Clinical Otolaryngology

Cover image for Vol. 42 Issue 1

Edited By: Terry Jones

Impact Factor: 2.627

ISI Journal Citation Reports © Ranking: 2015: 5/43 (Otorhinolaryngology)

Online ISSN: 1749-4486

Author Guidelines

Clinical Otolaryngology is intended to reflect all aspects of otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery, but in particular its clinical aspects. We welcome contributions under various headings, each of them having different requirements. Should a contribution be outside these guidelines, they will still be considered for publication, but the authors are advised to include a covering letter explaining why they find it difficult to comply with the guidelines. Overall, our aim is to publish original articles that add to what is already known about clinical aspects of otorhinolaryngology. Authors should attempt to demonstrate how their contribution does this. Animal and laboratory studies which have the potential to impact on clinical practice are encouraged. Case Reports are not considered for publication.

There is no charge for illustrations in colour.

Ethical policies of Clinical Otolaryngology
The ethical policies of Clinical Otolaryngology have been adapted (with permission) from the guidelines published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd1 and the guidelines adopted by the British Medical Association.2 In the opinion of the editors, these represent stringent and careful policies for a leading medical journal. Submitted work must comply with these policies, which are also based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on good publication and comply with their Code of Conduct.

All authors must fulfil the following three criteria:
• Have made a substantial contribution to research design, or the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data;
• Have drafted the paper or revised it critically;
• Have approved the submitted and final versions. An author may list more than one contribution, and more than one author may have contributed to the same element of the work. E.g. ‘A performed the research, A and C analysed the data and wrote the paper, E contributed the knockout mice for the study and G designed the research study and wrote the paper’.

The Editors aim to ensure that all articles published in Clinical Otolaryngology (hereinafter called ‘the journal’) meet internationally accepted ethical standards. To achieve this, we evaluate the ethical aspects of submitted work that involves human or animal subjects. We require that authors submitting a paper provide the date, approval number or code and or name of the approving committee on all work submitted to the journal.
There may be some exceptions (for example retrospective reviews of anonymised clinical records) in which case a letter from the relevant ethics committee (translated into English if necessary) stating that ethical permission was not required must be included.
If ethical concerns are raised, we will require full disclosure of ethical aspects of a study (such as copies of the consent forms or animal care certification) and we may, at our discretion conduct a formal or informal ethical review of the study whether or not it meets acceptable standards for publication. Results of this review may be shared with the authors, and if concerns are identified they will be passed along to the authors’ institution(s).
Editorial appraisal of ethical issues goes beyond simply deciding whether human subjects in a study gave fully informed consent, although this is one very important issue to consider. The Editors will judge whether the overall design and conduct of each piece of work is morally justifiable. If a study is deemed unethical, it will be rejected whether or not the findings were judged to be of importance.

Patient confidentiality and consent to publication
The journal requires that authors use the BMJ guidelines on patient consent to publication:
Manuscripts concerned with human studies must contain statements indicating that informed, written consent has been obtained, that studies have been performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki, and that the procedures have been approved by a local ethics committee.
Images of, or information about, identifiable individuals: it is the author’s responsibility to obtain consent from patients and other individuals for use of information, images, audio files, interview transcripts, and video clips from which they may be identified. To ensure we have the rights we require authors must obtain explicit written consent from the individual and provide that to us.
• If the person is a minor, consent must be obtained from the child’s parents or guardians.
• If the person is dead, 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 photo 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 person’s understanding that it might be published.

Animal work
Manuscripts describing studies involving animals should comply with local/national guidelines governing the use of experimental animals and must contain a statement indicating that the procedures have been approved by the appropriate regulatory body.
Authors are expected to comply with the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting research ( before submission of a manuscript. While the guidelines refer to animal experiments, most of the elements are common to all forms of research communication and adherence will strengthen the transparency and completeness of reporting.

Defining Ethnicity
Ethnicity and culture are socially determined variables of limited use in biological research, though they are useful in health services research. All the variables are confounded by socioeconomic status. Try to use accurate descriptions of race, ethnicity and culture rather than catch all terms in common use. In the Methods section of research papers, describe the logic behind any ethnic groupings used. It is best to present a range of information including the following:
• Genetic differences;
• Self assigned ethnicity, using nationally agreed guidelines;
• Observer assigned ethnicity;
• Country or area of birth (participant’s own, or parents’ or grandparents’, if applicable);
• Years in country of residence;
• Religion.

