Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission’s compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

•  The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
•  The submission file is in Microsoft Word file format.
•  Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
•  The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
•  The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.

Author Guidelines

General Author Instructions 

SUBMISSION

Manuscripts should be submitted by one of the authors of the manuscript through the emails. Regardless of the source of the word-processing tool, only electronic PDF (.pdf) or Word (.doc, .docx, .rtf) files can be submitted. Only online submissions are advised strongly to facilitate rapid publication and minimize administrative costs. Submissions by anyone other than one of the authors will not be accepted. The submitting author takes responsibility for the paper during submission and peer review. If for some technical reason submission through the online Manuscript management System is not possible, the author can send manuscript as an email attachment.

TYPES OF PAPERS

1. Original research papers:

Papers that include original empirical data that have not been published anywhere earlier (except as an abstract). Null/negative findings and replication/refutation findings are also welcome. This type of paper normally should not exceed 25 double-spaced pages of text (including references) and should contain no longer than 15 figures/tables. We advise a length of 3000-6000 words (including everything). This type of paper should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables.

2. Short Research Articles:

These may be small single-result findings. Such articles can be brief but need to include enough information, particularly in the methods and results sections, that a reader could understand what was done. We advise a length of 3000-4000 words, plus 3-4 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references. This type of paper should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results and Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables.

3. Short communications:

Short Communications are urgent communications of important preliminary results that are very original, of high interest and likely to have a significant impact on the subject area of the journal. A Short Communication needs only to demonstrate a ‘proof of principle’. Authors are encouraged to submit an Original Research Paper to the journal following their Short Communication. We advise a length of 2500-3500 words, plus 2-3 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references. This type of paper should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables.

4. Review papers:

These papers will not have empirical data acquired by the authors but will include discussion of papers published and data acquired in a specific area. We advise a length of 5000-9000 words, (including 50-150 references plus 3-5 figures and/or tables (if required).

5. Minireview papers:

Minireviews are brief historical perspectives or summaries of developments in fast-moving areas covered within the scope of the journal. They must be based on published articles; they are not outlets for unpublished data. We advise a length of 3000-6000 words, (including 30-70 references plus 2-3 figures and/or tables (if required). They may address any subject within the scope of the journal. The goal of the Minireviews is to provide a concise summary of a particular field in a manner understandable to all readers.

6. Case reports / Case studies (Mainly for bio-medical journals):

Case reports describe patient cases which are of particular interest due to their novelty and their potential message for clinical practice. While there are several types of case reports, originality and clinical implications constitute the main virtues by which case reports are judged. (Ref: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18677298). Case studies are an invaluable record of the clinical practices of a profession. While case studies cannot provide specific guidance for the management of successive patients, they are a record of clinical interactions which help us to frame questions for more rigorously designed clinical studies. Case studies also provide valuable teaching material, demonstrating both classical and unusual presentations which may confront the practitioner. (Ref: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2597880/). Case Reports should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Presentation of Case, Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables. Abstract (not more than 250 words) of the Case reports should have the following sections: Aims, Presentation of Case, Discussion and Conclusion. Only Case Reports have word limits: Papers should not exceed 2000 words, 20 references or 5 figures.

7. Systematic Reviews:

Systematic Reviews should usually be based on medical interventions or animal model studies. We recommend that authors consult the PRISMA guidelines for reporting in Systematic Reviews. Systematic Reviews should deal with a clearly formulated question and use systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, and critically assess the relevant research. We advise a length of 5000-9000 words, (including 50-150 references plus 3-5 figures and/or tables (if required).

8. Policy Papers:

The purpose of the policy paper is to provide a comprehensive and persuasive argument justifying the policy recommendations presented in the paper, and therefore to act as a decision-making tool and a call to action for the target audience. We advise a length of 3000-4000 words, plus 3-4 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references.

TERMS OF SUBMISSION

Papers must be submitted on the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere and are not currently under consideration by another journal published by GPH or any other publisher. The submitting author is responsible for ensuring that the article’s publication has been approved by all the other coauthors. It is also the authors’ responsibility to ensure that the articles emanating from a particular institution are submitted with the approval of the necessary institution. Only an acknowledgement from the editorial office officially establishes the date of receipt. Further correspondence and proofs will be sent to the author(s) before publication unless otherwise indicated. It is a condition of submission of a paper that the authors permit editing of the paper for readability. 

