NeoReviews Author Instructions
NeoReviews is the American Academy of Pediatrics monthly peer-reviewed continuing medical education journal designed to keep the neonatology clinician current in all areas of neonatal medicine and to assist those participating in the Maintenance of Certification program of the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP).
The journal is one of the key components of the Academy’s continuing medical education program for neonatologists, comprising NeoReviews and the NeoReviewsPlus Self-Assessment.
The journal’s articles are intended to be state-of-the-art contributions that add significantly and relevantly to the knowledge and ability of the neonatology clinician to deal with his or her patients and their problems.
Because articles are mapped to the ABP neonatal-perinatal medicine content outline, most NeoReviews articles are solicited at the invitation of the editor-in-chief. Some articles are spontaneously submitted or are solicited at the invitation of the editor-in-chief based on knowledge gaps determined by the journal’s editorial board that are not mapped to the ABP general pediatrics content outline.
In each issue, two review articles include quiz questions formulated by topic experts. Subscribers must attain a minimum passing score on each review article’s quiz to qualify for Maintenance of Certification Part 2 (Lifelong Learning and Self-Assessment) points and continuing medical education credits.
Authors should be aware that ALL manuscripts automatically are screened for potential plagiarism. If potential plagiarism is detected, an inquiry will be launched; if plagiarism is confirmed, consequences result. To avoid this, before submitting a manuscript, consider running it through CrossRef or other plagiarism detection software to remedy any similarity that is detected.
Style Requirements: All aspects of the manuscript creation, including the formatting of tables, illustrations, references, grammar, punctuation, usage, and scientific writing style, should be prepared according to the most current AMA Manual of Style.
Formatting Requirements: All submissions must adhere to the following format:
Main manuscript should be submitted to the NeoReviews content management system as a Microsoft Word document. The journal cannot accept PDF files of manuscripts.
- Do not include page headers, footers, page numbers, or line numbers in new submissions.
- Figures must be submitted separately; the journal cannot accept figures embedded in Word documents.
- On the other hand, tables MUST be embedded in the manuscript file, at the end of the document, following the references.
- Refer to the “Article Types” section for specific guidelines on preparing a manuscript in a particular category.
Units of Measure: Conventional measurement units should be used, followed by Système International (SI) units in parentheses, for example: platelet count of 142×103/μL (142×109/L). If authors fail to provide SI units, the manuscript will be unsubmitted. For SI conversion tables, see AMA Manual of Style, 10th edition, 2007.
Titles: Titles are limited to a count of 90 characters or less in the journal’s content management system.
Avoid abbreviations and acronyms. The full title will appear on the article, on the table of contents, and in all subsequent references to the article, including footnotes and indexing services.
The title entered by authors must match the title on the manuscript.
Permissions: For permission to use previously published material, authors should contact the copyright owner (usually the publisher). Authors essentially should ask for all rights into perpetuity for print and electronic formats and for all future formats to be developed.
Authors are responsible for: obtaining permissions for any tables, images, figures or video reproduced or adapted from another publication; paying for any related permission costs; and providing the permission-granting forms and materials to the NeoReviews staff.
Model Release: Photographs in which any patients are identifiable should be submitted only after written parental permission has been obtained. It is the responsibility of the author to obtain this permission, preferably with the AAP Model Release Form, and to provide the model release form to the editorial staff of NeoReviews.
Every effort should be made to maintain the patient’s privacy by obscuring his or her identity, including blacking out the eyes as needed, deleting identifying information on radiographs, and avoiding references to specific subjects in the text of the article, legend or caption, and headline. If the child’s identity cannot be obscured, the author should avoid using the child’s surname in any voice-over.
For audio and video files, the author first and foremost should make certain that parental consent has been obtained to use the child’s image for educational purposes in print and online and in any and all formats to be developed into perpetuity. Note the difference between educational purposes (subscriber access only) and promotional purposes (open access, reprint covers, homepages, or other online promotional sites).
Consideration of Race and Ethnicity
The “title page” should appear first in your manuscript document and, depending on the individual needs of a paper, may encompass more than one page.
Title pages for all submissions must include the following items. Review articles require additional items as listed below and as seen in the template.
