| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Physical Therapy Information for Authors
Physical Therapy (PTJ) promotes evidence-based practice and excellence in both clinical and basic research. PTJ documents basic and applied knowledge related to physical therapy, provides evidence to guide clinical decision making, publishes a variety of original research relevant to the field, and is a forum for diverse opinions that are based in scholarly argument. Our readership includes physical therapist clinicians, researchers, educators, and students and all health care professionals interested in rehabilitation. Like the profession it serves, PTJ strives to enhance the function, health, and well-being of all members of society.
PTJ's circulation in 2008 is more than 72,000. Its 2006 impact factor was 1.510. On January 7, 2008, the mean time from submission to first decision for the previous 12 months was 47 days. Time from acceptance to publication online is less than or equal to 3 months and from acceptance to publication in print is less than or equal to 5 months. The acceptance rate is 30%.
These submission guidelines, first posted in March 2007, are MANDATORY for all manuscripts submitted on January 1, 2008, or thereafter. For more about the formulation or these guidelines, refer to the Editor's Note by Craik and Riddle and the Editor's Note by Fitzgerald.
PTJ endorses the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals put forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
What to Expect: Manuscript Review Process
General Instructions for All Manuscript Types
Research Reports: Include clinical trials, diagnostic test studies, measurement studies, observational studies, qualitative studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and studies using single-subject designs.
Case Reports: Describe various aspects of clinical practice but do NOT test hypotheses, establish cause-and-effect relationships, or prove effectiveness.
Technical Reports: Describe and document the specifications or mechanical aspects of a devide used by physical therapists in intervention or measurement.
Perspectives: Present new ideas, interpretations, and opinions about a specific clinical approach to patient care (on either a theoretical or practical basis) or professional issues.
DILBERT: © Scott Adams/Dist. by United Feature Syndicate, Inc.
PTJ is committed to quality of content AND timeliness. No more "infinite loop."
The Editor in Chief and Editorial Board reserve the right to reject, without full review, any manuscript that does not meet Journal criteria. Manuscripts are prescreened by an Editor and/or Editorial Board member. Manuscripts are immediately rejected by PTJ when:
* Study
participants are able bodied, without a compelling justification for relevance
to physical therapist practice.
* Reliability study does not include a discussion of the impact that the error
will have on clinical decision making.
* Study describes a new test without a sound comparison to current tests.
* Qualitative study is purely descriptive, without analysis or interpretation
of findings.
* Study has fatal flaws in the methods section.
* Study does not have a theoretical or evidence-based argument for the relevance
of the work to physical therapist practice.
All submissions accepted for peer review are privileged communications. Author identity is kept confidential from reviewers, unless otherwise indicated. All correspondence is sent to the author who submits the article.
PTJ reviews and considers a manuscript for exclusive publication with the understanding that the manuscript—including any original research findings or data reported in it—has not been published previously and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, whether in print or electronic form. Reports of secondary analyses of data sets should specify the source of the data.
If authors violate this policy or engage in other misconduct, the Editor in Chief and the Editorial Board reserve the right to reject the manuscript and may refer the matter to the authors' academic institution or other appropriate entity.
Prior disclosure of any part of the contents of any manuscript in a widespread and substantive form, print or electronic, may make the manuscript ineligible for publication in PTJ. Note: Publication of abstracts and presentations at meetings do not constitute prior disclosure. During the submission process, you will be prompted to indicate whether your manuscript has been presented orally at a scientific meeting or at a professional forum. Authors who need clarification of this policy are encouraged to contact the janreynolds{at}apta.org before releasing or distributing information from the manuscript that they want to submit.
PTJ adopted the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement in March 2007 and the CONSORT Statement extension for nonpharmacologic treatment (NPT) interventions in February 2008. Click here for requirements.
Effective January 1, 2009, PTJ requires clinical trial registration. Click here for details.
Authors agree to execute copyright transfer as requested during the submission process. Authors will be prompted to upload a signed copyright release, authorship, and financial disclosure form. (Please upload one form per author.) Manuscripts published in PTJ become the property of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) and may not be published elsewhere, in whole or in part, in print or electronic form, without the written permission of APTA, which has the right to use, reproduce, transmit, derivate, publish, and distribute the contribution, in PTJ or otherwise, in any form or medium.
All funding sources supporting the work should be acknowledged. During the submission process, authors will be required to enter this information. They also will be prompted to upload a disclosure statement, signed by all authors. This information will be held in confidence by the Editor in Chief during the review process and, if the paper is accepted for publication, will be shared with readers as appropriate.
In the cover letter that is submitted with the manuscript, authors of Research Reports should provide the name of the institutional review board (IRB), institutional animal care and use committee, or other similar body that approved the study. Authors also should submit patient consent forms for photographs or videos. Within the manuscript, authors must include a statement in the “Method” section that they obtained informed consent of participants, when required for protection of human subjects. Along with their signed copyright release forms, authors of Case Reports should submit a signed patient consent form. Case Report authors who practice in the United States should also include a statement about meeting the HIPAA (Health Insurance, Portability, and Accountability Act) requirements of the institution for disclosure of protected health information.
Authors must obtain and submit written permission to publish photographs in which subjects are recognizable. This statement must be signed by the subject, parent, or guardian. You will be prompted to upload this statement during the submission process.
Authors must obtain and submit written permission from the original sources, in the name of APTA, to publish illustrations, photographs, figures, or tables taken from those sources. Authors will be prompted to upload these permissions during the submission process.
The following are general instructions for preparing manuscripts for PTJ. Please also see specific types of manuscripts.
Are there other articles using the same data set or otherwise related to this manuscript that have been published or are under review by other journals? If so, please submit a masked copy of the article(s) along with your manuscript.
PTJ promotes "people-first" language. That is, patients and subjects should not be referred to by disability or condition (eg, use "patients who have had a stroke" or "patients with stroke," rather than "stroke patients" or "stroke survivors"). Terms that could be considered biasing or discriminatory in any way should not be used.
PTJ follows the American Medical Association [AMA] Manual of Style, 9th ed, published by Williams & Wilkins (Baltimore, Md).
Please use the International System of Units. (English units may be given in parentheses.)
For all equipment and products mentioned in the text, place a footnote containing the manufacturer's full address with ZIP code at bottom of the page on which the item is mentioned, and use consecutive symbols (*, †, ‡, §, ||, #, **, ††, ‡‡, §§, ||||, ##).
