The manuscript should be in English (international, UK or US), Times New Roman font 12, double-spaced, submitted in a Word formatting format (e.g. Word ). In general, all measurements should be expressed in SI units. Refer to teeth by their full name or their FDI tooth number.
To protect the identity of the author(s) during peer review, ensure that the authors’ names are not included with the file (e.g. within the file properties). For blinded review process, all identifying information should be blocked using black highlight.
a. Original research articles
Manuscripts should be between 3500 and 5000 words, including figure legends and references. Longer articles can be accepted at the Editor’s discretion.
Introduction – The Introduction should briefly indicate the objectives of the study and provide enough background information to clarify why the study was undertaken. In the last paragraph of the section, state the aim of the study concisely, and, where applicable, give the research hypothesis.
Materials and methods – The Materials and methods section should be brief but sufficient to allow other investigators to repeat the research. Define the materials and equipment used in as detailed manner as necessary by, for example, name, product number and batch, and identify the manufacturer by product, city, and country in parentheses. For common methods, a brief description and a reference may be enough; however, if you deviate from the common method, give a full description. Note that the Biochemical Journal provides a valuable resource on nomenclature (http://www.biochemj.org/bj/bji2a.htm#NOMENCLATURE). Conclude the Materials and methods section with a paragraph dealing with statistics, if applicable. Name and specify all non-descriptive statistical methods if applicable. The praxis of naming statistical terms and methods is very variable. Therefore, define statistical terms, abbreviations, and most symbols. Specify the computer software used. Authors are advised to consult a statistician or a person with in-depth statistical knowledge.
Results – Results should be presented in logical sequence giving the main or most important findings first, without subjective comments and reference to previous literature. Restrict tables and figures to those needed to explain the argument of the paper and to assess its support. Use graphs as an alternative to tables with many entries; do not duplicate data in graphs and tables.
Discussion – The Discussion section is the only proper section for subjective comments. It should be as concise as possible and should include a brief statement of the principal findings. A discussion of the validity of the observations, of the findings in light of other published work dealing with the same or closely related subjects, and a statement of the possible significance of the work are placed in this section. The last paragraph should be dedicated to the conclusions of the study.
References – The number of references should not normally exceed 40, and 20–30 references are frequently adequate.
Tables – Each table should be self-explanatory, submitted in Excel, with a brief title, numbered with Roman ordinal numbers that are associated with the text.
Figures – Digital images should be in JPEG or JPG format, with CMYK or grayscale, at least 10 cm wide and at least 300 dpi (118 pixels per cm). Do not embed images in the word processing or Excel programs.
b. Review articles
For review articles there is no upper limit in words. The structure of a review article is:
Introduction – Should define the topic and purpose of the review and describe its relevance to the readers.
Methods – The methods section should briefly indicate how the literature search was conducted and what major sources of evidence were used. Ideally, indicate what predetermined criteria were used to include or exclude studies (e.g., studies had to be independently rated as being high quality by an established evaluation process, such as the Cochrane Collaboration). Be comprehensive in trying to identify all major relevant research. Critically evaluate the quality of research reviewed. Avoid selective referencing of only information that supports your conclusions. If there is controversy on a topic, address the full scope of the controversy.
Discussion – The review will be comprehensive and balanced if it acknowledges controversies, unresolved questions, recent developments, other viewpoints, and any apparent conflicts of interest or instances of bias that might affect the strength of the evidence presented. Emphasize an evidence-supported approach or, where little evidence exists, a consensus viewpoint. In the absence of a consensus viewpoint, you may describe generally accepted practices or discuss one or more reasoned approaches.
Systematic reviews and meta-analysis submitted to the SEJODR should be prepared in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analyses) guidelines. See details and guidelines here: www.prisma-statement.org/index.htm.
c. Short communications
Short communications are short research articles intended to present exciting findings that will have a major impact in science. Short communications are limited to 3,500 words, including the abstract, introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion, references and figure legends. Additionally, Short communications may include no more than 4 figures and/or tables. Manuscripts should be organized as regular manuscripts.
d. Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor and their responses are encouraged to stimulate healthy discourse between authors and our readers. Letters to the Editor should refer to an article that has been published in the previous 12 months and must be less than 500 words including references. Send letters or questions directly to the Editor.
e. Clinical articles
Clinical articles are related to practice, and should discuss: synthesis of existing knowledge and guidelines for best practice, innovative clinical practices, use of existing practices in different clinical settings, clinical dilemmas and how they might be addressed. Manuscripts should be organized as regular manuscripts.
f. Case reports
SEJODR publishes original and interesting Case reports that contribute significantly to science and clinical work as well as knowledge. Authors should indicate how the case report adds to the clinical and scientific knowledge. Submissions that do not include this information will be returned to authors prior to peer review.
Case reports should include an up-to-date review of all previous cases in the field. Authors should seek written and signed consent to publish the information from the patients or their guardians prior to submission. Authors will be asked to confirm informed consent was received as part of the submission process, and the manuscript must include a statement to this effect by including a ‘Consent’ section, as follows: “Written informed consent was obtained from the patient [or the patient’s guardian] for publication of this case report and accompanying images.
Text structure should be:
Introduction – An introduction about why this case is important and needs to be reported. Please include information on whether this is the first report of this kind in the literature.
Case presentation – This should present all relevant details concerning the case. The case presentation should contain a description of the patient’s relevant demographic information (without adding any details that could lead to the identification of the patient) and any relevant medical history of the patient.
Discussion (optional) – This is a section for additional comments that provide any additional relevant information not included in the case presentation, and put the case in context or that explain specific treatment decisions.
Conclusion – This should state clearly what can be concluded from the case report, and give a clear explanation of the importance and relevance of the case.
Records for orthodontic reports
Ideally, an orthodontic Case report should include records taken at pre-treatment, debonding and at least one year post-treatment. Interim records should be used to illustrate case progress and particular treatment effects if the article is being submitted to introduce a new appliance or approach. Interim records should always illustrate the concepts being presented in the article. At every stage, records should be high-quality and in-focus and should include:
• Facial photos – right profile non-smiling and frontal non-smiling and smiling
• Intraoral photos – upper and lower dental arch; right, frontal, and left buccal, taken in habitual occlusion
• Study cast photos – in three or five views, especially if necessary to show articulation or if intraoral photos are not available
• Pre-treatment and post-treatment lateral cephalograms – with cephalometric landmarks and tracings
• Superimposition of pre-treatment and post-treatment tracings – with regional superimpositions if needed to illustrate particular movements
• Panoramic radiographs
Any other records submitted should meet the common-sense tests of both clarity of focus and clarity of purpose.