- Title. 90-character limit, including spaces.
- Author listing Full names for all authors, including applicable degrees. List current complete academic affiliation and contact information for all authors. While you already may have entered this information in the journal’s content management system, you also must include this information on the manuscript title page, for editorial and any future production processes. (Names of any non-authors who provided significant technical or other assistance may be noted in an Acknowledgments section at the end of the article.)
- Corresponding Author. Contact information for the Corresponding Author (including: name, address, telephone number, and e-mail). There can be only one Corresponding Author; he or she should be the person who uploads the manuscript and will be expected to handle all inquiries about manuscript submission, forms, permissions, reviews, author proofs and production.
- Funding source. Research or project support, including internal funding, should be listed here; if the project was done with no specific support, please note that here. Technical and other assistance should be identified in Acknowledgments (if any). Along with your funding source please state that your manuscript "[does/does not] contain a discussion of an unapproved/investigative use of a commercial product/device"
- Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosure statements NeoReviews does not prohibit authors who have a financial association with a profit-making company from writing articles. However, the journal’s policy requires that when potential conflicts of interest exist or arise, the author must disclose any affiliation, financial agreement, or other involvement with any company associated with a product or service that figures prominently in the submitted article.
- If applicable, Clinical Trial registry name and registration number. We adhere to International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines, which require that all trials must be registered with ClinicalTrials.gov or any other World Health Organization (WHO) Primary Clinical Trials Registry.
- For Review article submissions only: also include these four items: Content Specifications, Practice Gaps or Education Gaps, Learning Objectives, and Abbreviations (if any). These are not needed for any other manuscript type. Click here to see an example of a title page.
If a title page does not meet these requirements, the submission may be returned to the authors for completion.
Tables: Tables should be used to highlight/present material as succinctly as possible. Information in tables should not be repeated in the text. However, if material can be summarized in 100 words or less, tables are not necessary—instead the material should be incorporated into the text.
Lists should be embedded in the manuscript. If a list consists of more than 3 items, it should be a bulleted list.
Table placement should be noted in the manuscript; the tables themselves should be inserted in numerical order at the end of the manuscript.
Avoid abbreviations in tables; define any abbreviations that must be used in footnotes at the end of the table. Where possible, rows should be in a meaningful order (e.g., descending order of frequency).
NOTE: Tables should be constructed using a Microsoft Word program. Tables and figures from a 3rd party need to be clearly identified as such, and permissions must be supplied if needed. Do not provide tables in scan/image format.
Figures and Illustrations: Figures include graphs, charts, photographs, and illustrations. If a figure is reproduced from another source, authors are required to obtain permission from the copyright holder, and proof of permission must be uploaded at the time of manuscript submission. However, NeoReviews will not accept images from Wikipedia, the Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, Wikimedia Commons, or any other affiliate of The Wikimedia Foundation, due to the open community contribution and open community editing practices of these entities.
Number figures in the order in which they appear in the text. Each figure must include a legend, listed in numerical order at the end of your manuscript. Do not include figure legends in the figures themselves.
Technical requirements for figures: Figures must be uploaded separately with a file resolution of at least 300 DPI with a minimum of 600 pixels or 2 inches on the shortest side.
- Charts and illustrations work best as EPS, AI, or PDF; charts and line drawings should never be submitted in JPG format.
- Photographs submitted as TIFF are best. JPG or PNG are acceptable for original photographs, but edited photographs should be saved as TIFF.
- Do not embed images or illustrations in MS Word files.
- Strip radiographs or other patient images of all identifying information before upload.
- Figure arrays should be clearly labeled, preassembled, and submitted to scale. Figure parts of an array (A, B, C, etc.) should be clearly marked in capital letters in the upper left-hand corner of each figure part.
Style for figures: Readers should be able to understand figures without referring to the text. Avoid pie charts, 3-dimensional graphs, and excess ink in general. Make sure that the axes on graphs are labeled, including units of measurement, and that the font is large enough to read.
Failure to submit figures as separate files or follow other technical requirements will result in the manuscript being unsubmitted and returned to the author for correction. No editing will be done by the editorial office; all changes are the responsibility of the authors.