All manuscripts must be formatted double-spaced, with pages AND lines numbered. Please use 12-point font. Most manuscripts undergo a masked review process, so you will submit both a masked copy and an unmasked copy. In the masked version, please remove author names and any affiliations within the article.
Sections, in order of appearance: (1) Title page, (2) Abstract, (3) Body of article, (4) Acknowledgments, (5) References, (6) Tables, (7) Figure legends, (8) Figures, (9) Legends for supplemental materials, (10) Appendixes.
Different article types have different requirements for word count, headings in the body of the manuscript, and number of tables and figures, please see the section on the article type for this information.
References should be indicated by numerical superscripts that appear consecutively in the text. If you use End Notes, please use version 6.0 or higher. References should be listed in consecutive order on a separate sheet at the end of the manuscript. Follow AMA style for reference style. Cite the reference number in the text each time an author is mentioned. Use MEDLINE/PubMed journal abbreviations. References should be listed in the order of appearance in the manuscript, not in alphabetical order.
Tables should be formatted in Word, numbered consecutively, and placed together at the end of the manuscript, after the reference list. Please refer to recent issues of PTJ for style.
For peer-review purposes, figures can be attached to the manuscript after the figure legends; however, figures also should be submitted as separate, high-res graphic files in tif, jpg, eps, or pdf format, with the resolution set at a minimum of 300 dpi. The separate image files will help PTJ staff to produce the sharpest images both in print and online. Rule of thumb: the larger the figure (eg, 8.5" × 11"), the better. If electronic formats are not available to you, figures must be submitted as 5" × 7" camera-ready glossies and mailed to the Editorial Office. Figures should be numbered consecutively. For helpful guidelines on submitting figures online, visit Cadmus Journal Services. Lettering should be large, sharp, and clear, and abbreviations used within figures should agree with Journal style. Color photographs are encouraged, in sharp focus and with good contrast.
Appendixes should be numbered consecutively and placed at the very end of the manuscript. Use appendixes to provide essential material not suitable for figures, tables, or text. If the manuscript is accepted for publication, the review team may recommend that an appendix appear online only.
The PTJ Web site has the capability to host a variety of supplemental data that cannot be published in print or that exceeds PTJ’s limits on word counts or on tables and figures. Supplemental files can include tables, figures, appendixes, video clips, PowerPoint files, or Excel spreadsheets.
If a manuscript contains tables or figures that exceed PTJ’s maximum, the review team may recommend that some of them appear online only as a PDF. These tables and figures would have the same format and style as those in the final published article.
To help the reader, PTJ recommends that Research Report and Case Report authors submit study protocols, treatment manuals, detailed descriptions of evaluation and intervention procedures, treatment progression algorithms, etc. These can be submitted as online-only tables, figures, appendixes, or video clips. They are reviewed by the editors and Editorial Board and should be submitted at the same time that the manuscript is submitted. The videos can be of patients, procedures, interventions, or any other relevant part of the study or case. (See Video Central for recent examples.)
Video Requirements. PTJ's preferred format for video clips is MPEG (Moving Picture Experts Group). Because of sophisticated compression techniques, MPEG files are much smaller than other formats for the same quality. These files also are compatible with both Windows Media Player (PC) and QuickTime (Mac). Other acceptable formats include: .mov (QuickTime Movie), .wmv (Windows Media Video), .mp4, and .avi (Audio Video Interleave).
If the manuscript is accepted for publication, PTJ staff will convert the video file to MPEG format and it will accompany the final print version of the article online.
File size: less than 10 MB preferred
Minimum dimensions: 320 pixels wide by 240 pixels deep
Maximum length: 5 minutes
Citations and Legends. Where applicable, include a citation to each video in the manuscript text and include the title (10-15 words maximum) and a legend for the video in the manuscript after the figure captions.
Patient Permission. If patients are in the video, either the subjects should not be identifiable or they must give written permission to use the figure.
If you have questions about videos, please contact the steveglaros{at}apta.org.
Requirements for Presenting Data
Strategies for Common Analytic Approaches
Specific Guidelines for:
Clinical Trials
Diagnostic Test Studies
Measurement Studies
Observational Studies
Qualitative Studies
Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
These guidelines were developed because many manuscripts submitted for review lack design or analytic detail, which limits the ability of the reviewer (and ultimately the reader) to interpret the meaningfulness of the work. In addition, some manuscripts use an analytic strategy that is not the most appropriate for their topic.
Percentages. Report percentages to one decimal place (ie, xx.x%) when sample size is e"200. To avoid the appearance of a level of precision that does not exist with small samples, do not use decimal places (ie, xx%, not xx.xx%) when sample size is <200.
Standard deviations. Use "mean (SD)" rather than "mean±SD" notation. The ± symbol is ambiguous and can represent standard deviation or standard error.
Standard errors. When possible, report confidence intervals (CI) rather than standard errors.
P values. When reporting the results of statistical tests, P values alone are insufficient. A description of the magnitude of the effect or the association with CI is required. Report exact P values to 2 decimal places except when P<.001; in which case, "P<.001" is sufficient.
Confidence intervals. If point estimates (eg, an intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] in a reliability study, a likelihood ratio in a diagnosis study) are calculated, CI must be reported to provide an estimate of the precision of a point estimate. Interpretations of the meaningfulness of the point estimate and CI must be provided in the discussion.
"Trend". Use the term "trend" only when describing a test for trend or dose-response in, for example, epidemiological studies of rate of disease given various exposure levels of a risk factor. Avoid the term "trend" when referring to P values that are close to, but not below, .05. In such instances, simply report a difference and the confidence interval (CI) of the difference (if appropriate) with or without the P value. If you decide to discuss findings that do not reach the significant P value, an appropriate level of caution should be used when discussing the meaningfulness of the findings. Emphasis should be placed on potential clinical impact and not on statistical meaningfulness.
Statistical software. In the data analysis section, specify the statistical software—version, manufacturer, and manufacturer's location—that was used for analyses.
Data analysis section. The preferred statistics are those that are in common use for the type of study being reported. The description should be readily understood by the reader and easily applied to clinical decision making.
Missing data. Always report the frequency of missing data, the reasons and any patterns for the missing data, and how you handled missing data in the analyses.
Sample size estimation. Both qualitative and quantitative studies must provide a rationale for the sample size.
Descriptive tables. In tables that simply describe characteristics of 2 or more groups (eg, Table 1 of a clinical trial):
(1) Report averages with standard deviations, not standard errors, when data are normally distributed.
