Submissions
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.-
Authors
Originality letter:
Stating that the manuscript has not been published previously and is not in the process of being evaluated by another publication- Statement that the manuscript is an honest, accurate and transparent record of the reported study, that no important aspects of the study have been omitted, and that any deviations from, or discrepancies with, the study originally planned have been explained and documented
- Complete detailed statement of potential conflicts of interest and sources of funding. The information must include the name of the sponsor(s), together with an explanation of any roles played in the design or data collection, analysis or interpretation, drafting of the report, or the decision to submit the results for publication
- Complete information of the corresponding author: address, telephone, fax and e-mail, in order to ensure adequate communication
- The submission also includes a document on “Transfer of Copyright” with the original signatures of all the authors. No digital signatures will be accepted
- Detailed description of each author’s contribution
Document format
Text written in Microsoft Word, with double spacing in Arial 12 font, and upper and lower margins of 2.5 cm and left and right margins of 3 cm
- The article must not exceed the following number of words: 5,500 for original research; 6,250 for systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines or consensus; 4,400 for reflection or education articles; 3,500 for case reports or articles on the history of medicine; 500 for letters to the editor
Title pageContains the title of the article (Spanish and English or Portuguese, if applicable), no more than 100 characters long
- Names and surnames of each of the authors, most relevant academic training, and institutional affiliation
- Name, postal and electronic address of the corresponding author
- Disclosure of potential conflict of interest and funding for the study
Abstract
In Spanish, English and Portuguese (if applicable) in a structured format, including the following: Objectives, Materials and Methods, Results and Conclusions. It must be specific and written in an impersonal style.
- The abstract must have no more than the following number of words: 250 for original research papers, systematic reviews, guidelines or consensus; 200 for case reports, reflection, education or history of medicine articles.
- It must include key words in Spanish indexed in the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS). Search at: http://decs.bvs.br/E/homepagee.htm
- And include the key words indexed in the PubMed Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). Search at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh. Alternatively, authors may use the link https://meshb.nlm.nih.gov/MeSHonDemand as a resource where they may find the indexation terms suggested by the National Library of Medicine when they copy and paste the abstract.
Body of the Article
The following subtitles must be included in original research articles: 1. Introduction; 2. Materials and Methods, including design, population, sampling and sample size, procedure, measured variables, statistical analysis and ethical considerations; Results; 4. Discussion; 5 Conclusions; 6. Acknowledgments; 7. References; 8. Tables and Figures; 9. Contributions of the authors.
Systematic reviews must adjust to the following format: 1. Introduction; 2. Materials and Methods, including databases searched, search terms, search dates and languages, selection methodology, assessment of the risk of bias, and synthesis of the articles; 3. Results; 5 Conclusions; 6. Acknowledgments; 7. References. 8. Tables and Figures; 9. Contributions of the authors.
Case reports must include the following sections: 1. Introduction; 2. Case presentation; 3. Materials and Methods, including the question to be answered with the review of the literature, search terms, databases, language and time period; 4. Ethical Considerations; 5. Results, describing and reporting the studies retrieved from the search; 6. Conclusions.
Transparency statement:
For studies resulting from original research, the author, through the Open Journal System (OJS), attaches the Ethics Committee letter of approval as part of the requirements for the submission.Should the author(s) consider that the study does not require the endorsement of an Ethics Committee, a satisfactory explanation must be provided.
For case reports or case series, instead of the endorsement of the ethics committee, authors may attach the informed consent signed by the patient, authorizing the report of the case(s) and the use of any related material.
Statement of compliance with publication standards:
At the time of submitting the article for publication, confirm adherence to one of the following guidelines and attach the relevant completed checklist. Do not forget to mention the page number where the required information is included. All the items of the guideline must be completed or an explanation must be provided for those that are not completed. Please make sure your manuscript follows one of the following guidelines:
Observational studies: http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/strobe/
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/prisma
Diagnostic validity studies: http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/stard/
Case reports: http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/care/
Statistical analysis:http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/sampl/ / http://www.equator-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SAMPL-Guidelines-6-27-13.pdf
Qualitative research reports: http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/Coreq / http://intqhc.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/6/349.long
Qualitative research synthesis:http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/Entreq / http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/12/181/table/T1
Healthcare improvement guidelines:http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/Squire
Economic evaluation reports: http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/Cheers
Adherence to the recommended publication guidelines will render the review of the manuscript easier, improve the probability of publication and enhance the usefulness of the research findings for clinical practice and future research.
Tables and Figures:
Tables and figures are identified using standard arabic numerals in the exact order in which they appear and they each will be included in separate pages.