Audio Files: When appropriate, authors may include audio files to add educational value to their reviews (for example: heart murmurs, distinctive infant cries, etc.). Indicate in the manuscript where the audio file should be inserted (Audio 1, Audio 2, etc.).
Video Files: NeoReviews encourages submission of relevant videos to accompany articles.
As with Figures, authors should indicate where the video should appear in the manuscript (Video 1, Video 2, etc.), so that links can be placed into the article for use when it is accessed electronically.
All videos must adhere to the same general permission rules that apply to figures (i.e., parental consent / model release when a patient is identifiable). Video files should be named clearly to correspond with the figure they represent (i.e., video1.mov, video2.mp4, etc.).
No editing will be done at the editorial office—all changes are the responsibility of the author.
References: Reference all content appropriately. Direct quotes should be enclosed in quotations marks. See Plagiarism. References should be numbered sequentially as they are cited within the manuscript. Please cite references parenthetically in the text as shown in the example below. Please do not use the footnote or endnote function for references in your manuscript. References should then be listed in the same numerical order at the end of the manuscript.
Reference style within a manuscript:
“. . .women have Graves disease and only 1% to 5% of their infants develop neonatal hyperthyroidism. (1) (2) Clinical manifestations of neonatal Graves disease include irritability, hyperactivity, flushing, poor weight gain, tachycardia, hyperthermia, diarrhea, frontal bossing, triangular facies, small anterior fontanelle and less commonly, heart failure, exophthalmos, cholestasis, thrombocytopenia, and hyperammonemia. (1) (2) (3) (4) A goiter is another sign . . .”
Reference style at the end of a manuscript (NOTE: No period at end of Reference):
- Srinivasan S, Misra M. Hyperthyroidism in children. Pediatrics in Review. American Academy of Pediatrics. 2015;36(6):239-48
- Khadora MM, Al Dubayee M. Neonatal Graves' disease with unusual metabolic association from presentation to resolution. BMJ case reports. 2014;2014.
- Regelmann MO, Sullivan CK, Rapaport R. Thyroid "vise" in an infant with neonatal Graves' disease. Pediatrics. 2013;132(4):e1048-51
For additional guidance, especially on reference format, see the most current AMA Manual of Style.
Suggested Readings: Authors may add a section entitled “Suggested Readings,” containing more resources that, while not referenced in the article, may be valuable to the reader. Suggested Readings should be listed alphabetically.
Suggested Readings style (NOTE: No period at end of Suggested Reading):
Adams DJ, Clark DA. Common genetic and epigenetic syndromes. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2015;62(2):411-26
Shuman C, Beckwith BJ, Smith AC, et al. Beckwith Wiedemann Syndrome. Gene Reviews http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1394/. Accessed April 5, 2016
Weissman A, Mashiach S, Achiron R. Macroglossia: prenatal and ultrasonographic diagnosis and proposed management. Prenat Diag. 1995;15:66-69
Weksberg R, Shuman C, Beckwith JB Weksberg. Beckwith–Wiedemann syndrome. Eur J Human Genetics. 2010;18:8-14
For additional guidance, especially on format, see the most current AMA Manual of Style.
Figure: Should I Cite? flowchart accessed 3/25/16 at http://libguides.library.nd.edu/scholarly-publishing/plagiarism.
Quoting Other Work: Authors are required to rephrase substantially any facts or language taken from other sources. This includes rephrasing self-quotation, from sources the author already has published.
If it is important to quote another source verbatim, the material MUST be in quotation marks and the source acknowledged, including any publications owned by the AAP (e.g., The Red Book). Even one sentence must be in quotation marks and acknowledged, or it should be rewritten. See “Should I Cite?” flowchart above.
Self-plagiarism: Articles recruited or accepted for publication by PIR should not be submitted to another journal, either simultaneously or in the future. If the author has published elsewhere on the same subject, the author must rewrite or acknowledge the original source, using quotations marks, any material from sources in which the previously published work has appeared.