(2) Report median (minimum, maximum) or median (25th, 75th percentile [interquartile range, or IQR]) when data are not normally distributed.
Multi-factor (multi-way) analyses of variance. Reports results of main effects and then the relevant interactions before reporting any additional post hoc findings. Provide a rationale for any post hoc testing that is done.
Tables reporting multivariable analyses. Authors sometimes present tables that compare an outcome one by one with multiple individual factors, followed by a multivariable analysis that adjusts for confounding. If confounding exists, as is often the case, the one-way comparisons are simply intermediate steps that may offer little useful information for the reader. In general, we suggest omitting these intermediate steps in the manuscript—but this is left to your discretion as author.
When describing results of linear regression analyses, beta coefficients, CI, and P values are the preferred data to report in a table. For logistic regression, odds ratios (not beta coefficients) and CI are recommended.
Making tables and figures as informative as possible. The following references give useful information about the design and format of informative tables and figures:
Tufte ER. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Cheshire Conn: Graphic Press; 1983:178. ISBN: 0961392142
Wainer H. How to display data badly. The American Statistician. 1984;38:137-147. Google Scholar
Wainer H. Visual Revelations: Graphical Tales of Fate and Deception from Napoleon Bonaparte to Ross Perot. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc; 1997. ISBN: 038794902X
Pocock SJ, Clayton TC, Altman DG. Survival plots of time-to-event outcomes in clinical trials: good practice and pitfalls. Lancet. 2002; 359:1686-89. PMID: 12020548
You also can follow a few simple rules of thumb:
1. Avoid pie charts.
2. Avoid simple bar plots or histograms that do not present measurements of variability.
3. Consider using box-plots to illustrate non-normally distributed data.
4. Provide raw data (numerators and denominators) in the margins of meta-analysis forest plots.
Screening covariates. Use caution when selecting covariates for multivariable analyses. Approaches that select factors for inclusion in a multivariable model only if the factors are "statistically significant" in "bivariate screening" may not be optimal. A factor can be a confounder even if it is not statistically significant by itself because it changes the effect of the exposure of interest when it is included in the model or because it is a confounder only when included with other covariates. You are encouraged to provide theoretical or data-driven justifications for the selection of covariates.
Reference
Sun GW, Shook TL, Kay GL. Inappropriate use of bivariable analysis to screen risk factors for use in multivariable analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:907-916. PMID: 8699212
Model building. The approach for model building in a multivariable analysis is up to your discretion as author, but it should address theory as part of the model-building process. Stepwise methods of model building should be avoided except for the narrow application of hypothesis generation for subsequent studies. Stepwise methods include forward, backward, or combined procedures for the inclusion and exclusion of variables in a statistical model based on predetermined P value criteria. Variables that use external clinical judgment are better strategies than P value–driven approaches for selecting variables. You might use a bootstrap procedure to determine which variables, under repeated sampling, would end up in the model using stepwise variable selection procedures. Regardless, you should describe how model fit was assessed, how and which interactions were explored, and the results of those assessments.
References
Collett D, Stepniewska K. Some practical issues in binary data analysis. Stat Med. 1999;18:2209-2221. PMID: 10474134
Mickey RM, Greenland S. The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. Am J Epidemiol. 1989;129:125-137. PMID: 2910056
Steyerberg EW, Eijkemans MJC, Harrell FE Jr, Habbema JDF. Prognostic modeling with logistic regression analysis: a comparison of selection and estimation methods in small data sets. Stat Med. 2000;19:1059-1079. PMID: 10790680
Steyerberg EW, Eijkemans MJ, Habbema DF. Stepwise selection in small data sets: a simulation study of bias in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:935-942. PMID: 10513756
Altman DG, Andersen PK. Bootstrap investigation of the stability of a Cox regression model. Stat Med. 1989;8:771-783. PMID: 2672226
Mick R, Ratain MJ. Bootstrap validation of pharmacodynamic models defined via stepwise linear regression. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1994;56:217-222. PMID: 8062499
Harrell FE Jr, Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med. 1996;15:361-387. PMID: 8668867
Measurement error in multivariable analyses. If several risk factors for disease are considered in a logistic regression model and some of these risk factors are measured with error, the point and interval estimates of relative risk corresponding to any of these factors may be biased either toward or away from the null value; the direction of bias is never certain. In addition to potentially biased estimates, confidence intervals (CI) of correctly adjusted estimates will be wider, sometime substantially, than naïve CI. You are encouraged to consult the references below for strategies to address this problem.
References
Rosner B, Spiegelman D, Willett WC. Correction of logistic regression relative risk estimates and confidence intervals for measurement error: the case of multiple covariates measured with error. Am J Epidemiol. 1990;132:734-745. PMID: 2403114
Carroll R. Measurement error in epidemiologic studies. In: Armitage P, Colton T, eds. Encyclopedia of Biostatistics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 1998. ISBN: 0471975761.
Clinically meaningful estimates. Authors should report results for meaningful metrics rather than reporting raw results. For example, rather than reporting the log odds ratio from a logistic regression, you should transform coefficients into the appropriate measure of effect size, odds ratio, relative risk, or risk difference. Don't give readers an estimate, such as an odds ratio or relative risk, for a one-unit change in the factor of interest when a one-unit change lacks clinical meaning (age, mm Hg of blood pressure, or any other continuous or interval measurement with small units). All estimates should reflect a clinically meaningful change, along with 95% confidence bounds.
Between-group differences. For comparisons of interventions (eg, trials), focus on between-group differences, with 95% confidence intervals of the differences, and not on within-group differences. State the results using absolute numbers (numerator/denominator) when feasible. When discussing effects, refer to the confidence intervals rather than P values, and point out for readers if the confidence intervals (CI) exclude the possibility of significant clinical benefit or harm.
Odds ratios and predicted probabilities. Authors often report odds ratios for multivariable results when the odds ratio is difficult to interpret or not meaningful. First, the odds ratio might overstate the effect size when the reference risk is high. For example, if the reference risk is 25% (odds=0.33) and the odds ratio is 3.0, the relative risk is only 2.0. Statements such as "threefold increased risk" or "three times the risk" are incorrect. Second, readers want an easily understood measure of the level of risk (and the confidence intervals) for different groups of patients as defined by treatment, exposure, and covariates. Consider providing them a table of predicted probabilities for each of the factors of interest, and confidence intervals (CI) of those predicted probabilities. Moreover, a multiway table that cross-classifies predicted probabilities by the most important factor and then adjusts for the remaining factors will often be more meaningful than a table of adjusted odds ratios. Standard commercial software can produce predicted probabilities and confidence bounds.
