© John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Edited By: Alastair D Burt
Impact Factor: 3.425
ISI Journal Citation Reports © Ranking: 2015: 15/79 (Pathology); 87/187 (Cell Biology)
Online ISSN: 1365-2559
Aims and scope
Histopathology is an international journal that publishes high quality research from a broad range of areas within the field of diagnostic human pathology. This includes papers in which the research is solely based on morphological/histopathological techniques and those in which these are complemented by other methods and technologies such as proteomics and genomics. There is a focus on papers in which there is a clear impact on clinical outcomes including improved diagnosis, better prognostic information and prediction of response to therapies (tissue based stratified medicine). The journal also publishes papers that describe technical innovations that lead to improved diagnostic and prognostic information.
Translational studies with direct relevance to the interpretation of tissue and cellular alterations in human disease are also welcome although the journal does not accept papers that are solely based on animal or tissue culture studies.
As well as original research papers, the Journal seeks to provide rapid publication in a variety of other formats, including editorials, review articles (both contributed and solicited), short reports, lessons of the month and items of correspondence. Case reports are published only if they are of marked originality and have an exceptionally important clinical message; these will generally be accepted as items of correspondence. The journal will consider high quality systematic reviews and where appropriate meta-analyses of relevant data.
As the journal of the British Division of the International Academy of Pathology, it seeks to reflect the broad professional interests of the Society’s membership but its ethos, authorship, content and purpose are those expected of a leading publication in the international scientific literature.
Submitting your manuscript: summary
Please make your submission online at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/histop.
Submissions can be uploaded as a Word document plus separate figure files (GIF, JPG, BMP, TIF, PIC).
Should you experience any difficulties in submitting your manuscript, please do not hesitate to contact the Editorial Assistant whose contact details are as follows:
Histopathology Editorial Office
9600 Garsington Road
Tel: +44 (0)8458 340370
Fax: +44 (0)1865 714591
The following outlines the requirements for submission of a manuscript to Histopathology. Further details are given below. There are no submission charges, page charges or fees for inclusion of supporting information on the internet.
Every manuscript should have:
A concise cover letter
A Microsoft Word (or equivalent) file (NOT A PDF) that is presented in English, in a double spaced format using a standard font (e.g. Arial, Helvetica, Times Roman etc 12 point) and has page numbers
A title page (or pages) containing:
• A succinct and clear title that accurately describes the work contained within the manuscript.
• A short running title (up to 50 characters including spaces)
• List of authors (using given and family name, but not degrees)
• Full affiliations of all authors and contact details of the corresponding author(s)
• A conflict of interest statement
• A word count (from beginning of Introduction to end of Discussion)
The next page should have:
• An Abstract (structured and no more than 250 words)
• Keywords (3 to 8) preferably chosen from the medical subject headings (MeSH) in Index Medicus.
The manuscript should contain the following:
• Materials and methods
• Acknowledgements which should include a statement defining funding sources
• List of abbreviations (optional)
• List of online Supporting Information (if any)
• Reference list in the correct format (see below)
• Figure legends (concise and not repeating material in the Results section)
As separate files:
• Figures (at the appropriate size and resolution [http://authorservices.wiley.com/electronicartworkguidelines.pdf])
• Supporting Information files (if any)
• Additional Files for Review but NOT for publication
• Patient Consent Form (where relevant)
The manuscript must be submitted via the online submission system (and not by mail or email), which is located at: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/histop
• Your Histopathology Manuscript Central username and password (unless you are a new user)
• All manuscript, figure and Supporting Information files finalised and ready to upload
• Permission to reproduce any previously published material scanned and ready to upload
• Full correct names and E-mail addresses of all of your co-authors.
• The names and full contact details of up to three suggested referees
• Additional files for review but not for publication may be provided
An initial assessment will be made by the Editor-in-Chief (or one of three Regional Editors) following submission of your manuscript. This process considers whether the submitted work falls within the scope of Histopathology (see above). At this point a proportion of manuscripts will be returned to the authors.