Manuscript Screening: Authors should be aware that all manuscripts automatically are screened for potential plagiarism using CrossRef, powered by iThenticate. If potential plagiarism is detected, editors will contact the authors for clarification, and may also contact the authors’ institution. To avoid this, before submitting a manuscript, consider running it through CrossRef to identify, then remedy, any similarity uncovered.
AAP Plagiarism Prevention Policy: The American Academy of Pediatrics and the editors and staff of PIR believe that plagiarism undermines the journal’s credibility and diminishes the journal’s reputation for integrity.
Plagiarism allegations or suspected plagiarism will be investigated thoroughly. AAP follows guidelines set forth by the international Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Plagiarized material found in submitted manuscripts prior to acceptance for publication will result in immediate rejection. Any author found to have plagiarized material for a published article – and this includes self-plagiarizing from sources that the author already has published – will be exposed, via editorial apology, in print and online and will be banned from future involvement in the journal, whether as an author, reviewer, or question writer.
Suggested Readings on Plagiarism: Committee on Publication Ethics, http://publicationethics.org/; University of Notre Dame Hesburgh Libraries, Scholarly Publishing: Plagiarism, http://libguides.library.nd.edu/scholarly-publishing/plagiarism.
Review articles should foster the latest and best practices, as driven by medical evidence, clinical guidelines, and the current recommendations of government and professional organizations.
Review articles on assigned topics are written at the invitation of the editor-in-chief. These topics are mapped to the ABP content specifications for neonatal-perinatal medicine. The journal strives to address all the content specs on a rolling basis over the course of any 5-year period as part of its mission to help prepare readers for certification exams and to maintain lifelong learning goals.
However, spontaneous submissions based on documentable needs will be considered. To suggest a review on a timely, trending medical topic outside the scope of the ABP content specifications, email the editor-in-chief at: email@example.com.
Review article components:
Review articles should contain the following elements, in the order listed.
Title Page: The title page should be the first page of the manuscript. See title page template for more details on title page requirements.
Because clarity is vital, abbreviations should be kept to a minimum. If more than three abbreviations are used in an article, they should be listed alphabetically, with their definitions, on the title page of the manuscript. Abbreviations/acronyms are acceptable for terms used 3 or more times in the manuscript.
Words to be abbreviated should be spelled out at first mention, then followed by the abbreviation in parentheses, for example: “American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).” Once an abbreviation is identified, that abbreviation should be used instead of the full term/name.
Word Count: 6,000, total (see section guidance below)
- Word count: 100-150 words each. List at least 1.
- This should be the first element, before the article body.
- Describe what providers should (but may not) know to improve their delivery of health care.
- Or, explain what's new ─ and probably not known to most clinicians ─ about the topic.
- Include epidemiological data when relevant.
- Word Count: Variable.
- Objectives should address the following statement: “After completing this article, readers should be able to ..."
- Word count: 250 words or less.
- Highlight any discrepancy between the current health situation / condition versus the optimal health situation / condition.
- Use epidemiological information to reiterate gaps in education or practice.
Body of the Review:
- Images count toward the total:
- Full-page image = 700 words
- Half-page image = 350 words
- Additional components to consider for inclusion:
- Epidemiology (including prevalence and etiology).
- Pathogenesis (including, when appropriate, pathophysiology).
- Clinical Aspects (symptoms, signs, laboratory tests, and diagnosis).
- Management (including therapy).
- Prognosis (including follow-up).
Evidence / Article Summary:
- Word count: 200-400 words
- Format: Bulleted list.
- Summarize major points, supporting each with a statement of evidence, to remind readers of the importance of basing their practices on evidence.
- Base statements on such evidence as meta-analyses, practice guidelines, or Cochrane collaborative analyses.
To determine Level of Evidence, see Evidence Quality diagram below.
- If information in the manuscript is repeated in the Evidence Summary, please use the same reference number used in the body of the manuscript
- For example: “Based on strong research evidence (1) (2)" . . . “Based on some research evidence as well as consensus (3) . . . “Based primarily on consensus due to lack of relevant clinical studies.”
- When an evidence summary does not seem appropriate, create a Summary listing the article’s major “take home” points.
- Consider casting the summary in terms of practice change recommendations.