- The title must appear at the top of the page, and the notes at the bottom.
- The following symbols are used for footnotes, in this order: *, †, ‡, §, ||, ¶, **, §, ††, ‡‡
- If a Figure or Table has been published previously, the written authorization of the editor is required, and credit must be given to the original publication. If photographs of individuals are used, a written permission must be obtained.
- When uploading the document, the tables and figures must be attached at the end of the manuscript. However, they must also be sent as files through the OJS management system, in PNG, EPS, PDF, or TIFF format.
- Graphs created in Microsoft Word, PowerPoint or Excel must be sent as .doc or .docx, .xls or .xlsx, or .ppt or .pptx files.
- Tables and figures must also use measurement units of the International System of Units, noting the conversion factors in the figure and table legends.
References:
Authors cite at least two Colombian or Latin-American references.
- Citations must be numbered sequentially in the order in which they appear in the text.
They must be based on the formats used by PubMed, just as they appear in the instructions to the authors of the Colombian Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (Revista Colombiana de Obstetricia y Ginecología - RCOG), at the end of each issue, or at: https://revista.fecolsog.org/index.php/rcog/libraryFiles/downloadPublic/14
Abbreviations or acronyms:
In case abbreviations or acronyms are used, they must be preceded by the full terms the first time they appear in the text.
- The author(s) declare that the article summited is original, unpublished, that it has not been sent for review, and that it has not been published, partially or totally, in any other scientific journal, national or foreign; Furthermore, that the manuscript has been read and approved by the author or all of the authors.
Original Research
Original research studies: These are documents resulting from observational research or clinical experiments and consist of the following sections:
a. Introduction: It presents the condition of interest and provides a clear definition of the subject of the study and the burden of the disease (incidence, prevalence, quality of life, impact for the system in terms of costs). It also briefly details the key aspects related to the intervention (frequency, route of administration or duration of therapy) or exposure in the case of observational studies, mentioning the biological plausibility through which the intervention or exposure exerts its effect (mechanism of action). This section should be closed by mentioning the relevance of the research question and presenting the main objective of the study, relating it to the research question. It is highly desirable that this section indicates the controversies or knowledge gaps that are intended to be resolved with the study. The introduction should ideally not exceed 500 words (two pages).
b. Materials and methods: It describes in a complete and detailed manner the elements and procedures implemented, so that the results can be reproduced. This section focuses in design; study population (inclusion and exclusion criteria); sampling and sample size; process; instrument for used to collect information; definition of variables and type of statistical analysis. In this section, it is essential to mention ethical considerations according to the type of research (not only for experimental studies), the use of informed consent (if this is necessary) and approval by the Ethics Committee from the institution or university where the study was conducted or to which the researchers are affiliated. In the case of controlled clinical experiments, these must have been previously registered in the protocol phase in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) of the World Health Organization, available in: http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/) (or in the clinical trials registry of the National Institute of Health of the United States (Clinicaltrials.gov, available in: https://clinicaltrials.gov/). This record must be reported as part of the final document, prior to its publication. It is also important to add the considerations on animal research (whether or not there is an Animal Research Committee, the care that was taken with these, etc.) in this section.
c. Results: It provides information regarding how many patients were potential candidates, how many did not meet the inclusion or exclusion criteria, and finally mention the number of participants who were part of the study. This section should present descriptive statistics based on those key clinical and sociodemographic variables. The results must be presented clearly and unequivocally, and it is imperative that they focus exclusively on those that correspond to the proposed objective(s) and the research question. Tables and illustrations are presented in logical sequence in the text, without repeating the data in the tables or illustrations in the text.
d. Discussion: Brief description of the most important findings of the study, so to contrast the results with the international and local literature and provide a possible explanation of the differences and similarities regarding the observed results. It ends with the strengths and weaknesses of the study, as well as mentioning the implications of the results for clinical practice and for research.
e. Conclusions: Brief summary of the study conclusions based on the results presented, focusing on the objective (s) and the research question(s).
Reflection Article
Reflection article: This is an article where the author presents an analytical, interpretive, or critical perspective on a specific topic, using original sources. It has at least one objective that arises from unsolved assumptions or controversies. It has a thesis to support (not a hypothesis to reject or verify) based on theories that support its approach and the facts that allow the verification of the thesis, ending with the conclusions of the document. These types of articles usually do not include the methodology and discussion sections.
Medical Education
Medical education: It has a clear educational objective and seeks to contribute to the comprehensive training of the doctor. This type of article should have an introductory section where the importance of the topic for the readers of the magazine is highlighted, to then present as an objective, the concepts or skills that are intended to be provided through the development of the content. Next, the article presents as a central axis, the facts that support the key concepts, which must be appropriated by the reader, ending with a brief conclusion about the importance of the concepts presented. These types of articles may or may not use a hypothetical case as the background for the instructional exercise.