TITLE AND AUTHORSHIP INFORMATION

The following information should be included

Paper title
Full author names
Full institutional mailing addresses
Email addresses of all authors

 MANUSCRIPT STRUCTURE

The manuscript should be written in English with a simple layout. The text should be prepared in single column format. The text, excluding the abstract, if required, can be divided into numbered sections with brief headings. Starting from the introduction with section 1, subsections should be numbered (for example 2.1 (then 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.2, etc.), up to three levels
Title

The title should be without any abbreviations and it should enlighten the contents of the paper.

Abstract
The abstract should be concise and informative. It should not exceed 300 words in length. It should briefly describe the purpose of the work, techniques, and methods used, major findings with important data and conclusions. Different sub-sections, as given below, should be used. No references should be cited in this part. Generally, non-standard abbreviations should not be used, if necessary they should be clearly defined in the abstract, at first use.  

Keywords
Immediately after the abstract, about 4-8 keywords should be given. Use of abbreviations should be avoided, only standard abbreviations, well known in the established area may be used, if appropriate. These keywords will be used for indexing.  

Abbreviations

Non-standard abbreviations should be listed and full form of each abbreviation should be given in parentheses at first use in the text. 

Introduction

Provide a factual background, clearly defined problem, proposed solution, a brief literature survey and the scope and justification of the work done.  

Material and methods

Give adequate information to allow the experiment to be reproduced. Already published methods should be mentioned with references. Significant modifications of published methods and new methods should be described in detail. This section will include sub-sections. Tables & figures should be placed inside the text. Tables and figures should be presented as per their appearance in the text. It is suggested that the discussion about the tables and figures should appear in the text before the appearance of the respective tables and figures. No tables or figures should be given without discussion or reference inside the text.

Tables should be explanatory enough to be understandable without any text reference. Double spacing should be maintained throughout the table, including table headings and footnotes. Table headings should be placed above the table. Footnotes should be placed below the table with superscript lowercase letters.

Each figure should have a caption. The caption should be concise and typed separately, not in the figure area. Figures should be self-explanatory. Information presented in the figure should not be repeated in the table. All symbols and abbreviations used in the illustrations should be defined clearly. Figure legends should be given below the figures. 

Some guidelines for Medical papers:
Randomized controlled trials should follow the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) guidelines (http://www.consort-statement.org).
Case reports, case series, cross-sectional and other observational studies should follow the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) guidelines (http://www.strobe-statement.org). If the detailed methods are explicitly stated in the manuscript for single case studies, STROBE may be avoided.
Authors producing systematic reviews and meta-analyses should follow the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines (http://www.prisma-statement.org).  

Results & Discussion

Results should be clearly described in a concise manner. Results for different parameters should be described under subheadings or in a separate paragraph. Table or figure numbers should be mentioned in parentheses for better understanding.

The discussion should not repeat the results, but provide a detailed interpretation of data. This should interpret the significance of the findings of the work. Citations should be given in support of the findings. The results and discussion part can also be described as separate, if appropriate.  

Tables & Figures

Tables & figures should be placed inside the text. Tables and figures should be presented as per their appearance in the text. It is suggested that the discussion about the tables and figures should appear in the text before the appearance of the respective tables and figures. No tables or figures should be given without discussion or reference inside the text.

Tables should be explanatory enough to be understandable without any text reference. Double spacing should be maintained throughout the table, including table headings and footnotes. Table headings should be placed on the table. Footnotes should be placed below the table with superscript lowercase letters. Vertical rules should not be used.