Note: The editorial board will begin accepting IOS case submissions again on February 15th 2023. Please check here at that time for updated IOS author guidelines.
The editors and staff of NeoReviews find themselves in the fortunate position of having too many submissions for the Index of Suspicion in the Nursery column. Our available publication slots for the column are filled, and because we do not think it is fair to delay publication unduly, we have decided not to accept new cases for the present. We will make an announcement in NeoReviews when we resume accepting new cases. We apologize for having to take this step, but we wish to be fair to all authors and to publish only timely medical information. We are grateful for your interest in the journal.
The editors and staff of NeoReviews find themselves in the fortunate position of having too many submissions for the Visual Diagnosis Section. Our available publication slots for the column are filled, and because we do not think it is fair to delay publication unduly, we have decided not to accept new cases for the present. We will make an announcement in NeoReviews when we resume accepting new cases. We apologize for having to take this step, but we wish to be fair to all authors and to publish only timely medical information. We are grateful for your interest in the journal.
In Video Corner, the journal strives to promote best practices and evidence-based procedural approaches. Consider submitting instructional videos. There are several ways to teach using video, and the editors are open to creative methods (including the use of text, voice-overs, simulations, and just-in-time training). However, there are two components critical to teaching procedures: the cognitive and the technical. This format has been established in medical education and accepted.
- Word limit: 1,600
- Title Page: Do not reveal the diagnosis in the case title. See title page template.
- Video Components: The first step for submitting your video is to develop a written script. Be sure to identify the problem (topic) to be covered and the learning objectives you hope to accomplish. Your written script should be based on the following 10 steps:
- Any video submitted should be reviewed by the HIPAA compliance officer at your hospital, university or institution, especially if live patients are shown.
- The AAP Model Release form for all humans shown in your video must be completed and on file at AAP.
- Avoid promoting trade names.
- Try to blur out or hide patient identities and product brands.
- Use peer-reviewed resources when available.
- Suggested formats and file sizes: mp4, H.264 encoding. Image size 980x720.
E-mail the video and the accompanying manuscript files to Akshaya Vachharajani, MD, associate editor, Video Corner, firstname.lastname@example.org. Be sure to use the words “NeoReviews_Video Corner” in your subject line, along with the name of the topic or procedure demonstrated. If the file email is rejected due to size, please send an e-mail to email@example.com, asking for additional guidance on submission.
Allow 4-6 weeks for a reply. If your video and manuscript are accepted, Dr. Vachharajani will contact you about any revisions that might be needed.
If you need additional guidance, please contact the AAP staff of NeoReviews at: firstname.lastname@example.org.
NeoReviews’ Perspectives series offers insights on the profession of neonatology by taking a closer look at subjects in the following topic areas: Educational Perspectives, Historic Perspectives, Perinatal Profiles, International Perspectives, Nursing Perspectives, and, coming soon, Research Perspectives and Quality Improvement Perspectives.
- Word limit: 1,000 words
- Article Components:
- Title Page: 90-character title limit. See title page template.
- Body of the article:
- Be sure to clear the topic with the Perspectives Associate Editor (see below)
- Bear in mind that the reader may have little familiarity with the person/topic/project you are writing about. Therefore, make sure your topic is clear and sharply focused.
- References and/or Suggested Readings
- Images & Figures: Please provide any visual elements that will help readers to better understand your article, particularly if it focuses on individuals. Note: Obtaining permission to use a previously published image, figure or table is the author’s responsibility.
- For questions about the Perspective series, contact Mamta Fuloria, MD, Associate Editor, Perspectives, at email@example.com. Be sure to include the words "NeoReviews_Perspectives” in the subject line.
The purpose of Maternal-Fetal Case Studies is to describe a pregnancy complication to provide teaching pearls relevant to readers of NeoReviews.
In this feature, authors provide a brief outline of a pre-existing maternal diagnosis pregnancy-related complication and subsequently, document the pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. Following that, authors discuss the fetal and neonatal implications of the maternal diagnosis or pregnancy-related complication.