Reference
Altman DG, Deeks JJ, Sackett DL. Odds ratios should be avoided when events are common. BMJ. 1998;317:1318. PMID: 9804732
Missing variables. Always report the frequency of missing variables and how the analysis handled missing data. Consider adding a column to tables or a row under figures that makes clear the amount of missing data. In some cases, the use of dummy variables to represent missing values should be avoided. Replacing missing predictors with dummy variables or missing indicators can lead to biased estimates. Your approach to the handling of missing data should be explained, and the limitations should be discussed.
References
Vach W, Blettner M. Biased estimation of the odds ratio in case-control studies due to the use of ad hoc methods or correcting for missing values for confounding variables. Am J Epidemiol. 1991;134:895-907. PMID: 1670320
Vach W, Blettner M. Missing data in epidemiologic studies. In: Armitage P, Colton T, eds. Encyclopedia of Biostatistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1998:2641-2654. ISBN: 0471975761
Greenland S, Finkle WD. A critical look at methods for handling missing covariates in epidemiologic regression analyses. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;142:1255-1264. PMID: 7503045
Allison PD. Missing Data. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, Inc; 2002. ISBN: 0761916725
Missing outcomes. Always report the frequency of missing outcomes and follow-up data, the reasons and any patterns for the missing data, and how you handled missing data in the analyses.
A variety of methods exist for handling missing outcomes. The last observation carried forward approach (LOCF) to address incomplete follow-up can, at times, provide biased estimates, and the direction of the bias is not predictable. Other, potentially more appropriate methods for handling missing data include imputation, pattern-mixture (mixed) models, and selection models. Application of these methods requires consideration of the patterns and potential mechanisms behind the missing data. The method of addressing missing data may have little impact on findings when the proportion of missing data is small (eg, <5%).
Provide a justification for the method used for handling missing data, and discuss the impact this approach may have on the findings.
References
Fitzmaurice GM, Laird NM, Ware JH. Applied Longitudinal Analysis. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 2004:chapter 14. ISBN: 0471214876
Molenberghs G, Verbeke G. Models for Discrete Longitudinal Data. New York, NY: Springer; 2005:chapters 26-32. ISBN: 0387251448
Longitudinal analyses. Consider using longitudinal analyses if outcome data were collected at more than one time point. With an appropriate model for longitudinal analysis, you can report differences within groups over time, differences between groups, and differences across groups of their within-group changes over time (usually the key contrast of interest). You can control for any confounding that might emerge, such as a difference in a variable (eg, body weight), among those who remained in the study until completion.
Longitudinal analysis options include a population averaged analysis (eg, generalized estimating equations [GEE]) that estimates the time by treatment interaction and adjusts variance for the repeated measures within individuals over time.
Another option is a mixed effects model, with random effects for patient and the estimate of interest being the time by treatment interaction. In choosing a model, consider whether any missing data are missing at random (ie, "ignorable" missing data) or missing dependent on the observed data (ie, informative missing data). In GEE analyses, missing data are assumed to be missing completely at random independent of both observed and unobserved data. In random coefficient analysis, missing data are assumed missing at random dependent on observed data but not on unobserved data. Other types of repeated measures analyses are acceptable but are not optimal for the reasons cited above.
Reference
Twisk JWR. Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis for Epidemiology: A Practical Guide. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2003. ISBN: 0521819768
Reports of trials of interventions for the treatment, diagnosis, course, or prevention of disease. Recent examples: Cleland et al and Nawoczenski et al
As defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), a clinical trial is any research project that prospectively assigns human subjects to intervention or comparison groups to a cause-and-effect relationship between an intervention and an outcome. To help ensure transparency and accountability in the reporting of clinical trials, PTJ has adopted a policy on clinical trial registration, effective January 1, 2009:
Trial registration is free and typically takes no more than 30 minutes. Acceptable registries must meet the following ICMJE requirements: be publicly available, searchable and open to all prospective registrants; have a validation mechanism for registration data; and be managed by a not-for-profit organization. An acceptable registry includes, at a minimum, the following information:
Authors should specify where the trial is registered and the trial's unique registration number at the end of the abstract of their manuscript.
A trial must have at least one prospectively assigned concurrent control or comparison group in order to trigger the requirement for registration. Non-randomized trials are not exempt from the registration requirement if they meet the above criteria.
Two large registries are:
Read Editor in Chief Rebecca Craik's editorial for more on clinical trial registration. For additional information, visit www.icmje.org
Questions? Contact janreynolds{at}apta.org.
PTJ adopted the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Statement (see Moher) in March 2007 and the CONSORT Statement extension for nonpharmacologic treatment (NPT) interventions in February 2008. This extension takes into account many of the issues that physical therapist researchers face, such as "difficulties of blinding, the complexity of the intervention and the influence of care providers' expertise and volume of care of centres on treatment effect."
Authors are required to submit, as part of their manuscript, the modified CONSORT flow diagram for individual randomized, controlled trials of nonpharmacologic treatment (see page 5 of the PDF).
Authors are strongly encouraged to refer to the revised checklist (see page 4 of the PDF) while preparing their manuscript. A completed checklist is not required for submission at this time.
Background: According to the CONSORT Group, "The adoption by journals of the CONSORT Statement has been associated with improved quality of reporting," but reports of trials of nonpharmacologic treatments (NPT)-including "surgery, technical interventions, rehabilitation, psychotherapy, behavioural interventions, implantable and non-implantable devices, and complementary medicine-have been "suboptimal" (http://www.consort-statement.org/index.aspx?o=1416). The CONSORT Group, therefore, published an extension of the CONSORT Statement for trials of nonpharmacological treatment interventions (Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:295-309).
Other CONSORT guidelines
All RCTs: Harms extension (see Ioannidis)
CONSORT extension for cluster RCTs (see Campbell)
CONSORT extension for noninferiority and equivalence RCTs (see Piaggio)
Titles should not be vague and should reflect measured variables. For instance, instead of using "physical therapy" to refer to intervention, state specific interventions (eg, "strengthening exercises"). For randomized trials, add the subtitle "A Randomized, Controlled Trial" to the full title of your manuscript. For example: "Effect of Resistive Exercise on the Functional Status of Patients with Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Randomized, Controlled Trial."
Titles (including subtitles) should be no longer than 150 characters (including punctuation and spaces). Titles in excess of this limit will be edited, subject to author approval.
