1. How your submission will be evaluated by European Urology reviewers: Reviewer template and Publication guidelines Jim Catto Associate Editor European Urology How to Write a Manuscript and Get It Published in European Urology

2. Reviewer template and Publication guidelines The manuscript The authorThe reviewer

3. 1. The manuscript Content: Quality of work Novelty of question Report Type Manuscript Structure Checklists etc.

4. 1. The manuscript Content: Quality of work Novelty of question Report Type Manuscript Structure Checklists etc. Quality metrics: Content Strength of Message

5. 2. The review: Tasks for the reviewer a). Judge the work Quality of work Novelty of question Level within the field Interest to readership… Checklists etc.

6. 2. The review: Tasks for the reviewer a). Judge the work Quality of work Novelty of question Level within the field Interest to readership… Checklists etc. b). Improve the work Structured review http://europeanurology.com/about-the-journal/reviewers

7. Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Add enough to the published literature? What does it add? Cite relevant references to support your comments on originality

8. Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Does this work matter? Will it help our readers to make better decisions and, if so, how? Is a European Urology the right journal for it?

9. Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Clearly defined: –Question or –Aims or –Objectives or –Hypothesis Is this appropriately answered?

10. Structured reviews Design – Appropriate – Adequate Participants: – Clearly described and defined – Inclusion and exclusion criteria described? – How representative are of this category of patients? Originality Importance to readers Science – Defined question – Study design – Participants – Methods – Results – Interpretation/Disc/Conc lusion – References

11. Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Adequately described? State main outcome measure? Reporting standards: –RCTs –Systematic reviews –Observational studies –Health economics studies Checklist’s? Ethics –IRB/EC approval –Reviewer opinion

12. Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Do they answer the question? Are the outcomes credible? Are the data well presented Justify and pay attention to the –Tables –Figures ? Supplementary data

13. Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Co nclusion –References Are these warranted by the data Discussed in the light of previous evidence Is the message clearly stated?

14. Structured reviews Originality Importance to readers Science –Defined question –Study design –Participants –Methods –Results –Interpretation/Disc/Conc lusion –References Up to date and relevant Any glaring omissions? Pertinent to European Urology ? Adherence to & role of limited numbers

15. The Abstract Does it reflect the data? Is it clear? Does it serve purpose? Does it stand alone or lead into the paper? Consistency The Abstract is very important

16. Reporting guidelines Used to standardize reporting of clinical studies Aim to enhance quality and transparency of health care research We advocate their use for these reasons But for you …. they are a wealth of helpful information about what and how to write? Manuscripts conforming to CONSORT are more likely to be accepted

17. Reporting guidelines http://www.equator-network.org/

18. Reporting guidelines http://www.equator-network.org/resource-centre/library-of-health-research-reporting/

19. Reporting guidelines http://www.equator-network.org/resource-centre/library-of-health-research-reporting/ CONSORT: For RCT’s, but also excellent general advice STARD: For diagnostic studies PRISMA: For systematic reviews and meta- analyses STROBE: Epidemiology REMARK: Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies

20. Thank-you