Topics may include the effects on the fetus/newborn secondary to:
- Maternal medical conditions including:
- Cardiac disease including chronic hypertension
- Connective tissue disorders
- Diabetes, pre-existing or gestational
- Exposure to ionizing radiation
- Gastrointestinal/digestive disorders
- Hematologic disorders
- Immunologic disease
- Infectious diseases including HIV, viral bacterial, protozoal, parasite
- Maternal substance use including illicit drugs, cannabis, tobacco, alcohol
- Metabolic disorders including PKU
- Neurologic disease
- Psychiatric disorders
- Pulmonary disease
- Renal disease, acute or chronic
- Thromboembolic disease
- Surgery during pregnancy and effects of anesthesia
- Multiple gestation
- Preeclampsia and other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy
- Complications of labor that affect the fetus/neonate
- Cord prolapse
- Effects of analgesics administered intrapartum
- Intrapartum fever, intraamniotic infection
- Maternal hypotension
- Meconium-stained amniotic fluid
- Operative assisted vaginal delivery
- Placental abruption, vasa previa, maternal-fetal hemorrhage
- PPROM / PROM
- Shoulder dystocia
- Uterine rupture
Word Limit: Approximately 1400-1600 words
Title: Title should ideally link neonatal implications for the pregnancy diagnosis or complication
Case Presentation: The pregnant patient’s presentation and initial aspect of the clinical case (approximately 2-3 paragraphs) including obstetrical history and prenatal course/management
Case Progression: Completion of the patient antenatal course leading to delivery
Delivery: Brief description of delivery including gestational age and mode of delivery (1 paragraph)
- Maternal Outcome: Brief description of postpartum course and delivery
- Neonatal Outcome: Brief description of neonatal care including any neonatal resuscitation, Apgar score and weight (grams, %) and brief postnatal course
Discussion: (3-4 paragraphs) Provide evidence-based guidelines for management of the complication of pregnancy or the pre-existing diagnosis during pregnancy. Focus on fetal and neonatal implications of obstetric decision-making and implications of any pregnancy-related complications or diagnoses.
Figures / Photos / Tables / Graphics:
- Figures, photos, tables or other graphics are encouraged to illustrate educational points for the reader. Illustrations may include photos of the delivery, radiographs, and tables to outline summarized information. It is the author’s responsibility to obtain copyright, as needed. Note, radiographs do not require permission if there are no identifiers.
- A fetal heart rate tracing can be included if it aptly illustrates key points in the case
- As a general rule, approximately 3-4 graphics (including photos, tables, figures) are encouraged
- Photos and figures are still required to be submitted in accordance with figure guidelines and should not be submitted as part of the main document.
-Use of references from national guidelines from American College ObGyn or Society Maternal-Fetal Medicine or landmark articles are encouraged
-The total number of references does not need to be extensive; an average of 5 references for the discussion section is appropriate
Milliken S, Allen RM, Lamont RF. The role of antimicrobial treatment during pregnancy on the neonatal gut microbiome and the development of atopy, asthma, allergy and obesity in childhood. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2019;18(3):173-18
Associate Editor: Brett C. Young MD firstname.lastname@example.org
If you need additional guidance, please contact the AAP staff of NeoReviews at: email@example.com.
Submit manuscripts to our content management system here.
Initial Review: Each article proceeds through initial editorial checks before being cleared for review. Articles may be returned to the author if they do not meet the specifications listed above.
Editors’ Review Considerations: Once submission proceeds through the initial review noted above, each article is sent out for peer review. The great majority of articles require some revision. All articles are subject to this standard review process, and there is no guarantee of future publication.
Deadlines: Authors receive several weeks to revise their manuscripts as recommended and are required to adhere to the stated deadline. If there will be an egregious reason for missing the deadline, contact firstname.lastname@example.org as soon as possible to negotiate an alternate deadline.
After acceptance, articles are scheduled for publication based on current journal content needs. Approximately 60 days before publication, authors receive a link to view an Author Proof, showing the article as it will appear when published.
At this stage, it is extremely important for authors to go over the entire manuscript proof line by line, including tables and figures, to make sure the article is accurate.
NeoReviews is most grateful for all authors’ contributions to neonatal-perinatal education and to the health of children everywhere.