Reporting Clinical Trials Conducted by Pharmaceutical Companies
Relying on published trials alone can provide a biased view of effectiveness and safety when assessing medical interventions. Therefore, all trials should be deposited in a Clinical Trials Registry such as:

Publications must include the registration number and name of the trial register. Note that registration can be obtained retrospectively if necessary.
Please ensure that clinical trials sponsored by pharmaceutical companies follow the guidelines on good publication practice. These guidelines aim to ensure that such trials are published in a responsible and ethical manner. The guidelines cover companies’ responsibility to endeavour to publish results of all studies, companies’ relations with investigators, measures to prevent redundant or premature publication, methods to improve trial identification and the role of professional medical writers.

Role of professional medical writers in peer-reviewed publications
Please ensure that you follow the guidelines by the European Medical Writers Association on the role of medical writers.3 The guidelines emphasise the importance of respecting widely recognised authorship criteria, and in particular of ensuring that all people listed as named authors have full control of the content of papers. The role of professional medical writers must be transparent. Please name any professional medical writer among the list of contributors to any article for the journal (not only original research papers), and specify in the acknowledgments and statement of competing interests for the article who paid the writer. Writers and authors must have access to relevant data while writing papers. Medical writers have professional responsibilities to ensure that the papers they write are scientifically valid and are written in accordance with generally accepted ethical standards.3

Authors are required to disclose financial interests in any company or institution that might benefit from their publication. A competing interest exists when a primary interest (such as patients’ welfare or the validity of research) might be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain or personal rivalry). It may arise for the authors of the journal article when they have a financial interest that may influence their interpretation of their results or those of others. Financial interests are the easiest to define and they have the greatest potential to influence the objectivity, integrity or perceived value of a publication. They may include any or all, but are not limited to, the following:
Personal financial interests: Stocks or shares in companies that may gain or lose financially through publication; consultant fees or fees from speakers bureaus other forms of remuneration from organisations that may gain or lose financially; patents or patent applications whose value may be affected by publication;
Funding: Research support from organisations that might gain or lose financially through publication of the paper;
Employment: Recent, present or anticipated employment of you or a family member by any organization that may gain or lose financially through publication of the paper. Any such competing interest that authors may have should be declared. The aim of the statement is not to eradicate competing interests, as they are almost inevitable. Papers will not be rejected because there is a competing interest, but a declaration on whether or not there are competing interests will be added to the paper;
Patent rights;
Consultancy work.

At the time of submission, all authors must complete the Conflict of Interest form available in the ‘Instructions and Forms’ section of the journal's ScholarOne Manuscripts website and ensure that it reaches the journal's Editorial Office.
All sources of funding must be disclosed in the Acknowledgments section of the paper. List governmental, industrial, charitable, philanthropic and/or personal sources of funding used for the studies described in the manuscript. Attribution of these funding sources is preferred.
• This work was supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health, USA (DKxxxx to AB);
• This work was supported by the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of Canada (grant to AB and CD);
• This work was supported by a grant from Big Pharma Inc. (to AB) and equipment was donated by Small Pharma Inc. EF received a graduate studentship award from the University of xxxxx.

For papers where there are no competing interests, all authors must include the statement ‘Conflict of interest: the authors declare no conflict of interest.’
We will also ask reviewers to provide a statement of competing interests.

Very rarely, the Editors may have cause to suspect serious research misconduct, based on comments received or his/her own review of a paper. In this case, the article in question will be held in abeyance until this matter is resolved. The Editors will contact authors and any appropriate third party to ascertain whether the grounds for investigation are justified. If serious research misconduct is discovered, the Editors will contact the authors’ institutions after rejecting the paper.
Despite vigorous peer-review, it is possible that a paper that is fraudulent in some manner may be published. If this is discovered, it will be retracted and appropriate steps will be taken to notify readers of the journal, and the authors’ institution. Retractions will include the word ‘Retraction’ in the title, so that they are identified as such on indexing systems, for example, PubMed.
In any case of serious research misconduct, all authors of such an article may be banned from future publication in the journal.