Word limit. 250 words
Structure. Background, Objective, Design, Setting, Patients, Intervention, Measurements, Results, Limitations, Conclusions (see Haynes).
Other. If applicable, specify where the trial is registered and the trial's unique registration number at the end of the abstract. For more information, visit www.icmje.org. Also see upcoming editorial on clinical trials registry April 1.
Word limit. 4,500 words (excluding abstract and references). Please provide the manuscript word count on the abstract page of your manuscript. Additional materials may be submitted in the form of an appendix, which would appear only as supplemental data on the PTJ Web site if the paper is accepted.
Sections. Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion
Use the following
Methods section subheadings:
• Design Overview
• Setting and Participants
• Randomization and Interventions
• Outcomes and Follow-up
• Statistical Analysis
• Role of the Funding Source
References. 75 or fewer (See here for more information about formatting)
Tables and figures. Maximum of 6. Include a CONSORT flow diagram for nonpharmacological trials. (See here for more information on formatting)
Comments. Always end the introduction section with a clear statement of the study's objectives or hypotheses.
Identify the funding source for the study and its role in the study's design, conduct, and reporting. Put this information last in the Methods section and title the subhead "Role of the Funding Source."
In the Methods section, state (if correct) that the study was approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). If the study was not submitted to an IRB, provide documentation that not seeking IRB review for this type of study was in accordance with the policy of your institution.
Statistical analysis. In randomized controlled trials, the primary analysis must examine between-group differences (not exclusively within-group change). Estimates of treatment effects with 95% CI must be provided. The preferred statistics are those that are in common use, readily understood by the reader, and easily applied to clinical decision making. Examples include the effect size for continuous data and number needed to treat (NNT) for categorical data. The reporting of P values alone is insufficient.
Data. PTJ works to maintain the highest levels of integrity and accountability. The Editors therefore reserve the right to ask researchers to provide the raw data for their studies during review or at any time up to 5 years after publication in PTJ. This would likely happen only in rare instances, when credibility of the research is brought into serious question.
Reporting. Authors are expected to follow a pre-specified data analysis plan. If you deviate from the pre-planned analysis, the rationale should be made clear in the paper. The findings of a trial must be presented in a way that will enhance a reader’s understanding of the study’s contribution to the evidence. The discussion should include a consideration of the importance of the between-groups difference. More information is provided in Requirements for Presenting Data.
It is essential that reports of trials provide sufficient details on interventions so that readers can judge the applicability and clinical relevance of results. You are encouraged to provide a trial treatment manual as an electronic-only appendix.
Reports of studies of the accuracy of diagnostic tests.
Consult STARD guidelines and checklist (see Bossuyt).
Identify the article as a study of diagnostic accuracy somewhere in the title. Titles should not be vague and should reflect measured variables. For instance, instead of using "physical therapy" to refer to intervention, state specific interventions (eg, "strengthening exercises").
Titles (including subtitles) should be no longer than 150 characters (including punctuation and spaces). Titles in excess of this limit will be edited, subject to author approval.
Word limit. 250 words
Structure. Background, Objective, Design, Setting, Patients, Measurements, Results, Limitations, Conclusions (see Haynes).
Word limit. 4,500 words (excluding abstract and references). Please provide the manuscript word count on the abstract page of your manuscript. Additional materials may be submitted in the form of an appendix, which would appear only on the PTJ Web site if the paper is accepted.
Sections. Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion.
References. 75 or fewer (See here for more information about formatting)
Tables and figures. Maximum of 6. Include a STARD flow diagram (see Bossuyt). (See here for more information on formatting)
Comments. Always end the Introduction section with a clear statement of the study's objectives or hypotheses.
Identify the funding source for the study and its role in the study's design, conduct, and reporting. Put this information last in the Methods section and title the subhead "Role of the Funding Source."
State (if correct) that the study was approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). If the study was not submitted to an IRB, provide documentation that not seeking IRB review for this type of study was in accordance with the policy of your institution.
Statistical analysis. The likelihood ratio (LR) with CI must be reported, along with an interpretation of the clinical relevance of the findings.
Data. PTJ works to maintain the highest levels of integrity and accountability. The Editors therefore reserve the right to ask researchers to provide the raw data for their studies during review or at any time up to 5 years after publication in PTJ. This would likely happen only in rare instances, when credibility of the research is brought into serious question.
Reports of development or testing of impairment-specific, disease-specific, or generic health-related measurement tools designed to determine various aspects of body function or structure, activity, or participation of individuals and populations within their environments.
None at this time.
Titles should not be vague and should reflect measured variables. For instance, instead of using "physical therapy" to refer to intervention, state specific interventions (eg, "strengthening exercises").
Titles (including subtitles) should be no longer than 150 characters (including punctuation and spaces). Titles in excess of this limit will be edited, subject to author approval.
Word limit. 250 words
Structure. Background, Objective, Design, Methods, Results, Limitations, Conclusions
Word limit. 4,500 words (excluding abstract and references). Please provide the manuscript word count on the abstract page of your manuscript. Additional materials may be submitted in the form of an appendix, which would appear only on the PTJ Web site if the paper is accepted.
Sections. Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion
References. 50 or fewer (See here for more information about formatting)
Tables and figures. Maximum of 6 (See here for more information on formatting)
Comments. Always end the Introduction section with a clear statement of the study's objectives.
Identify the funding source for the study and its role in the study's design, conduct, and reporting. Put this information last in the Methods section and title the subhead "Role of the Funding Source."
In the Methods section, state (if correct) that the study was approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). If the study was not submitted to an IRB, provide documentation that not seeking IRB review for this type of study was in accordance with the policy of your institution.
Protocol. PTJ encourages submission of the original study protocol.
Statistical analysis. Provide a rationale for the analytical approach used in the study. As indicated by the objectives of the study, report appropriate test results, including: estimates of reliability (eg, for quantitative data, the ICC with 95% CI are appropriate along with single score error estimates such as the SEM; for nominal and ordinal level data, the kappa or weighted kappa are commonly used); evidence for content, criterion-based, and/or construct validity; information on the interpretability and clinical meaningfulness of measurements.
Data. PTJ works to maintain the highest levels of integrity and accountability. The Editors therefore reserve the right to ask researchers to provide the raw data for their studies during review or at any time up to 5 years after publication in PTJ. This would likely happen only in rare instances, when credibility of the research is brought into serious question.