Manuscripts that enter the review process are assigned sequentially to a relevant Associate Editor who invites reviewers (normally two external reviews are sought). The reviewers’ evaluations and Associate Editor’s comments are submitted to the Editor-in-Chief (or the relevant Regional Editor) to inform a final decision. We aim to convey a decision within four weeks of the receipt of the manuscript.
The Editor-in-Chief or Regional Editor will advise authors whether a manuscript is accepted, requires revision, or is rejected. Revisions are expected to be returned within four weeks of decision. Manuscripts not revised within this time are subject to withdrawal from consideration for publication unless there are extenuating circumstances.
Please note that some manuscripts will have to be rejected on the grounds of priority and available space. Invitation to submit a revised manuscript does not imply that acceptance will automatically follow.
Authors may provide the Editor-in-Chief /Regional Editors with the names, addresses and email addresses of up to three suitably qualified individuals of international standing who would be competent to referee the paper, although the Editorial team will not be bound by any such nomination. Likewise, authors may advise of any individual who for any reason, such as potential conflict of interest, might be inappropriate to act as a referee, again without binding the Editor-in-Chief.
The decision of the Editor-in-Chief is final. If, however, authors dispute a decision and can document good reasons why a manuscript should be reconsidered, a rebuttal process exists. In the first place, authors should write to the Editor-in-Chief outlining their case.
Detailed guidance on the preparation of manuscripts
Submission of a manuscript will be held to imply that it contains original unpublished work and is not being submitted for publication elsewhere at the same time. This should be confirmed in the covering letter. The corresponding author must confirm that all authors have agreed with the submission in its present (and subsequent) forms. The authors should also indicate in their covering letter: the aim of the study; the significant and novel findings and where relevant how the findings could influence clinical practice.
The manuscript should be prepared using a word processing package, in A4 page, using a standard font, double spaced with margins of at least 2 cm and have page numbers. Do not use line numbering. The manuscript should be in English using consistent and preferably UK spelling.
The title of the paper should be short and must summarise the content of the article. It should be presented in a way that catches the attention of readers. It must however be accurate and unambiguous and should focus on the message of the paper.
Short running title
This should be concise (maximum of 50 characters including spaces) and reflect the main title and content of the manuscript.
List of contributors
All those designated as authors should qualify for authorship and all those who qualify should be listed. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. One author (deemed to be the Corresponding Author) should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article. Joint first authorship is permitted but this is normally restricted to two contributors unless there are exceptional circumstance.
Authorship credit should be based only on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; 3) final approval of the version to be published. Provision of funding, collection of data or general supervision of the research group alone does not justify authorship. All others who contributed to the work who are not authors should be named in an Acknowledgements section.
If you are submitting a revised article and the authors have changed from the original submission, for example: if additional authors are added [or removed] then agreement of all authors is mandatory with justification and explanation required within the covering letter, submitted via the ScholarOne system.
Full affiliations of all authors
This should include the name of the department(s) and institution(s) to which the work should be attributed, and contact details of the corresponding author i.e. the full postal address, phone number and email address.
Conflict of interest statement
Authors are responsible for disclosing all financial and personal relationships between themselves and others that might bias their work. To prevent ambiguity, authors must state explicitly whether potential conflicts do or do not exist. Authors should describe the role of the study sponsor(s), if any, in study design, in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in the writing of the report and in the decision to submit the report for publication.
A conflict of interest statement must be included in the manuscript (on the title page) that details any conflicts that exist for each author, or declares the absence of conflict for each author; this will be incorporated into the text of any accepted article.
We provide here details of some example situations or arrangements that the Editors of Histopathology would deem to result in a conflict of interest:
• Private or corporate funding of any part of the study, or donation or loan of supplies or equipment. In such cases role of the study sponsor or donor(s), if any, in the study design; data collection, analysis or interpretation; or writing of the report must be made clear.
