2,” etc. Provide a legend for supplemental digital content at the end of the text. List each legend in the order inwhich the material is cited in the text. The legends must be numbered to match the citations fromthe text (eg, “Appendix 1,” “Appendix 2,” etc.).
For audio and video files, include the author name, title, brief summary of the content, videographer name, participants, length (minutes), and size (MB).
Authors should ensure that patients are not identifiable in the supplemental digital content unless they obtain written consent from the patients and document that they have obtained consent in the cover letter submitted with the manuscript.
B. Submission of Supplemental Digital Content
When submitting supplemental digital content online to Editorial Manager, the digital files should be uploaded along with your other submission items.
C. File Size and Types
To ensure a quality experience for those viewing supplemental digital content, the journal’s publisher suggests that authors submit supplemental digital files no larger than 10 MB each.
See the box for a list of acceptable file types for supplemental digital content.
Supplemental Digital Content (SDC) File Types
Documents: .doc, .docx, or .odt
Tables: .doc, .docx, or .odt
Figures, graphics, and illustrations: .tif, .eps, .ppt, .jpg, .pdf, or .gif
Audio files: mp3 or .wav
Video files: .wmv, .swf, .flv, .mov, .qt, .avi, .mpg, .mpeg, or .mp4
For more information, please review the publisher’s requirements for submitting supplemental digital content (http://links.lww.com/A142).
Back to top
VII. COVER ART
For each issue, the editors may select a piece of art from the issue to be placed on the cover of the journal. This art may consist of informative illustrations, diagrams, or clinical images. Authors who believe that their submission includes potential cover art should note this fact in their cover letter. The editors also welcome submissions of potential cover art via e-mail (email@example.com). All potential cover art must be submitted as TIFF files of not less than 300 dpi.
Back to top
- Wager E, Barbour V, Yentis S, Kleinert S; COPE Council. Retraction guidelines. September 2009. Available at:
http://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines_0.pdf. Retrieved October 21, 2016.
- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Defining the role of authors and contributors. Available at:
http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html. Retrieved October 21, 2016.
- Altman DG, Moher D. Declaration of transparency for each research article. BMJ 2013;347:f4796.
- Roberts LW. Addressing authorship issues prospectively: a heuristic approach. Acad Med 2016 Jun 28. [Epub ahead of print].
- Scott-Lichter D and the Editorial Policy Committee, Council of Science Editors. CSE’s white paper on promoting integrity in scientific journal publications, 2012 update. 3rd revised edition. Wheat Ridge (CO); 2012. Available at:
http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/resource-library/editorial-policies/white-paper-on-publication-ethics/. Retrieved October 21, 2016.
- Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, for the CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:1063–70.
- DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, Haug C, Hoey J, Horton R, et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA 2004;292:1363–4.
- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Clinical trials registration. Available at
http://www.icmje.org/about-icmje/faqs/clinical-trials-registration/. Retrieved October 21, 2016.
- Battisti WP, Wager E, Baltzer L, Bridges D, Cairns A, Carswell CI, et al. Good publication practice for communicating company-sponsored medical research: GPP3. Ann Intern Med 2015;163:461–4.
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Code of federal regulations. Title 45 Public welfare. Department of Health and Human Services. Part 46: Protection of human subjects. Available at:
http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.html. October 21, 2016.
- Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary. 11th ed. Springfield (MA): Merriam- Webster, Incorporated; 2003.
- Committee on Publication Ethics. What to do if you suspect plagiarism: (a) suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript. Available at:
http://publicationethics.org/files/Suspected%20plagiarism%20in%20a%20submitted%20manuscript%20%281%29.pdf. Retrieved October 21, 2016.
- Committee on Publication Ethics. What to do if you suspect plagiarism: (b) suspected plagiarism in a published manuscript. Available at:
http://publicationethics.org/files/Suspected%20plagiarism%20in%20a%20published%20manuscript_0.pdf. Retrieved October 21, 2016.
- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Available at:
http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/. Retrieved October 21, 2016.
- von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP, for the STROBE initiative. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 2007;370:1453–57.
- Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ, et al. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2007;4:e297. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297
- Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, and the PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:264–9.
- Zorzela L, Loke YK, Ioannidis JP, Golder S, Santaguida P, Altman DG, Moher D, Vohra S; PRISMA harms group. PRISMA harms checklist: improving harms reporting in systematic reviews. BMJ 2016;352:i157.
- Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:40–44.
- Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000;283:2008–12.
- Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al; CHEERS Task Force. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. BMJ 2013;346:f1049.
- Ogrinc G, Davies L, Goodman D, Batalden P, Davidoff F, Stevens D. SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process. BMJ Qual Saf. 2015 Sep 14. pii: bmjqs-2015-004411. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004411. [Epub ahead of print]
- Nuovo J, Melnikow J, Chang D. Reporting number needed to treat and absolute risk reduction in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2002;287:2813–4.
- Straus SE, Richardson WS, Glasziou P, Haynes RB. Evidence based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 3rd ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2005.
- Eichelberger KY, Doll K, Ekpo GE, Zerden ML. Black lives matter: claiming a space for evidence-based outrage in obstetrics and gynecology. Am J Public Health 2016;106:1771–2.
Back to top