Reports of cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies of the prevalence, causes, mechanisms, course, treatment, and prevention of disease. Authors who are reporting data on several patients and want to perform data analyses in an attempt to identify correlations, test hypotheses, or determine cause-and-effect relationships should submit the manuscript following the Observational Studies format.
STROBE statement and checklist
Titles should not be vague and should reflect measured variables. For instance, instead of using "physical therapy" to refer to intervention, state specific interventions (eg, "strengthening exercises").
Titles (including subtitles) should be no longer than 150 characters (including punctuation and spaces). Titles in excess of this limit will be edited, subject to author approval.
Word limit. 250 words
Structure. Background, Objective, Design, Methods, Results, Limitations, Conclusions (see Haynes).
Word limit. 4,500 words (excluding abstract and references). Please provide the manuscript word count on the abstract page of your manuscript. Additional materials may be submitted in the form of an appendix, which would appear only on the PTJ Web site if the paper is accepted.
Sections. Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion
References. 75 or fewer (See here for more information about formatting)
Tables and figures. Maximum of 6 (See here for more information on formatting)
Comments. Always end the Introduction section with a clear statement of the study's objectives or hypotheses.
For studies that examine the reliability of a measurement or series of measurements, the patient and clinician sample sizes must be of adequate size to be generalizable. In addition, the study must make a clear and compelling argument for how the findings would have an impact on clinical practice. Issues such as single score interpretation and the interpretation of change scores for the measures under study should be addressed.
Identify the funding source for the study and its role in the study's design, conduct, and reporting. Put this information last in the Methods section and title the subhead "Role of the Funding Source."
In the Methods section, state (if correct) that the study was approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). If the study was not submitted to an IRB, provide documentation that not seeking IRB review for this type of study was in accordance with the policy of your institution.
Protocol. PTJ encourages submission of the original study protocol. If you are using an existing database, indicate the source of the data and permission to use the data. Describe methods used to maximize completeness, validity, and quality of the data.
Statistical analysis. Describe primary and secondary analyses, including summary measures used, and methods of analysis. Detail how adjustments are made for confounders and any planned subgroup analyses. Account for missing/incomplete data or loss to follow-up.
Data. PTJ works to maintain the highest levels of integrity and accountability. The Editors therefore reserve the right to ask researchers to provide the raw data for their studies during review or at any time up to 5 years after publication in PTJ. This would likely happen only in rare instances, when credibility of the research is brought into serious question.
Reports of research that is concerned with understanding the processes which underlie behavioral patterns. Focus is on the meanings and interpretations of the participants' contributions. Data generally are derived from observation, interviews, verbal interactions, and examination of documents.
http://www.qualres.org/HomeGuid-3868.html
Titles should not be vague and should reflect measured variables. For instance, instead of using "physical therapy" to refer to intervention, state specific interventions (eg, "strengthening exercises").
Titles (including subtitles) should be no longer than 150 characters (including punctuation and spaces). Titles in excess of this limit will be edited, subject to author approval.
Word limit. 250 words
Structure. Background, Objectives, Design, Methods, Results, Conclusions
Word limit. 5,500 words (excluding abstract and references). Please provide the manuscript word count on the abstract page of your manuscript. Additional materials may be submitted in the form of an appendix, which would appear only on the PTJ Web site if the paper is accepted.
Sections. Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion
References. Fewer than 50 (See here for more information about formatting)
Tables and figures. Maximum of 6; one figure of the theoretical model if grounded theory. (See here for more information on formatting)
Comments. Always end the Introduction section with a clear statement of the study's objectives, aims or questions.
Identify the funding source for the study and its role in the study's design, conduct, and reporting. Put this information last in the Methods section and title the subhead "Role of the Funding Source."
In the Methods section, state (if correct) that the study was approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). If the study was not submitted to an IRB, provide documentation that not seeking IRB review for this type of study was in accordance with the policy of your institution.
Sampling. The sampling strategy should be justified in the Methods section. Indicate how the sample is sufficient to understand the study context.
Analysis. The analysis procedure(s) should be made explicit, avoiding jargon, and/or defining terms. If thematic analysis is used, detail how the categories/themes were derived from the data. Indicate how data were selected from the original sample in the analysis process. If software is used, indicate the name, version, and manufacturer. Provide sufficient data to support the findings and consider any contradictory data. Specify the methods to enhance methodological rigor.
Data. PTJ works to maintain the highest levels of integrity and accountability. The Editors therefore reserve the right to ask researchers to provide the raw data for their studies during review or at any time up to 5 years after publication in PTJ. This would likely happen only in rare instances, when credibility of the research is brought into serious question.
Results. Include quotes or other evidence to support the conclusions from the analysis. Indicate methods of triangulation or data cross-checking and whether findings have been validated by participants.
Reviews that systematically find, select, critique, and synthesize evidence relevant to well-defined questions about diagnosis, prevention, prognosis, or therapy.
For meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, follow QUOROM reporting guidelines and checklist.
For meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology, follow MOOSE reporting guidelines and checklist (page 3 of PDF).
Titles should not be vague and should reflect measured variables. For instance, instead of using "physical therapy" to refer to intervention, state specific interventions (eg, "strengthening exercises"). For studies that are meta-analyses or systematic reviews, add that descriptor as the subtitle at the end of the title.
Titles (including subtitles) should be no longer than 150 characters (including punctuation and spaces). Titles in excess of this limit will be edited, subject to author approval.
Word limit. 250 words
Structure. Background, Objective, Design, Setting, Patients, Intervention, Measurements, Results, Limitations, Conclusions (see Haynes).
Word limit. 4,500 words (excluding abstract and references). Please provide the manuscript word count on the abstract page of your manuscript. Additional materials may be submitted in the form of an appendix, which would appear only on the PTJ Web site if the paper is accepted.
Sections. Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion.
The Methods section subheadings
should be:
• Data Sources and Searches
• Study Selection
• Data Extraction and Quality Assessment
• Data Synthesis and Analysis
References. 75 or fewer (See here for more information about formatting)
Tables and figures. Maximum of 8. Include a flow diagram that depicts search and selection processes; include evidence tables. (See here for more information on formatting)
Comments. Justify why the review makes an important contribution to the literature and should be a priority for publication. This is particularly critical when there are already other published reviews on the same topic or when the review locates only a few studies. Reviews that fail to provide a clear answer to the study objective are a low priority for publication.
Always end the Introduction section with a clear statement of the study's objectives or hypotheses.