• For each author (or their immediate family members):
• Employment by a company that produces a material or equipment used in the study.
• The receipt of financial or other compensation (such as cash, travel/accommodation costs, royalties, fees, stock or stock options) for work; advising or consulting; expert testimony or advocacy/public speaking from companies, organizations, institutions, and individuals.
• The ownership of financial holdings or considerations, such as stocks or bonds in a company that could be construed as gaining from the conclusions of the study.
• The holding of a patent on a method or equipment used in the study, or that employs a principle validated by the study.
• The presence of personal, professional, political, institutional, religious, or other associations that could have a bearing upon the stance taken in the submitted work.
Full details of the conflicts of interest of our Editor-in-Chief, Regional Editors and Associate Editors are held on record at the journal offices.
We ask our Editors to identify any manuscripts for which there is a real or perceived conflict of interest; they would not participate in the review process in such a situation. Similarly we ask reviewers to similarly declare any conflict of interest and decline invitations to review if this exists.
With regard to conflict of interest we are guided by the principles laid down by the Committee on Publication Ethics (http://www.publicationethics.org.uk), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication Updated October 2008 http://www.icmje.org/#conflicts) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME Editorial Policy and Publication Ethics Committees Conflict of Interest in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals Posted March 27, 2009. http://www.wame.org/conflict-of-interest-in-peer-reviewed-medical-journals).
Word count (from beginning of Introduction to end of Discussion)
The length of the manuscript should normally be no more than 2500 words. The use of online Supporting Information as a route for presenting additional material is available. When using the device of Supporting Information for additional text or data, authors should remember that the main manuscript must contain sufficient information to make the work intelligible without resort to the Supporting Information. For example, it is not acceptable to shorten a manuscript by placing all of the Materials and Methods in Supporting Information. However it is acceptable to place some aspects of experimental detail in Supporting Information.
Abstract (Structured and no more than 250 words)
After the title page(s) the next page should carry an abstract of no more than 250 words which includes subsections: Aims; Methods and results; Conclusions. The abstract should be concise and clear. It should emphasise new and important aspects of the study. It should be understandable without reference to the rest of the paper and should contain no citation to references in the reference list. Non-standard abbreviations should be avoided. Advice on how to optimise your abstract for search engines can be found here.
Below the abstract, authors should provide and identify as such 3 to 8 keywords or short phrases to assist indexing the article and that may be published with the abstract. MESH headings are a useful guide for authors in considering keywords.
Manuscript structure: general aspects
As noted above full articles should usually be no more than 2500 words from the beginning of the Introduction to the end of the Discussion, which is approximately nine journal pages, when tables, figures and references are also included.
Review articles may exceed these limits by arrangement with the Editor-in-Chief. Please remember that succinct articles are likely to make a greater impact on readers than long ones and are likely to proceed more rapidly though the editorial process post-acceptance..
The text of research articles should be divided into sections with the headings: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion. Some articles may need subheadings within sections (especially the Results and Discussion sections) to clarify their content. Such sections however should not be numbered.
Other types of articles, such as reviews and short reports, still need a title and abstract and should adhere as closely as possible to these guidelines. This is not required in items of correspondence.
Review articles and commentaries/editorials have greater flexibility than standard original articles although a concise clear style is essential. Such articles are usually by invitation although the editorial team is happy to receive suggestions and outlines of possible material of this kind. All such material, whether invited or not, will normally undergo peer review.
Editorials usually take the form of a brief (typically 2 to 3 journal pages) review that places a paper (or group of papers) published in the issue into a broader context. They should be focussed and pithy. They should be accessible to a broader audience than the primary papers might be. Diagrams are often useful to illustrate concepts and ideas.
The nature of a review article is self-explanatory. These might be of variable length from short items (mini-review) through to very detailed, fully referenced contributions.