Each figure should have a caption. The caption should be concise and typed separately, not in the figure area. Figures should be self-explanatory. Information presented in the figure should not be repeated in the table. All symbols and abbreviations used in the illustrations should be defined clearly. Figure legends should be given below the figures. Upon submission of an article, authors are supposed to include all figures and tables in the PDF file of the manuscript. Figures and tables should not be submitted in separate files. If the article is accepted, authors will be asked to provide the source files of the figures. Each figure should be supplied in a separate electronic file. All figures should be cited in the paper in a consecutive order. Figures should be supplied in either vector art formats (Illustrator, EPS, WMF, FreeHand, CorelDraw, PowerPoint, Excel, etc.) or bitmap formats (Photoshop, TIFF, GIF, JPEG, etc.). Bitmap images should be of 300 dpi resolution at least  

Guideline for Reporting P values:

P is always italicized and capitalized.

i) Correct expression: (P = .05). Wrong Expression: (P < .05), unless P < .001.
ii) The P value should be expressed to 2 digits whether or not it is significant. If P < .01, it should be expressed to 3 digits.
iii) When rounding, 3 digits is acceptable if rounding would change the significance of a value (eg, P = .049 rounded to .05).
iv) Expressing P to more than 3 significant digits does not add useful information since precise P values with extreme results are sensitive to biases or departures from the statistical model.
v) Reporting actual P values avoids this problem of interpretation. P values should not be listed as not significant (NS) since, for meta-analysis, the actual values are important and not providing exact P values is a form of incomplete reporting.
vi) Do not use 0 before the decimal point for statistical values P, alpha, and beta because they cannot equal 1.  

Conclusions

This should briefly state the major findings of the study.  

Acknowledgments

A brief acknowledgement section may be given after the conclusion section just before the references. The acknowledgements of people who provided assistance in manuscript preparation, funding for research, etc. should be listed in this section. All sources of funding should be declared as an acknowledgement. Authors should declare the role of the funding agency, if any, in the study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript. If the study sponsors had no such involvement, the authors should so state.  

Competing Interests

Declaration of competing interest should be placed here. All authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately (or appropriately) influence (bias) their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. If no such declaration has been made by the authors, GPH reserves to assume and write this sentence: “Authors have declared that no competing interests exist.”. 

Authors’ Contributions

Authors may use the following wording for this section: “ ‘Author A’ designed the study, performed the statistical analysis, wrote the protocol, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. ‘Author B’ and ‘Author C’ managed the analyses of the study. ‘Author C’ managed the literature searches…… All authors read and approved the final manuscript.” 

Consent

No manuscripts will be peer-reviewed if a statement of patient consent is not presented during submission (wherever applicable).
This section is compulsory for medical journals. Other journals may require this section if found suitable. It should provide a statement to confirm that the patient has given their informed consent for the case report to be published. Journal editorial office may ask the copies of the consent documentation at any time.

Authors may use a form from their own institution or this Patient Consent Form. It is preferable that authors should send this form along with the submission. But if already not sent during submission, we may request to see a copy at any stages of pre and post-publication.

If the person described in the case report has died, then consent for publication must be collected from their next of kin. If the individual described in the case report is a minor, or unable to provide consent, then consent must be sought from their parents or legal guardians.

Authors may use the following wording for this section: “All authors declare that ‘written informed consent was obtained from the patient (or other approved parties) for publication of this case report and accompanying images. A copy of the written consent is available for review by the Editorial office/Chief Editor/Editorial Board members of this journal.” 

Ethical Approval

This section is compulsory for medical journals. Other journals may require this section if found suitable. If human subjects are involved, informed consent, protection of privacy, and other human rights are further criteria against which the manuscript will be judged. It should provide a statement to confirm that the authors have obtained all necessary ethical approval from suitable Institutional or State or National or International Committee. This confirms either that this study is not against the public interest, or that the release of information is allowed by legislation.

All manuscripts which deal with animal subjects must be approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB), Ethical Committee, or an Animal Utilization Study Committee. , and this statement, and approval number must accompany the submission. If required, the author should be ready to submit a scanned copy of the IRB or Ethical Committee Approval at any stage of publication (Pre or post-publication stage). The manuscript should contain information about any post-operative care and pain management for the animals.

For manuscripts involving animal experiments, Authors may use the following wording for this section “All authors hereby declare that “Principles of laboratory animal care” (NIH publication No. 85-23, revised 1985) were followed, as well as specific national laws where applicable. All experiments have been examined and approved by the appropriate ethics committee”

All manuscripts which deal with the study of human subjects must be accompanied by Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethical Committee Approval, or the national or regional equivalent. The name of the Board or Committee giving approval and the study number assigned must accompany the submission. If required, the author should be ready to submit a scanned copy of the IRB or Ethical Committee Approval at any stage of publication (Pre or post-publication stage).