Review Article
Literature review article: The reviews integrate the results of published or unpublished research in a scientific or technological field, in order to account for progress and trends in development. Since 2013, the RCOG prioritizes the publication of literature reviews that follow a verifiable, repeatable methodology and with low risk of bias on narrative reviews. For tips on preparing for systematic reviews, see: https://es.cochrane.org/sites/es.cochrane.org/files/uploads/Manual_Cochrane_510_reduit.pdf. The review article should consist of the following sections:
a. Introduction: It must contain a brief description of the objective of the review or the population subgroup that is interested in the review, to continue with the description of what is evaluated and applicable to the condition to be studied. The topic may cover a medical technology, for example, a medication , a surgical procedure, a diagnostic test. It may also be a risk factor or a prognostic factor. It should continue with a brief description of how the subject under evaluation works and end with the importance of the literature review presented to the readers of the RCOG.
b. Materials and methods: The question to be answered with the literature review (PICO format) must be included, based on the criteria, the inclusion of studies within the review by type of epidemiological design (clinical trials if medical or surgical interventions, cohorts or series of cases or reviews of the literature or clinical practice guidelines), type of participants, type of exposure (intervention, diagnostic test or prognostic risk factors of interest) and results (primary and secondary) that will be evaluated with the literature review may be included. When evaluating interventions, at least one of the primary outcomes is related to possible adverse effects. This section should contain a description of the search strategy implemented. It should be mentioned: the databases or any other source of information where the research was carried out, the search terms and the limits implemented (type of language, date of publication, etc.). Reference should be made to the methodology used to select the relevant studies, how many authors were in charge of selecting the articles, extracting the data, evaluating the risk of bias, and analyzing the information.
The way in which discrepancies were solved must be mentioned. The results may be presented descriptively or by grouping data by statistical methods or meta-analysis. This section should contain the measures of effect for the dichotomous and continuous data (Relative Risk -RR, Opportunity Ratio -OR or Risk Difference - DR) . In the case of the metaanalysis, the graphs and tables that group the information from the included studies, the assessment of heterogeneity in the results and the reporting bias must also be presented. Finally, necessary considerations must be made regarding the methodology used to synthesize the information (fixed or random effects) as well as possible subgroup or sensitivity analyzes.
c. Results: Mention should be made of the number of titles retrieved, those that were excluded and the reason for this, and then we should give way to present the number of included studies (the authors must rely on the construction of a PRISMA flow chart). The key characteristics of the included studies (study site, population, intervention, comparisons, and outcomes) and of the evaluation of the quality of the studies (risk of bias) and the presentation of the results of the review should be summarized. either descriptively or by weighted grouping of data by means of tables or figures that include the information described in the methodology.
d. Discussion: It should be focused on the main findings of the literature. Agreements and disagreements with other reviews, the effect of the quality of the evidence on the findings, and the applicability of the evidence should be mentioned.
e. Conclusions: A reference of the implications for practice and research should be made. The search strategy (described in detail) and the tables with the details of the included and excluded studies should be uploaded as complementary information using the OJS (Open Journal System) management system.
The search strategy should be labeled Appendix S1, and any tables that include/exclude studies should labeled as Table S1. As a general rule, only the key figures and tables to be published on paper should be selected with everything else as supplemental information online.
If the protocol has been published, the appropriate citation must be added, and, not simply cite the Cochrane handbook or other generic guide.
PROSPERO is the international online registry for systematic reviews that aims to reduce duplication and promote efficient use of resources. We recommend registering with PROSPERO for all systematic reviews with the aim of improving the transparency and rigor of secondary research, but currently it is not a requirement. Please note that retrospective registration is not possible. For more information see: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/
Case Report
Case report or case series: The presentation of case reports (from 1 to 5 cases) and of the series of cases (6 or more cases) in the Colombian Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (RCOG) aims to: 1- Disseminate information about diseases that represent a new challenge for clinical practice, 2- The generation of an association hypothesis. 3- A reason to do a literature review on a subject which is controversial or there is little information 4- In situations of therapeutic interventions, describe a new technique, disseminate, or revise a surgical technique. As of this date, the Colombian Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (RCOG) will only accept case reports without review of the literature under exceptional circumstances (e.g. description of a new surgical technique or a new condition). A review of the literature should have the following sections:
a. Title: Contains the design and purpose for which the case(s) is/are submitted. This is usually a literature review.