Items of correspondence: Comments on previously published papers, items of topical interest, and brief original communications will be considered under this heading. The letter should not be divided into sections. No abstract is required. The length, including references, should be between 600 and 800 words. You should include no more than six references. Submit no more than two black and white or coloured illustrations; each should not exceed one column width.
Short reports: The Journal will consider brief original reports; the length should not exceed 1500 words. It should still include a structured abstract of 250 words. It should not contain more than two figures or tables, or one of each.
Lesson of the Month: Articles submitted for “Lesson of the Month” should be succint with a punchy title and provide novel information to the reader. Such articles might include a description of a case (or cases) that raises interesting diagnostic issues from which an important lesson is learnt. This may include cases where errors have been made. Examples could include cases where there is a differential diagnosis and a particular immunostain is misleading or the description of a previously unreported iatrogenic artefact. No abstract is required. The length, including references, should be between 600 and 800 words. You should include no more than six references. Submit no more than two black and white or coloured illustrations; each should not exceed one column width.
Manuscript structure: specific guidance
Authors should state the purpose of the article and summarise the rationale for the study or observation, providing relevant background. The length of the Introduction is not specified but it should be in proportion to the rest of the manuscript and sufficiently comprehensive to allow a non specialist to understand the setting of the work. Give only strictly pertinent references and avoid the inclusion of data or conclusions from the work being reported. The aims of the study and hypothesis being tested should be stated clearly and objectively.
Materials and methods
• Ethical issues:
• A statement describing explicitly the ethical background to the studies being reported should be included in all manuscripts in the Materials and Methods section. Ethics committee or institutional review board approval should be clearly stated and the relevant reference numbers and dates must be given. Do not use patients’ names, initials or hospital numbers, especially in illustrative material.
• The Journal recognises that the requirements and legislation pertaining to all aspects of ethical review may vary between different jurisdictions. If there are any legitimate concerns raised by reviewers or editors about any aspect of the ethical issues of the study that cannot be satisfactorily resolved, the Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to decline to publish the manuscript. The current ethical policies of Histopathology can be found at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2559/homepage/ethical_policy_of_histopathology.htm.
• As a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), adherence to these submission criteria is considered essential for publication in Histopathology. If, at any stage in the submission and review process or even after publication, a manuscript or authors are found to have disregarded these criteria, it is the duty of the Editor-in-Chief to report this to COPE. COPE may recommend that action may be taken, including but not exclusive to, informing the authors’ professional regulatory body and/or institution of such a dereliction. The website for COPE may be accessed at: http://www.publicationethics.org.uk
• If concerns are raised regarding potential misconduct, such as plagiarism, redundant publication, or fabrication or manipulation of data, authors should be aware that the Journal will follow the COPE guidelines in dealing with the case, which, if the Journal is not satisfied with the authors’ explanation, can lead to the withdrawal of a manuscript from peer-review, or the publication of a retraction, and also to the Journal informing the authors’ professional regulatory body and/or institution of the details of the case.
- If the person is a minor, consent must be obtained from the child¹s parents or guardians.
- If the person is deceased, we consider it essential and ethical that you obtain consent for use from the next of kin. If this is impractical you need to balance the need to use the image against the risk of causing offence. In all cases ensure you obscure the identity of the deceased.
- If using older material, or for material obtained in the field, for which signed release forms are, for practical purposes, unobtainable, you will need to confirm in writing that the material in question was obtained with the person¹s understanding that it might be published.
• General aspects of Materials and Methods:
• Describe the methods, reagents and equipment (give the manufacturer’s name and address in parentheses) and procedures in sufficient detail to allow other workers to reproduce the results. Give references to established methods, including statistical methods (see below); provide references and brief descriptions for methods that have been published but are not well known; describe new or substantially modified methods.
• Studies on biomarkers and/ or prognostic and predictive factors must describe the patient selection criteria and provide a detailed breakdown of the cohort(s) included in the study.