Outline the steps that have been taken to optimize data quality (eg, independent rating of study attributes and/or data extraction, double data entry, piloting of data extraction form, training of raters). For studies that have numerical data and use statistical inference, include a section under Methods that describes the methods and specific statistical software used for the statistical analysis.
Where pooling is undertaken, a quantitative approach (levels of evidence, vote counting) is preferred to a qualitative approach. Include a consideration of trial heterogeneity (statistical, methodological, clinical).
Figures such as forest plots and funnel plots need to be of high quality and usually are best prepared on meta-analysis software designed to produce such plots.
Statistical analysis. Please see the recommendations in the QUOROM and MOOSE checklists for issues related to statistical analyses. Included in these recommendations are assessments of heterogeneity, study quality, and confounding.
Data. PTJ works to maintain the highest levels of integrity and accountability. The Editors therefore reserve the right to ask researchers to provide the raw data for their studies during review or at any time up to 5 years after publication in PTJ. This would likely happen only in rare instances, when credibility of the research is brought into serious question.
Case Reports describe various aspects of clinical practice (eg, examination, intervention, administrative approaches, risk management, etc) related to the field of physical therapy. Case Reports differ from Research Reports in that they do not test hypotheses or establish cause-and-effect relationships.
Because many different aspects of physical therapy could be described in a case report, a "one size fits all" format is unrealistic. The PTJ Editors and Editorial Board, therefore, have established 7 focus-based case report formats:
Diagnosis/Prognosis
Clinical Measurement Procedures
Intervention
Application of Theory to Practice
Risk Management
Administrative/Educational Process
"Full" Traditional Case Report
Protection
of Participants. Along with their signed copyright release forms,
authors of Case Reports should submit a signed patient consent form. Case Report
authors who practice in the United States should also include a statement about
meeting the HIPAA (Health Insurance, Portability, and Accountability Act) requirements
of the institution for disclosure of protected health information.
Case report authors are required to identify their focus and follow the format corresponding to that focus. Case Reports receive masked review by 2 reviewers and 1 Editorial Board member.
A Word About Case Series. For the purposes of PTJ, "case series" is a case report describing multiple patients. Like single-patient case reports, a case series describes the episode of care for the patients, including descriptions of the examination procedures, interventions, and outcomes of care. Authors submitting a case series should use the same format that is required by PTJ for single-patient case reports. To condense information so that the case series meets the maximum word-limit criterion (3,500 words), PTJ recommends that authors use tables whenever possible to provide selected history, examination, intervention, and outcome information for each patient in the case series.
If authors reporting data on several patients want to perform data analyses in an attempt to identify correlations, test hypotheses, or determine cause-and-effect relationships, they should NOT submit the manuscript as a case report. Instead, they should submit the manuscript following the Observational Studies format.
Case Report authors submitting on or after October 1, 2007: as part of the review process, you may be asked to revise your reports to include some of the information that is requested in these guidelines.
Emphasis is on the diagnostic or prognostic aspect of patient care. May cover the process and logic associated with differential diagnosis (ie, clinical decision making), unusual or difficult diagnostic/prognostic events, missed diagnoses, etc. Detail should be concentrated in the patient history and physical examination and in the conclusion or decisions made based on the examination. The case report should challenge readers to deduce the diagnosis and determine how the diagnosis relates to the care of the patient. Interventions and outcomes may be included but should not have as much detail.
The title should indicate that the manuscript is a case report. Titles should not be vague. For instance, instead of using "physical therapy" to refer to intervention, state specific interventions (eg, "strengthening exercises").
Titles (including subtitles) should be no longer than 150 characters (including punctuation and spaces). Titles in excess of this limit will be edited, subject to author approval.
Word limit. 250 words or fewer
Structure. Background and Purpose, Case Description, Outcomes, Discussion
Word limit. 3,500 words (excluding abstract and references). Please provide the manuscript word count on the abstract page of your manuscript. Additional materials may be submitted in the form of an appendix that would appear only as supplemental data on the PTJ Web site if the paper is accepted.
Sections.
Background and Purpose
Patient History and Review of Systems
- Clinical Impression
Examination
- Clinical Impression
Intervention
Outcome
Discussion
Background and Purpose. Scholarly discussion on the current issues related to the diagnostic/prognostic aspect of the case (eg, current state of knowledge, problems with differential diagnoses, mimicking or missed diagnoses).
Rationale for why the approach needs to be demonstrated in a case.
Purpose statement that clearly indicates the focus as related to diagnosis/prognosis (eg, "The purpose of this case report is to demonstrate the diagnostic process in….").
Patient History and Review of Systems. Detailed demographic characteristics and history (eg, chief complaints, other relevant medical history, prior or current services related to the current episode, comorbidities) that are relevant to the diagnostic/prognostic approach being demonstrated.
Patient/family goals for physical therapy.
Clinical Impression: Based on the data provided so far, explain what you believe is the primary problem, the potential differential diagnoses that need to be addressed, and any further information not provided in the initial patient interview or history that you requested from the patient. Include the reasons for asking for this additional information as it pertains to the diagnostic/prognostic aspect of the case. The plan for examination (eg, test selection) should be clearly described. State why, at this point, this particular patient is a good candidate for the purpose of the case report.
Examination. Examination procedures should be consistent with the clinical impression above and with the diagnostic/prognostic issues that are the focus of the case. Procedures directly related to the diagnostic/prognostic process being demonstrated should be described so that readers can replicate them (figures, tables, and supplemental appendixes and videos can be used to provide adequate detail).
Available studies on reliability and validity of measurements should be cited. If not available, provide acknowledgement of this fact. Reviewers may request a presumptive argument for the potential of reliability and validity in these cases.
Clinical Impression: Provide a statement confirming or denying initial impressions based on the examination data, and give a working diagnosis. Indicate the plan of action (eg, proceed with intervention, further testing, referral for other consultation). State why the patient continues to be appropriate for the case. If the decision is to proceed, state the plan for intervention based on the current data.
Include the plan for follow-up evaluation of outcomes (measures, time points). If further examination is required, address this next, indicating the additional tests and why particular tests are chosen.
Another Clinical Impression: State the revised course of action, based on the additional information.
Intervention. Summarize the physical therapy and/or medical interventions used (eg, surgery, radiation therapy). If physical therapy interventions were performed, provide a general description of the strategy and intervention tactics. Tables, figures, and appendixes can be used to provide details. Include enough detail so that the reader understands what was done, but extensive details should not be necessary. Clearly link treatment intervention back to the diagnostic decision-making process.
