Here you will find all the key information you will require when preparing a manuscript for submission to Evidence-Based Dentistry including article specifications and formatting guidelines. Please read this section before submitting.
Evidence-Based Dentistry is a hybrid journal, offering both subscription and Open Access publishing pathways. Authors can choose to publish using either the traditional publishing route or via immediate gold Open Access (OA). Please see our ‘Open Access publishing’ page for more information.
Article type specifications
We publish two article types: invited commentaries and peer-reviewed systematic reviews (please see our ‘Preparing your manuscript’ page for detailed formatting guidelines).
The following summary describes the peer review process for this journal:
- Identity transparency: Single anonymised
- Reviewer interacts with: Editor
- Review information published: None
Further information regarding our peer review process can be found in our 'For referees' section.
By invitation only. These are not normally peer reviewed.
- are engaged in clinical practice in one or more of the disciplines of relevance to target audiences of Evidence-Based Dentistry
- can write clearly in English
- can respond within two weeks of our request for a commentary
- have a working knowledge of the basic principles of evidence-based healthcare
...then become an EBD commentator by contacting the EBD Editorial Office.
When we invite a commentary from you, we will ask you to include the following details in the order specified:
- Title of commentary
- Author list + affiliations
- Structured abstract detailing: 1) Data sources; 2) Study selection; 3) Data extraction and synthesis; 4) Results; 5) Conclusions
- GRADE rating
- Main text of commentary
- References list (if applicable)
- 2-3 practice points
- Conflict of interest statement
At the top of your piece, we will also ask you to include a subject term from the following list which best captures the topic of your commentary:
- Dental implants
- Special care dentistry
- Restorative dentistry
- Paediatric dentistry
- Oral cancer
- Oral health
- Dental public health
- Oral medicine
We would ask you to select from this list as far as possible; however, for any topic that falls outside of this list, please simply indicate the subject term that best fits your commentary and we will do our best to accommodate this.
We welcome submissions of systematic reviews in the field of dentistry and oral health. Please note that EBD does not accept narrative reviews.
We mandate for authors to follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework. Please include a completed PRISMA 2020 checklist and flow diagram to accompany the main text. A blank template of the checklist and flow diagram can be downloaded from the PRISMA website. We also strongly encourage authors to prospectively register their study protocol in a suitable registry, such as PROSPERO.’
For systematic reviews of observational studies, please include a completed Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) checklist instead.
- Structured abstract max. 300 words
- Main body of text (excluding abstract, tables/figures, and references) not to exceed 6,000 words
- Max. 8 tables or figures
- Max. 100 references
- Include 3 key points highlighting the main findings of the review and how/if they affect or translate into practice
Systematic review papers should be submitted with an abstract up to 300 words in length, and the body of the paper should be structured as per the PRISMA checklist:
- Author contributions
- Ethics declarations
- Funding information
Where possible, we advise that you try and use the same headings used in the abstract in the main body of text. Additional headings can of course be added.