• Important information that is not essential for the understanding of the manuscript may appear as Supporting Information online. Examples of this might include PCR primer sequences and extraneous experimental detail. As a guide, information required to understand what was done and how, should be in the manuscript.
• Reliable studies of clinical samples require high quality samples and we anticipate that authors will document BRISQ Tier one variables See: Simeon-Dubach D, Burt AD, Hall PA. Quality really matters: the need to improve specimen quality in biomedical research. Histopathology. 2012;61(6):1003-5
Histopathology is interested in personalized medicine research describing biomarkers of therapeutic outcome or response. Predictive biomarker studies that estimate response or survival in advance of therapy or pharmacodynamic biomarker studies that are associated with target modulation are of particular interest. Highest priority will be given to those articles that are likely to have direct clinical applications and are definitive based on size of cohort, methodological approach, statistical analysis, multivariate analysis, reproducibility, and patient follow-up.
Personalized medicine biomarker studies should have the following characteristics:
• They are definitive in size and statistical power. Prospective studies or prospective-retrospective studies will receive priority. Retrospective studies will be considered, but they should include verification using an independent cohort.
• They describe a unique cohort with results that directly impact clinical practice. (For rare cancer types, it is recognized that small cohorts will be analyzed.)
• They adhere to the REMARK criteria as listed in their guidelines (http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/97/16/1180/T1.expansion.html).
• They contain thorough specimen collection data, assay validation, and statistical rigor.
• They are based on (or include) mechanistic data.
• Statistics and bioinformatics
• You must describe statistical and bioinformatic approaches for both data processing and analysis with enough detail to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to verify the reported results. When possible, quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of error or uncertainty (such as standard error or confidence intervals). Sample size should always be indicated. References for the design of the study and statistical methods should usually be to standard works (with pages stated) but citation to the papers in which the designs or methods were originally reported may sometimes be appropriate.
• Restrict tables and figures to those needed to explain the argument of the paper and to assess its support. Where possible use graphs as an alternative to tables.
• The checklist for statisticians published by the BMJ is a valuable resource (see: http://resources.bmj.com/bmj/authors/checklists-forms/statisticians-checklist).
A systematic review is a comprehensive high- level summary of primary research on a specific research question that attempts to identify, select , synthesise and appraise all (high quality) evidence relevant to that question. A meta-analysis uses statistical methods to quantitatively evaluate pooled data from single studies. Many pathological reviews are likely not to have sufficient data on clinical outcomes to warrant a meta-analysis.
While the content of a systematic review will be partly determined by the topic and evidence, as a minimum the review should:
• Clearly state the purpose of the review
• Determine inclusion and exclusion criteria to generate a PRISMA flowchart that includes identification of studies, screening, eligibility and inclusion data (See Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J et al, The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 2009: 339: b2700)
• Determine the primary end point of the review ie. acceptance or rejection of the null hypothesis
• Clearly describe the search methodology (databases, search terms)
• Describe the process of data extraction
• Undertake statistical assimilation if appropriate
• Evaluate the quality and/or risk of bias of the studies included preferably using a standard assessment tool (See Guyatt, GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008; 336: 924-926
Present your results in logical sequence in the text, tables and illustrations. Do not repeat in the text all the data in the tables or illustrations; emphasise or summarise only important observations. Figures and tables should be clearly referred to in the manuscript. It is generally the case that interpretation should be reserved for the discussion.
Emphasise the novel and important aspects of the study and the conclusions that follow from them. Do not repeat in detail data or other material given in the Introduction or the Results section. Include in the Discussion section the implications of the findings and their limitations, including implications for future research. Relate the observations to other relevant studies including those that may conflict with the data you present. Highlight the clinical importance of your findings.
Avoid unqualified statements and conclusions not completely supported by the data. Authors should avoid making statements on economic benefits and costs unless their manuscript includes economic data and analyses. Avoid alluding to work that has not been completed. State new hypotheses when warranted, but clearly label them as such. Recommendations, when appropriate, may be included. References to unpublished data should not be included.