Plagiarism and falsification
The journal carefully scrutinises all papers for evidence of plagiarism and falsified data using specialised software. Plagiarism can comprise the following:
• Multiple submission (i.e. to several journals at the same time);
• Redundant publication (i.e. when the same data are published repeatedly, especially when articles contain an unacceptable degree of overlap but some original data, or in the case of the first time data are published (followed by subsequent redundant publications);
• Self-plagiarism;
• Reviewer misconduct (e.g. a reviewer making use of material obtained during review);
• Changes to authorship after publication due to discovery of guest or ghost authors;
• Deliberate omission of funding or competing interest information.

Manipulation of images
The journal follows the guidelines and procedures established by the Council of Science Editors for digital imaging data. Please note the following in particular:
• No specific feature within an image may be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced;
• Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or colour balance are acceptable if they are applied to the whole image and as long as they do not obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any information present in the original;
• The grouping of images from different parts of the same gel, or from different gels, fields, or exposures must be made explicit by the arrangement of the figure (e.g., dividing lines) and in the text of the figure legend;
• Images will be examined for any indication of improper modifications. The final acceptance of all manuscripts is contingent on any concerns raised in our review of the figures being resolved.

Responding to institutions and research integrity bodies (eg the ORI)
Where the US Office of Research Integrity (ORI), and other research integrity bodies, request that the Journals publishes a correction or retraction resulting from scientific misconduct cases, the Editors will consider this request carefully. If the retraction is accepted by the Editor, the usual procedure for Retractions will be followed (see above).

Expressions of Concern
The journal publishes Expressions of Concern if the Editor has well-founded suspicions of misconduct, where they feel that it is sufficiently serious to warrant warning potential readers. The title of the Expression of Concern will include the words ‘Expression of Concern’. Expressions of Concern are published on numbered pages (print and electronic) and are listed in the journal's table of contents. They will cite the original article and be linked to it, so that indexing and abstracting services are able to identify and link to both the Expression of Concern and the original paper. Reasons for the Expression of Concern are clearly stated.

The journal has a duty to publish corrections (Errata) when errors could affect the interpretation of data or information, whatever the cause of the error (i.e. arising from author or publisher errors). It is important to set the scientific record straight. The title of the Erratum will include the words 'Erratum'. Errata are published on a numbered page (print and electronic) and are listed in the journal's table of contents. They will cite the original article and be linked to it, so that indexing and abstracting services are able to identify and link to both the erratum and the original paper. Reasons for retraction are clearly stated.

Decisions on manuscripts or on ethical misconduct are regarded as final; however, we recognise the right of an individual to challenge our decisions and seek an appeal. For appeals on ethical issues or on manuscript decisions, contact the Editor-in-Chief, Professor Terry Jones, who will be given full access to the submitted materials and all correspondence, and will conduct an inquiry independent of the Editors and Editorial Board and render a final binding decision.

Editors or Editorial Board members are never involved in editorial decisions about their own work. Journal editors, Editorial Board members and other editorial staff (including peer reviewers) withdraw from discussions about submissions where any circumstances might prevent him/her offering unbiased editorial decisions. When making editorial decisions about peer reviewed articles where an editor is an author or is acknowledged as a contributor, affected editors or staff members exclude themselves and are not involved in the publication decision. When editors are presented with papers where their own interests may impair their ability to make an unbiased editorial decision, he/she deputises decisions about the paper to a suitably qualified individual. Editors and members of the Editorial Board disclose their competing interests on an annual basis.

The Editors of the journal treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents, which means they will not divulge information about a manuscript to anyone without the authors’ permission. During the process of manuscript review, the following people may also have access to manuscripts:
• Editors and editorial staff of the journal;
• External reviewers, including statisticians and experts in trial methods;
• Third parties (the only occasion when details about a manuscript might be passed to a third party without the authors’ permission if there is reason to suggest serious research misconduct—see above);
• Third parties invited to write an Editorial Commentary on a paper.

