Preparing your manuscript

Here, you will find all the key information you will require when preparing your manuscript for submission to the BDJ, including article specifications and formatting guidelines. Please read this section before submitting.

Please note our word counts are not strict limits, but we encourage authors to write concisely.

Article type

Article description

Abstract

Word count

Figures, tables and boxes

References

Research

Original research with a focus on clinical research to enable researchers and scientists to communicate their findings to the rest of the community.

The body of the article should be organised using the same headings used in the abstract as far as possible. Subheadings can be used if needed.

Structured abstract of no more than 200 words. Should contain no references.

The following headings should be used as a guideline: Introduction, Aims, Design, Setting, Materials and methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion(s).

Ideally no more than 3,000 words.

Display items like figs/tables count as 100-500 words each, depending on size.

We encourage the inclusion of display items such as figures, tables and boxes to accompany your article. There is no set limit but reviewers may advise if the number of display items should be increased or reduced. Max of 100 (as current as possible).

Clinical

Articles and reports on the latest developments and information relevant for those in dental practice. Can include 'How to' papers which are designed to provide the reader with practical advice to follow for techniques, procedures etc. No more than 200 words. Should contain no references. Ideally no more than 3,000 words.

Display items like figs/tables count as 100-500 words each, depending on size.

The more images the better! Tables and boxes are also handy to summarise text in an easy-to-read format. There is no set limit but reviewers may advise if the number of display items should be increased or reduced. Max of 80 (as current as possible).
Review

This section includes systematic reviews, literature reviews, and commissioned expert reviews.

Systematic and literature reviews should assess the quality of included studies. The body of the article should be organised using the same headings used in the abstract as far as possible. Subheadings can be used if needed.

Expert reviews are intended to provide as definitive a view as possible on a field within dentistry, including any recent breakthroughs or advances.

Systematic and literature reviews: Structured abstract of no more than 200 words. The following headings should be used as a guideline: Introduction, Aims, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion.

Expert reviews: No more than 300 words.

Should contain no references.

Systematic and literature reviews: Ideally no more than 3,000 words. Display items like figs/tables count as 100-500 words each, depending on size.

Expert reviews: Should not exceed 5,000 words (excluding abstract, figs/tables and references).

Systematic reviews should follow PRISMA framework and a completed PRISMA 2020 flow diagram should accompany the main text as a Figure.

For all review types, we suggest a maximum of 8 display items.

Systematic and literature reviews = max of 100.

Expert reviews = max of 60.

Education

Any type of article or report that is relevant to the vital subject of dental education, whether it is undergraduate, postgraduate, specialist or lifelong learning.

If a structured abstract is provided, the body of the article should be organised using the same headings as far as possible.

Can be a structured or unstructured abstract, of no more than 200 words. Should contain no references.

Ideally no more than 3,000 words.

Display items like figs/tables count as 100-500 words each, depending on size.

We encourage the inclusion of display items such as figures, tables and boxes to accompany your article. There is no set limit but reviewers may advise if the number of display items should be increased or reduced. Max of 100 (as current as possible).
Opinion

Articles which express the views and opinions of people that are open to debate and discussion.

Most Opinions are sent for peer review but some are accepted without peer review at the Editor-in-Chief's discretion.

No more than 200 words. Should contain no references.

Ideally 2,000-3,000 words.

Display items like figs/tables count as 100-500 words each, depending on size.

Figures, tables and boxes can be included but this is not mandatory. We have published many Opinions which are text-only. Max of 60.
General

Any articles covering a topic that doesn't quite fit into any of the other categories (e.g. historical papers, dental legislation).

No more than 200 words. Should contain no references.

Ideally no more than 3,000 words.

Display items like figs/tables count as 100-500 words each, depending on size.

We encourage the inclusion of display items such as figures, tables and boxes to accompany your article. There is no set limit but reviewers may advise if the number of display items should be increased or reduced.

Max of 80.

 

Additional guidance for Research articles

 

Introduction

This is a brief introductory statement, placing your work in perspective and explaining its intent and significance.

Materials and methods

This section should be sufficiently detailed, with references, so that all experimental procedures can be reproduced. Methods that have been published in great detail elsewhere don't need to be described to such an extent.

Papers involving clinical research should adhere to guidelines in the Declaration of Helsinki, with a statement in the text confirming that these protocols were followed and that patients gave their written, informed consent, as well as the trial registration number of the study. Trials also require ethical committee approval. For further review of the subject see Br Med J 1991; 302: 338-341.

For primary research manuscripts that document animal studies, we ask you to follow the ARRIVE reporting guidelines (PLoS BIO 2010; DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412).