List all contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship, such as a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance or a department chairperson who provided only general support. Financial and material support should also be acknowledged.
Groups of people who have contributed materially to the paper but whose contributions do not justify authorship may be listed under a heading such as ‘clinical investigators’ or ‘participating investigators’ and their function or contribution should be described.
All authors must indicate their specific contributions to the work described in the manuscript. Some examples include
• X performed the research
• Y designed the research study
• Z contributed essential reagents or tools
• A analysed the data
• B wrote the paper.
The acknowledgements should also contain a statement defining funding sources. This should include source(s) of support in the form of grants, equipment, or reagents, all of these should be clearly and fully defined, including sources of materials, reagents or other resources as gifts.
Human gene names should be upper case and italic and mouse gene names lower case and italic; protein names should be in plain type. Please follow HUGO gene nomenclature for human genes, at: http://www.genenames.org/. For mouse and rat gene nomenclature please follow the guidelines at:
List of online Supporting Information (optional)
A concise title and brief legend (no more than 20 words, with no special characters) as appropriate must be provided for each piece of Supporting Information.
References should be numbered consecutively in the order in which they are first mentioned in the text. Identify references in text, tables and legends by Arabic numerals in superscript. References cited only in tables or figure legends should be numbered in accordance with the sequence established by the first identification in the text of the particular table or figure. All references should be complete and accurate. References cited in Supporting information must appear in the main list of references even if they are not employed in the main text, and not in a separate list seen only online.
Avoid using abstracts as references. References to papers accepted but not yet published should be designated as ‘in press’; authors should obtain written permission to cite such papers as well as verification that they have been accepted for publication. Copies of any papers cited as ‘in press’ should normally be included in the submission. Avoid using unpublished observations and information from manuscripts submitted but not accepted.
The Journal’s reference style is modified Vancouver used by the NLM in Index Medicus. Up to six authors are allowed in the reference list. For articles with more than 6 authors, only the first 3 authors should be listed, followed by et al. The titles of journals should be abbreviated according to the style used in Index Medicus. Title abbreviations can be checked using the PubMed Journals database: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=journals&term=. Articles published online but not yet assigned to an issue may be cited using the DOI. Online citations should include the date of access. Examples of our reference style are:
Journal article from an issue
Fan H, Yuan Y, Wang J et al. CD117 expression in operable oesophageal squamous cell carcinomas predicts worse clinical outcome. Histopathology 2013; 62: 1028-1037.
Journal article in advance of inclusion in an issue
Watts K, Li J, Magi-Galluzzi C et al. Incidence and clinicopathological characteristics of intraductal carcinoma detected in prostate biopsies: a prospective cohort study. Histopathology 2013; DOI: 10.1111/his.12198
Chapter in an edited book
Dardick I. Histogenesis and morphogenesis of salivary gland neoplasms. In Ellis GL, Auclair PL, Gnepp DR eds. Surgical pathology of the salivary glands. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders, 1991; 108-128.
Chapter in a book
Ellis GL, Auclair PL. Tumours of the salivary glands. In Atlas of tumour pathology, 3rd edn. Washington DC: Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, 1996; 39-143.
Entry in a database
Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man [Internet]. Johns Hopkins University. Record No. 191170. Tumour Protein p53; TP53; [Accessed February 14, 2010]: Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/dispomim.cgi?id=191170
Each table should be on a separate page; use landscape orientation only if necessary. Tables should not be provided as photographic images or within graphics. Figures and illustrations must not be included or embedded into the document but uploaded as separate files.
Type each table on a separate page at the end of the main document. Number tables consecutively in the order of their first citation in the text and supply a brief title for each. Give each column a short or abbreviated heading. Any explanatory matter should be included in footnotes, not in the heading. Explain in footnotes all non-standard abbreviations that are used in each table. Identify statistical measures of variations, such as standard deviation and standard error of the mean. Make sure that each table is cited in the text. If you use data from another published source, obtain permission and acknowledge fully.