All references should be numbered consecutively in order of appearance and should be as complete as possible. In text citations should cite references in consecutive order using Arabic superscript numerals. Sample references follow:
Journal article:
1. 1. King VM, Armstrong DM, Apps R, Trott JR. Numerical aspects of pontine, lateral reticular, and inferior olivary projections to two paravermal cortical zones of the cat cerebellum. J Comp Neurol 1998;390:537-551.
2. Voet D, Voet JG. Biochemistry. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1990. 1223 p.
Please note that journal title abbreviations should conform to the practices of Chemical Abstracts.
For more information about AMA reference style - AMA Manual of Style

Copyright Information
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 via the Wiley Author Licensing Service (WALS) they will be able to complete the license agreement on behalf of all authors on the paper.

For authors signing the copyright transfer agreement
f 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

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 License 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 and visit

If you select the OnlineOpen option and your research is funded by certain funders [e.g. The Wellcome Trust and members of the Research Councils UK (RCUK) or the Austrian Science Fund (FWF)] 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:

Online Open

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

Any authors wishing to send their paper for OnlineOpen will be required to submit a completed Copyright Transfer Agreement Form and complete the payment form available from our website at:

Prior to acceptance there is no requirement to inform an Editorial Office that you intend to publish your paper OnlineOpen. All OnlineOpen articles go through the journal’s standard peer-review process and will be accepted or rejected based on their own merit.

Accepted Articles

This service ensures that accepted ‘in press’ manuscripts are published online soon after acceptance, prior to copyediting or typesetting. Clinical Otolaryngology gives Accepted Articles status to Reviews, Original Articles and Our Experience correspondence. Accepted Articles appear in PDF-only format, without the accompanying full-text HTML. Each manuscript is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), which allows the article to be cited and tracked before it is allocated to an issue. After print publication, the DOI remains valid and can continue to be used to cite and access the article.

Manuscript Submission

Clinical Otolaryngology receives all manuscript submissions electronically. To submit a manuscript launch your web browser (Internet Explorer 5 or higher or Netscape 7 or higher) and go to the JOURNAL’S ScholarOne Manuscripts (formerly known as Manuscript Central) homepage (

A Conflict of Interest Form should be uploaded with your manuscript.

If you have any problems with your submission, please contact the editorial office.

Preparation of manuscripts
a. Titles should be brief and include the type of study. See CONSORT guidelines at and STROBE guidelines at

b. A short title should be provided.

c. The style of writing should conform to acceptable English usage and syntax. Spellings should be taken from the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Authors are advised to use the terminology recommended by the ISO–IEC, Nomina Anatomica as used in the latest edition of Gray's Anatomy and WHO list of approved names for drugs.

d. Illustrations. The artwork should be submitted in electronic form. Please save vector graphics (e.g. line artwork) in encapsulated Postscript format (EPS), and bitmap files (e.g. half-tones) in tagged image file format (TIFF). Detailed information on our digital illustration standards is available at

No artwork should be incorporated into text files. Individual figure files should bear a reference number corresponding to a similar number in the text. References to figures should be by arabic numerals (e.g. Figure 3) and they should be numbered in order of appearance. The most suitable place for the figures to be inserted in the text should be indicated. A list of legends for the figures should be submitted on a separate page. In the full-text online version of the journal, figure legends may be truncated in abbreviated links to the full-screen version. Therefore the first 100 characters of any legend should inform the reader of key aspects of the figure.

Tables should be typed on a separate page and should be given arabic numbers (e.g. Table 3). The approximate position in the text should be indicated. Units should appear in parentheses in the column headings and not in the body of the table. Words or numerals should be repeated on successive lines; ‘ditto’ or ‘do’ should not be used.

e. References in the text must be numbered with superscript in the order of appearance and should be listed on a separate sheet (doublespaced) at the end of the paper. In the bibliography references should be quoted as shown.

1. Wright A., Hawkins C.H., Änggård E.E. et al. (2009) A controlled clinical trial of a therapeutic bacteriophage preparation in chronic otitis due to antibiotic-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa; a preliminary report of efficacy. Clin. Otolaryngol. 34, 349–357.
2. National Institute for Clinical Excellence (2008). Surgical management of otitis media with effusion in children; available at: http://guidance.