Structured summary of the following sections: Objective of the case(s) presentation Materials and methods: brief description of the characteristics of the case(s) and description of the clinical setting where the cases were attended. The databases that were consulted to perform the literature review should be mentioned as well as the terms implemented. Results: Presents the number of studies retrieved, their design and finally how many were included in the review of the topic. Presents the most relevant findings of the bibliographic review. Conclusions: focused on the case and on the literature review.
The body of the document must contain the following sections: a) Introduction: contains a brief description of what is known about the condition in terms of the definition of the entity that defines the cases, frequency and diagnosis, management, and prognosis. It points out the knowledge gaps and controversies around the subject and the reason why the presentation of the report or the series of cases is important for medical knowledge. This section closes mentioning the objective of the study, which focuses on reporting the case (s) and reviewing the available literature around a specific clinical aspect of the case (diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, etc.)
b. Cases presentation: Brief description of the positive findings that allow the identification of the cases (reason for consultation, history, physical examination, or diagnostic tests) of the management and final evolution. If a new procedure is described, it must be described in detail to allow its repetition in other scenarios. The characteristics of the site where the case(s) were evaluated should be described; it is suggested to include the level of complexity and type of population that it serves. If a new institution must be introduced, it must be presented in sufficient detail for it to be recognized again by other authors. In the case of a new surgical technique, it must be presented in detail to allow its replication in other sites.
c. Materials and methods: The question to be answered alongside with the literature review must be included; the authors are suggested to focus on only one clinical aspect of the case, probably the most relevant one (diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, etc.). It should include the search terms, the databases where the search was made, the period of time that includes the search and languages. It must also describe the inclusion criteria of the studies, per type of design, type of population included or type of exposure (intervention).
If there are any exclusion criteria for the studies they should be mentioned, while it is suggested to include the variables to be analyzed in the study; the authors can build a table where relevant aspects of each study are presented (included in the review of the topic): author, site and year in which the study was done, epidemiological design, type of participants, type of exposure evaluated, and measured results. The materials and methods section should include a section on ethical aspects such as: confidentiality of information, protection of patient's rights and informed consent for publication.
d. Results: This section should detail the number of titles identified by the research, number of included and excluded studies (with a reason for exclusion), the epidemiological design, the site where the study was conducted, and the variables to be analyzed in the included studies. Finally, this section presents the search results, around the clinical aspect selected to carry out the topic review.
e. Conclusions: Brief summary of the most important findings of the literature review in light of the objectives of the presentation of the case (s).
It is important to emphasize that when the objective of presenting the cases is to review the literature, there is no discussion section. When it comes to a new surgical technique, the discussion section should contrast the possible advantages of the new technique in relation to those already available. As of this date, the Colombian Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (RCOG) will only accept case reports without a literature review under exceptional circumstances (e.g. description of a new surgical technique or a new condition). When it comes to reporting cases or case series, which does not require review of the literature, it is recommended to implement the following format:
Title: It must contain the design and the why the case is presented.
Summary: It must be structured and must include the following subsections: Objective, Materials, and methods (place and time, measured variables, analysis). Results and Conclusions.
The body of the document must contain the following sections: a. Introduction: It contains a brief description of what is known about the condition in terms of its definition, frequency, and diagnosis. Additionally, it should mention the knowledge gaps and controversies around the subject and the reason why the presentation of the report or the series of cases is important; aspect that is closely related to the purpose of the presentation.
b. Presentation of the case or cases: Brief description of the positive findings that allow the identification of the cases (reason for consultation, history, physical examination, or diagnostic tests) of the management and final outcome. If a new procedure is described, it must be described in detail to allow its repetition in other scenarios.
c. Materials and methods: It should include the inclusion criteria, exclusion of the subjects, the characteristics of the site where they were treated (level of complexity and type of population served), the procedure to collect the information, the variables that were measured, and the analysis of the data. d. Results(only for the case series): Describe the characteristics of the population that is included and the exposures that are relevant to the cases.
e. Discussion: This section only applies when the objective of presenting the cases is the description of a new entity or a new surgical technique or the generation of an association hypothesis. The aim is to contrast the findings of the cases presented with that described in the literature regarding similar entities, other surgical techniques, or elements to consider as factors supporting the association (dose response, biological plausibility, etc.).
Letter to the Editor
Letters to the editor: Brief comments on some work published in the Magazine, or stories of general interest for the health area.
Medical History
History of medicine: Historical aspects of any area of medicine.
Privacy Statement
The names and e-mails included in this Journal will only be used for the purposes set forth therein and shall not be disclosed to third parties or for other uses.