Legends for tables, figures and other illustrations should be provided in the main manuscript. These should be clear and concise and not repeat material shown elsewhere in the Results section. Tables, figures and other illustrations must be clearly referred to in the text of the manuscript.
Type legends for illustrations starting on a separate page with Arabic numerals corresponding to the illustrations. When symbols, arrows, numbers or letters are used to identify parts of the illustrations, identify and explain each one clearly in the legend. The magnification for light micrographs is not required although internal scale markers can be incorporated. Indicate the type of stain used only if it is other than haematoxylin and eosin.
Figures must be at the appropriate size and resolution. Figures and illustrations must not be included or embedded into the document but uploaded as separate files. Figures should be numbered consecutively according to the order in which they have been first cited in the text.
If a figure has been published, acknowledge the original source and written permission from the copyright holder to reproduce the material must be supplied. Permission is required irrespective of authorship or publisher except for documents in the public domain. Permission should be requested using the official Permission Request Form. If photographs of people are used, either the subjects must not be identifiable or their pictures must be accompanied by written permission to use the photograph (see above).
Figures should be professionally drawn, photographed and digitised; freehand or typewritten lettering is unacceptable. Letters, numbers and symbols should be clear and even throughout and of sufficient size that when reduced for publication each item will still be legible. Shading and hatches should be used with care and consideration of the final size of the image be made.
• Figure Format
• Figures should be prepared to fit either one or two column widths (83 mm and 170.5 mm respectively) with a maximum height of 251.5 mm at the correct resolution:
Black and white and colour images – 300 dpi
Graphs, drawings, etc – 800 dpi preferred; 600 dpi minimum
Combinations of photos and drawings (black and white and colour) – 500 dpi
• Images included in online submissions are for review purposes only, and should be suitable for online viewing. Please provide best quality figures with final accepted manuscripts. Digital files in accordance with our instructions at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/authors/digill.asp can be used by production. EPS (illustrations, graphs, annotated artwork; minimum resolution 800 dpi) and TIFF (micrographs, photographs; minimum resolutions 300 dpi) are recommended, although in some cases other formats can be used. Files should be at print size.
• Colour images
• Colour Figures are reproduced in print at the following rates:
1st and 2nd Figures: Free (includes 'Correspondence' papers)
All subsequent figures: £60 each
• All colour figures online are free
• If you would like more than two figures to appear in colour in print, Wiley-Blackwell require you to complete and return a Colour Work Agreement form before your paper can be published. An original hard copy form sent by post is required to process payment for colour in print. Hard copy forms can be sent by mail to Customer Services (OPI), John Wiley & Sons Ltd, European Distribution Centre, New Era Estate, Oldlands Way, Bognor Regis, West Sussex, PO22 9NQ.
In preparing graphs ensure that appropriate formats are used (histogram, points, box and whisker etc) with error bars wherever possible. Ensure that lines and axes are of a width that will be easily seen and the texts and data points are similarly of an appropriate size. Avoid patterned or gradient in-fills in histograms.
English Checking Service for Authors in Asia (from non-English speaking countries)
A list of recommended English editing services is available for authors who want to have their paper checked and improved before submission. This list and further information on the service is available at http://authorservices.wiley.com/bauthor/english_language.asp Please note that this is an optional service paid for by the author.
Submission of a revised version
Once authors have completed the revisions to their manuscript, they can only submit it by logging into http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/histo and entering their Author Centre, where they will find the manuscript listed under "Manuscripts with Decisions". Under "Actions" click on "Create a Revision". The manuscript number will then be appended with an ‘R’ to denote that it is a revised version
When submitting a revised manuscript, it is essential that authors include a ‘point-by-point’ response to the comments made by the reviewer(s) in the space provided, detailing the changes made. In order to expedite the processing of the revised manuscript, please be as specific as possible in responses to the reviewer(s).