The responsibility of checking references rests with the author.
We recommend the use of a tool such as Reference Manager for reference management and formatting.

f. The name, address, telephone and fax numbers and e-mail address of the author to whom all correspondence and proofs should be sent must be provided.

g. Online production tracking is now available for your article through Wiley-Blackwell’s Author Services. Author Services enables authors to track their article - once it has been accepted - through the production process to publication online and in print. Authors can check the status of their articles online and choose to receive automated e-mails at key stages of production. The author will receive an e-mail with a unique link that enables them to register and have their article automatically added to the system. Please ensure that a complete e-mail address is provided when submitting the manuscript. Visit for details on online production tracking and for a wealth of resources including FAQs and tips on article preparation, submission and more.

h. Wiley-Blackwell will dispose of all hardcopy or electronic material submitted two months after publication.

Proofs will be sent via e-mail to the corresponding author as an Acrobat PDF* (portable document format) file. The e-mail server must be able to accept attachments up to 4 MB in size. To read PDF files, you must have Acrobat Reader installed on your computer. This software can be downloaded (free of charge) from the following Web site: will enable the file to be opened, read on screen, and printed out in order for any corrections to be added. Further instructions will be sent with the proof.

Proof corrections should be returned to the Author Corrections Team ( within 3 days of receipt.

EarlyView (Publication Prior to Print)
Clinical Otolaryngology is covered by Wiley’s Early View service. Early View articles are complete full-text articles published online in advance of their publication in a printed issue. Articles are therefore available as soon as they are ready, rather than having to wait for the next scheduled print issue. Early View articles are complete and final. They have been fully reviewed, revised and edited for publication, and the authors’ final corrections have been incorporated. Because they are in final form, no changes can be made after online publication. The nature of Early View articles means that they do not yet have volume, issue or page numbers, so Early View articles cannot be cited in the traditional way. They are therefore given a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), which allows the article to be cited and tracked before it is allocated to an issue. After print publication, the DOI remains valid and can continue to be used to cite and access the article.

Categories of contributions and their requirements

Original Articles
• Reports of randomised controlled trials should conform to the CONSORT guidelines for the international reporting of such trials. See
• Epidemiology studies [case controlled, cohort, cross sectional] should conform to the STROBE guidelines. See
• Titles should include the study design (e.g. prospective case-controlled study)
• Structured abstract of no more than 250 words with the following headings: Objectives; Design; Setting; Participants; Main outcome measures; Results; Conclusions. Only abbreviations that are in the list of acceptable abbreviations are permitted in the Abstract.
• Text 2500 words maximum. In the text limit the number of abbreviations of medical/scientific terminology aiming for no more than 2 such abbreviations. Define the abbreviation (term in full followed by the abbreviation in parentheses) on the first mention in the next; thereafter, use the abbreviation only.
• Method section broken down under a series of subheadings covering the aspects detailed in the CONSORT and STROBE guidelines.
• Method section must include at the beginning an ‘Ethical considerations’ section detailing what ethical considerations were made or undergone prior to commencing the study.
• Results with missing data can be a considerable source of bias if it exceeds 20%. If this is the case then serious efforts have to be made to show that such bias is unlikely to exist.
• Results with audiometric outcome data must be reported using the American Academy of Ophthalmology and Otolaryngology (AAOO) Committee on hearing and Equilibrium ‘Guidelines for the evaluation of results of treatment of conductive hearing loss’ (Otolaryngol. Head Neck Surg. 1995; 113, 186-187). This may be modified by the use of 4 kHz rather than 3 kHz. Data to include the reporting of air-bone gaps in 10 dB bins.
• Discussion section must be structured with subheadings such as: Synopsis of key/new findings; Strengths of the study; Comparisons with other studies; Clinical applicability of the study.
• Six tables/figures maximum.
• Appendices and additional figures or tables, that will not be in the print edition but will be in the online edition can be submitted. Such material must be submitted with the rest of the article and identified with a prefix S, for example Table S1 or Figure S1 (see
• 25 references maximum
• Conflicts of Interest section must declare conflicts of any of the authors or statement ‘None declared’.