We ask that reports of clinical trials conform to the CONSORT statement and reports of systematic reviews of clinical trials conform to the PRISMA statement. The BDJ is a member of, and subscribes to the principles of, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Results

This is where you can present your results without interpretation, in a logical and clear order. You can choose to present your results in table format, graphs, pie-charts, or any other way that best portrays the work.

Discussion

This section should focus on the interpretation and significance of the findings of your work, with comments that describe their relation to other work in the area.

Conclusion(s)

The final paragraph! This should highlight the main conclusions of your work and indicate the direction future work could take.

 

Additional guidance for all article types

We ask that you submit a cover letter along with your manuscript. This letter should be addressed to our Editor-in-Chief, Dr Stephen Hancocks, and state the following:

  • The title of your manuscript
  • The journal you are submitting to
  • That the manuscript isn't being considered for publication elsewhere
  • That if accepted it will not be published elsewhere.

Conflict of interest

We ask that you declare any possible conflicts of interest in your paper. This can include any of the following:

  • Funding from an organisation or company directly for the research
  • Funding you have received for any work you have been involved in from an organisation or company that could be linked to the research
  • Consultation of advisory positions you may hold in an organisation or company involved in the research/similar research

Author contributions statement

For any articles with more than one author, we require authors to include a statement of responsibility in the manuscript that specifies the contribution of every author. The level of detail varies; some disciplines produce manuscripts that comprise discrete efforts readily articulated in detail, whereas other fields operate as group efforts at all stages. Author contribution statements are included in the published paper.

Acknowledgements

When thanking people, we do ask that permission and approval of the wording is obtained. If a research project was supported by industry, we ask that this is acknowledged in the covering letter to the Editor-in-Chief at submission.

References

Articles that have already been published or are in press should be included in the reference list. Unpublished results or personal communication can be cited as such in the text, in parentheses.

Our reference style is the Vancouver style, and references should be numbered in the order in which they appear in the text. We ask that reference numbers are inserted as superscripts, after punctuation. For example, '...true.3,4,5 Jones et al.demonstrated...'. Note that ranges of references should be given by including each individual citation number NOT by using a hyphen (eg '...true.3,4,5,6 ' is correct but '...true.3-6 ' is incorrect). 

The full list of references should give the names and initials of all authors, unless there are more than six, in which case only the first three should be given, followed by et al.

For example:

Reference to an article
1. Field J V, Balfour-Paul A, Wright D W. Perimandibular space infections. Br Dent J 1981; 150: 255-258.

Reference to a book
4. Hargreaves I A, Craig J W. The management of traumatised anterior teeth of children. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1981.

Reference to a book chapter
7. Harding S R, Fryer J I. Recurrent oral ulceration in Greenland natives. In Casselli G (ed) Coeliac diseases. 3rd ed. pp 307-324. London: Stoma Press, 1982.

Reference to a report
2. Committee on Mercury Hazards in Dentistry. Code of practice for dental mercury hygiene. London: Department of Health and Social Security, 1979, publication no. DHSS 79-F3 72.

Reference to a webpage
3. General Dental Council. Scope of practice. 2009. Online information available at https://www.gdc-uk.org/information-standards-guidance/standards-and-guidance/scope-of-practice (accessed April 2012).

Figures and tables

Any figures or tables taken from someone else's work requires permission to be obtained. Should you have any queries regarding permissions, you can contact the editorial office and we will help as much as possible. Obtaining permission also applies to quotes, adapted material and any other content taken from previously published works or unpublished but owned by a third party. The original source should be cited in the figure or table caption.

It's helpful for us if all figures are submitted separately in TIFF, JPEG or EPD formats, in either greyscale or colour, and that tables are submitted as separate word documents.

When photos of patients are used in which the patient is recognisable, written consent of the patient for publication should be obtained by the author.

Colour figures are published free of charge.

Supplementary information

Supplementary material can be a useful addition to a manuscript to convey material relevant to the conclusion that cannot be included in the main article due to space or format constraints. As such, the main article must be complete and self-explanatory without the supplementary material. All supplementary material is peer reviewed along with the main article.

We don't subedit supplementary material, so it will be displayed online exactly as submitted. Therefore, please make sure any supplementary material is submitted in its final form as a single combined PDF, not exceeding 25 MB.

Language editing

As an international journal, we receive submissions from all over the world. Papers can be rejected based on the quality of the written English; therefore, if you aren't a native English speaker, we strongly encourage you to take up some of the following options:

  • Ask a colleague who is a native English speaker to review your manuscript for clarity
  • Use an English language editing service to help ensure your meaning is clear, such as Nature Research Editing Service. The use of a language editing service, including Nature Research Editing Service, is at the author's own expense and in no way implies that the article will be selected for peer review or accepted by the BDJ

When you've prepared your manuscript and are happy with it, have a look at our Editorial Process section for further information on how to submit and what to expect from the rest of your publishing journey.