Outcome. Briefly describe the outcome measures, and cite evidence for reliability and validity. If reliability and validity have not been established for a measure, acknowledge this, and make presumptive arguments that the measurements would be reasonably reliable and valid for the purpose of the case.
Present the outcomes over the time points indicated in the follow-up plan above.
Compare follow-up outcomes to baseline. Tables and figures can be used to enhance the description.
Discussion. Provide a scholarly, critical analysis of how the diagnostic dilemma, if any, was resolved, and how the diagnostic process guided further decision making from a treatment and/or prognostic perspective.
Compare the case to other similar reports in the literature, and provide rationale for how this case makes a novel contribution and improves existing diagnostic decision-making strategies.
Offer suggestions for future research.
Relative dates. Please use relative dates (eg, years or months or days relative to onset of injury or to start of treatment) in your manuscript rather than absolute dates (ie, calendar dates). It is usually easier to grasp the chronology of events when the amount of time since the event or start of treatment is reported, rather than forcing the reader to calculate the amount of time.
References. 30 or fewer (See here for more information about formatting)
Tables and figures. Maximum of 6. (See here for more information on formatting)
Emphasis is on introducing a new clinical measurement procedure or modifying an existing procedure to deal with a specific problem or measurement issue. The difference between this category and diagnosis/prognosis is that the focus is on one specific procedure. Detail should be concentrated in the scientific rationale or theory for the procedure, the conditions under which the procedure should be used, and a thorough description of the procedure so that readers could replicate it (supplemental videos may be appropriate). The case demonstrates the clinical use of the test. If evidence of reliability or validity is not yet available in the literature, the authors should make strong theoretical and presumptive arguments that the procedure provides reliable and valid measurements and has the potential to influence decision making.
The title should indicate that the manuscript is a case report. Titles should not be vague. For instance, instead of using "physical therapy" to refer to intervention, state specific interventions (eg, "strengthening exercises").
Titles (including subtitles) should be no longer than 150 characters (including punctuation and spaces). Titles in excess of this limit will be edited, subject to author approval.
Word limit. 250 words or fewer
Structure. Background and Purpose, Case Description, Outcomes, Discussion
Word limit. 3,500 words (excluding abstract and references). Please provide the manuscript word count on the abstract page of your manuscript. Additional materials may be submitted in the form of an appendix that would appear only as supplemental data on the PTJ Web site if the paper is accepted.
Sections.
Background and Purpose
Patient History and Review of Systems
- Clinical Impression
Examination
- Clinical Impression
Intervention
Outcome
Discussion
Background and Purpose. Because this focus introduces a new measurement procedure or a modification to an existing procedure, the background information should be a scholarly discussion on the gaps in the literature for assessing the target problem or clinical outcome that would provide the rationale for either developing the new procedure or modifying an existing one. The background also should provide the underlying theoretical basis for the development of the new test or modification. This could be based on biological, physiological, biomechanical, psychosocial, measurement, or any other knowledge and theory.
Purpose statement should clearly indicate that the focus relates to the clinical measurement procedure (eg, " The purpose of this case report is to demonstrate the use of a new clinical measurement procedure for….").
Patient History and Review of Systems. Demographic characteristics and history (eg, chief complaints, other relevant medical history, prior or current services related to the current episode, comorbidities) in sufficient detail to demonstrate that the patient is appropriate for the target measurement procedure.
Clinical Impression: Based on the data provided so far, explain why you believe that the patient is a good candidate for the measurement procedure.
Detail the examination plan for further determining whether the patient is appropriate for this type of measurement procedure (ruling in or ruling out relevant differential diagnoses).
Examination. Statement confirming that the patient is appropriate for the measurement procedure, based on the examination data. Describe any tests needed to confirm this, as stated in the above clinical impression.
Clinical Impression: Describe why the measurement procedure is appropriate for the patient and how the results will influence decision making.
Intervention (Measurement Procedure). In this case format, the measurement procedure is viewed as the "intervention." Describe the measurement procedure in detail. Details of how the measure was developed and how it is applied to the patient should be thorough so that others can replicate the procedure. Tables, figures, and appendixes can be used to enhance the detailed description.
List the basic rules and criteria used to interpret the results or scoring of the procedure.
Clinical Impression: Present the results and interpretation of the measurement procedure. Describe how the results fit in with the other history and examination data to inform further decisions about interventions, referrals, etc. If the procedure results in intervention, describe the intervention plan.
Outcome. If an intervention or consultation was performed based on the result of the measurement procedure, report the outcome of the intervention or consultation.
Compare outcome measures to pretreatment measures.
Discussion. Reflect back on how the measurement procedure helped identify the patient's problem(s) and assisted in treatment planning and evaluating clinical outcomes.
Presumptive arguments might be introduced for the procedure's validity based on the case.
Offer suggestions for further study of reliability and validity.
Relative dates. Please use relative dates (eg, years or months or days relative to onset of injury or to start of treatment) in your manuscript rather than absolute dates (ie, calendar dates). It is usually easier to grasp the chronology of events when the amount of time since the event or start of treatment is reported, rather than forcing the reader to calculate the amount of time.
References. 30 or fewer (See here for more information about formatting)
Tables and figures. Maximum of 6 (See here for more information on formatting)
Emphasis is on the intervention aspect of patient care. May cover the development of a new intervention or a modification to an existing intervention to deal with a clinical problem. Detail is concentrated in the rationale for the new or modified intervention, the development process, the direct application to the patient, and the setting in which it is used. The patient history and examination should indicate why the patient is appropriate for the new or modified intervention. Outcome is included but should not have as much detail.
The title should indicate that the manuscript is a case report. Titles should not be vague. For instance, instead of using "physical therapy" to refer to intervention, state specific interventions (eg, "strengthening exercises").
Titles (including subtitles) should be no longer than 150 characters (including punctuation and spaces). Titles in excess of this limit will be edited, subject to author approval.
Word limit. 250 words or fewer
Structure. Background and Purpose, Case Description, Outcomes, Discussion
Word limit. 3,500 words (excluding abstract and references). Please provide the manuscript word count on the abstract page of your manuscript. Additional materials may be submitted in the form of an appendix that would appear only as supplemental data on the PTJ Web site if the paper is accepted.
Sections.
Background and Purpose
Patient History and Review of Systems
- Clinical Impression
Examination
- Clinical Impression
Intervention
- Clinical Impression
Outcome
Discussion