• Appropriate where the intention is to update a topic where recent, quality evidence is available, or where scientific knowledge is rapidly advancing.
• Prior consultation with the editor of a proposed review is recommended via the Editorial Office.
• It is essential for the review to have a clearly defined question.
• Structured abstract of no more than 400 words with the following headings: Background; Objective of review; Type of review; Search strategy; Evaluation method; Results; Conclusions.
• Up to five succinct key points in addition to the structured abstract.
• Abbreviations, other than those in our list of acceptable abbreviations, are not permitted in the abstract or key points.
• In the text limit the number of abbreviations of medical/scientific terminology aiming for no more than 2 such abbreviations. Define the abbreviation (term in full followed by the abbreviation in parentheses) on the first mention in the next; thereafter, use the abbreviation only.
• Method section including reviewed source of literature. If electronic search (e.g. Medline) performed, word/s used and time period of search stated.Methods of review and outcomes of identified literature stated.
• Text for reviews should not normally exceed 2,500 words. Some flexibility on word count may be offered, but all reviews must adhere to the same structural requirements.
• Discussion section should be structured with subheadings such as: Summary of main results; Overall completeness and applicability of evidence; Quality of evidence; Potential biases in review; Comparison with other reviews; Implications for clinical practice; Implications for research.
• Six tables/figures maximum.
• Supplementary tables/figures can be submitted as detailed in the Original articles section above.
• Audiometric outcomes must be reported as detailed in the Original articles section above.
• ‘Conflicts of Interest’ section declaring conflicts of any of the authors or statement ‘None declared’.

There are two types of correspondence:

Our Experience
For contributions reporting audit, uncontrolled case series, scientific methods, questionnaire studies, educational and management issues.
• Such contributions must materially add to rather than repeat the existing literature.
• Titles should include the number of participants (e.g. twenty-two children)
• No abbreviations apart from those on our list of acceptable abbreviations.
• Five succinct key points (and no abstract).
• Text 1500 words maximum.
• Methods section should have a separate Ethical considerations section at the beginning.
• Discussion should be structured as detailed in the Original articles section above.
• Four figures/tables maximum.
• Audiometric data should be reported as detailed in the Original articles section above.
• Ten references maximum.
• ‘Conflicts of Interest’ section declaring conflicts of any of the authors or statement ‘None declared’.

We work with Clinical Case Reports to enable publication of Our Experience articles that we are unable to accept. Clinical Case Reports is a peer-reviewed, open access, rapid publication, interdisciplinary journal published by Wiley. Authors of Our Experience articles rejected by Clinical Otolaryngology are offered the option of having their article, along with any related peer reviews, transferred for consideration by the Clinical Case Reports editorial team. Authors will not need to reformat or rewrite their manuscript at this stage, and publication decisions will be made shortly after transfer. Article publication charges apply. For more information on how to transfer your manuscript please go to the Clinical Case Reports website.

Technical Notes
For contributions reporting technical descriptions which do not report on measures outcomes. Such contributions must materially add to rather than repeat the existing literature.
• Three succinct points (and no abstract).
• Should contain: Introduction, Technical Description, Discussion.
•Text 1000 words maximum.
• Two figures/tables maximum.
• Six references maximum.
• No abbreviations apart from those on our list.

Letters to the Editor
Priority given to letters that discuss previous articles.
• Text 400 words maximum.
• One table/figure maximum.
• Five references maximum.
• No abbreviations apart from those on our list.
• Ensure that your correspondence article includes the following information: title of correspondence article; list of author names; author affiliation details; and correspondence author details, in particular e-mail address. 

A PDF offprint of the online published article will be provided free of charge to the corresponding author, and may be distributed subject to the Publisher's terms and conditions. Paper offprints of the printed published article may be purchased if ordered via the method stipulated on the instructions that accompany the proofs. Printed offprints are posted to the correspondence address given for the paper unless a different address is specified when ordered. Note that it is not uncommon for printed offprints to take up to eight weeks to arrive after publication of the journal.

Free access to the final PDF offprint or your article will be available via author services only. Please therefore sign up for author services if you would like to access your article PDF offprint and enjoy the many other benefits the service offers.