For manuscripts involving human experiments, Authors may use the following wording for this section: “All authors hereby declare that all experiments have been examined and approved by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.” 

Reference Style

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the information in each reference is complete and accurate. All references must be numbered consecutively and citations of references in text should be identified using numbers in square brackets (e.g., “as discussed by Smith [9]”; “as discussed elsewhere [9, 10]”). All references should be cited within the text; otherwise, these references will be automatically removed. References must be listed at the end of the manuscript and numbered in the order that they appear in the text. 

WARRANTIES AND COPYRIGHTS:

By submitting the manuscript, the authors warrant that the entire work is original and unpublished; it is submitted only to this Journal and all text, data, figures/tables or other illustrations included in the research article are completely original and unpublished, and these have not been previously published or submitted elsewhere in any form or media whatsoever. All authors are responsible for the complete contents of their manuscript. The author(s) warrant that the work contains no unlawful or libelous statements and opinions and liable materials of any kind whatsoever, do not infringe on any copyrights, intellectual property rights, personal rights or rights of any kind of others, and does not contains any plagiarized, fraudulent, improperly attributed materials, instructions, procedures, information or ideas that might cause any harm, damage, injury, losses or costs of any kind to person or property. Each author(s) agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless this publisher and the Editors for any breach of such warranties. It is authors’ responsibility to obtain written copyright permissions from other sources (publishers) for reproduction of any figures, tables, photos, illustrations, text or other copyright materials from previously published work. It is the policy of Benchmark to own the copyright of all contributions it publishes. To comply with the Copyright Law, a Copyright Transfer Form that transfer copyright of the article to the publisher must be completed by the authors prior to publication of an accepted article in this journal. Authors must submit a signed copy of the Copyright Transfer Agreement with their manuscript.

ETHICAL ISSUES:

Authors cannot submit a manuscript for publication to other journals simultaneously. It is waste of valuable resources because editors and referees spent a great deal of time processing submitted manuscripts. It is also unethical to republish similar research articles (text/figures/tables) again because journals have limited page space and it most likely violates copyrights which have already been transferred to the first journal. Therefore, all journals require a signed author’s copyright transfer agreement stating the originality of the research work submitted through a manuscript. As stated above that authors should submit original, new and unpublished research work to the journal. The ethical issues such as plagiarism, fraudulent and duplicate publication, violation of copyrights, authorship and conflict of interest are serious issues concerning ethical integrity when submitting a manuscript to a journal for publication.

WITHDRAWAL OF MANUSCRIPTS:

If the author requests withdrawal of manuscript after submission within the time span when the manuscript is still in the peer-reviewing process with Editors/Referees, an author is allowed to withdraw the manuscript without paying any withdrawal penalty whatsoever. However, it is unethical to withdraw a submitted manuscript from one journal if accepted by another journal. The withdrawal of manuscripts from the journals after submitting to the publisher will incur a withdrawal penalty. After the manuscript is accepted for publication either through journal editors or guest editors, the withdrawal is not permitted. If the authors or conference organizers or a third party withdraw manuscripts any time after final manuscripts have already been submitted to Benchmark for processing, the request is not entertained without a significant withdrawal penalty. Authors or conference organizers or a third party are not allowed to withdraw submitted manuscripts because the withdrawal wastes valuable manuscript processing time, money and works invested by the publisher. The authors or conference organizers or a third party must always pay $200 per page manuscript processing charges as withdrawal penalty to the publisher even if the withdrawal is permitted. The withdrawal of the conference papers by conference organizers will never be permitted and the conference organizers will be punished for withdrawal by paying a withdrawal penalty of US$500 per manuscript. Withdrawal of manuscripts is only allowed after withdrawal penalty has been fully paid to Benchmark by the authors or conference organizers or a third party. Any reason whatsoever of withdrawal of submitted manuscripts is treated as invalid and completely unacceptable under any circumstances. Publisher is not responsible for any damages whatsoever resulting from this consequence of the author’s or conference organizer’s or a third party decision. All questions or differences whatsoever concerning manuscripts withdrawal from Benchmark whether as to construction or otherwise, shall be held in the local jurisdiction of the registered editorial office of Benchmark.