IMPORTANT: Authors must delete any original files from the manuscript submission that are being replaced by revised files, and ensure that the files are in the correct order.
These are peer reviewed articles that have been accepted for publication in Histopathology and are currently being copy-edited and typeset. They will appear on the journal website on the “Accepted Articles” page as a PDF of the edited manuscript and will have a DOI (digital object identifier). Subsequently the full articles will appear on Early View in a matter of weeks, after proofing by the authors.
Early View is Wiley-Blackwell’s exclusive service presenting individual articles online as soon as they are ready before the release of the compiled print issue. Early View articles are complete, citable and are published in an average time of eight weeks from acceptance.
Proofs in PDF format will be made available for download by the corresponding author for checking. This stage is to be used only to correct errors that may have been introduced during the production process. Prompt return of the corrected proofs, preferably within three days of receipt, will minimise the risk of the paper being held over to a later issue.
A complimentary PDF offprint of the final paper will be provided to the author who checked the proofs, unless otherwise indicated. Hard copy reprints (minimum order 50, up to 300 copies) may be ordered online: http://offprint.cosprinters.com/blackwell and hard copies of a chosen issue can be ordered from Customer Services (firstname.lastname@example.org), please remember to provide full details of the journal name and which issue (i.e. volume and issue number) you require.
Should you have a query relating to manuscripts that have been accepted for publication, please contact the Production Editor whose contact details are as follows:
OnlineOpen is available to authors of primary research articles who wish to make their article available to non-subscribers on publication, or whose funding agency requires grantees to archive the final version of their article. With OnlineOpen, the author, the author's funding agency, or the author's institution pays a fee to ensure that the article is made available to non-subscribers upon publication via Wiley Online Library, as well as deposited in the funding agency's preferred archive. For the full list of terms and conditions, see http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/onlineopen#OnlineOpen_Terms
Any authors wishing to send their paper OnlineOpen will be required to complete the payment form available from our website at: https://authorservices.wiley.com/bauthor/onlineopen_order.asp
If your paper is accepted, the author identified as the formal corresponding author for the paper will receive an email prompting them to login into Author Services, where they will be able to complete the license agreement on behalf of all authors on the paper.
For authors signing the copyright transfer agreement
If the OnlineOpen option is not selected the corresponding author will be presented with the copyright transfer agreement (CTA) to sign. The terms and conditions of the CTA can be previewed in the samples associated with the Copyright FAQs below:
CTA Terms and Conditions http://authorservices.wiley.com/bauthor/faqs_copyright.asp
For authors choosing OnlineOpen
If the OnlineOpen option is selected the corresponding author will have a choice of the following Creative Commons License Open Access Agreements (OAA):
Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License OAA
Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial -NoDerivs License OAA
To preview the terms and conditions of these open access agreements please visit the Copyright FAQs hosted on Wiley Author Services http://authorservices.wiley.com/bauthor/faqs_copyright.asp and visit http://www.wileyopenaccess.com/details/content/12f25db4c87/Copyright--License.html.
If you select the OnlineOpen option and your research is funded by The Wellcome Trust and members of the Research Councils UK (RCUK) you will be given the opportunity to publish your article under a CC-BY license supporting you in complying with Wellcome Trust and Research Councils UK requirements. For more information on this policy and the Journal’s compliant self-archiving policy please visit: http://www.wiley.com/go/funderstatement.
For RCUK and Wellcome Trust authors click on the link below to preview the terms and conditions of this license:
Creative Commons Attribution License OAA
To preview the terms and conditions of these open access agreements please visit the Copyright FAQs hosted on Wiley Author Services http://authorservices.wiley.com/bauthor/faqs_copyright.asp and visit http://www.wileyopenaccess.com/details/content/12f25db4c87/Copyright--License.html.