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

Reviewer template and Publication guidelines

The manuscript

The author The reviewer

1. The manuscript

Content:• Quality of work• Novelty of question• Report Type • Manuscript Structure• Checklists etc.

1. The manuscript

Content:• Quality of work• Novelty of question• Report Type • Manuscript Structure• Checklists etc.

Quality metrics:• Content• Strength of Message

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.

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

Structured reviews• Originality• Importance to readers• Science

– Defined question– Study design– Participants– Methods– Results– Interpretation/Disc/

Conclusion– References

• Add enough to the published literature?

• What does it add?• Cite relevant

references to support your comments on originality

Structured reviews• Originality• Importance to readers• Science

– Defined question– Study design– Participants– Methods– Results– Interpretation/Disc/

Conclusion– 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?

Structured reviews• Originality• Importance to readers• Science

– Defined question– Study design– Participants– Methods– Results– Interpretation/Disc/

Conclusion– References

• Clearly defined: – Question or– Aims or – Objectives or– Hypothesis

• Is this appropriately answered?

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/

Conclusion– References

Structured reviews• Originality• Importance to readers• Science

– Defined question– Study design– Participants– Methods– Results– Interpretation/Disc/

Conclusion– 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

Structured reviews• Originality• Importance to readers• Science

– Defined question– Study design– Participants– Methods– Results– Interpretation/Disc/

Conclusion– 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

Structured reviews• Originality• Importance to readers• Science

– Defined question– Study design– Participants– Methods– Results– Interpretation/Disc/

Conclusion– References

• Are these warranted by the data

• Discussed in the light of previous evidence

• Is the message clearly stated?

Structured reviews• Originality• Importance to readers• Science

– Defined question– Study design– Participants– Methods– Results– Interpretation/Disc/

Conclusion– References

• Up to date and relevant • Any glaring omissions?• Pertinent to European

Urology • ? Adherence to & role

of limited numbers

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

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

Reporting guidelines

http://www.equator-network.org/

Reporting guidelines

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

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 studiesPRISMA: For systematic reviews and meta-

analysesSTROBE: EpidemiologyREMARK: Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies

Thank-you