These author guidelines include information about the types of articles published by the journal and how to prepare a manuscript for submission. Other relevant information about the journal's policies and the reviewing process can be found under the About section. Manuscripts must adhere to all general formatting requirements and the specific requirements listed below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cover Letter

---

The authorship, disclosure statements, copyright, and license agreement form is our compulsory cover letter which needs to form part of your submission. Kindly download and complete, in English, the provided form.  Anyone that has made a significant contribution to the research and the paper must be listed as an author in your cover letter. Contributions that fall short of meeting the criteria as stipulated in our policy should rather be mentioned in the ‘Acknowledgements’ section of the manuscript. Read our authorship guidelines and author contribution statement policies.

 

 

Original Research full structure

---

Title
The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 95 characters (including spaces).

 

Abstract
The abstract, written in English, should be no longer than 250 words and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a succinct account of the objectives, methods, results and significance of the matter. The structured abstract for an Original Research article should consist of six paragraphs labelled Background, Objective, Methods, Results, Conclusion and What this study adds.

• Background: Why do we care about the problem?  State the context and purpose of the study. (What practical, scientific or theoretical gap is your research filling?)
• Objective: What problem are you trying to solve? What is the scope of your work (e.g. is it a generalised approach or for a specific situation)? Avoid using jargon that will not be readily understood by non-expert readers.
• Methods: How did you go about solving or making progress on the problem? Clearly state the basic design of the study, what data and/or samples were collected and name or briefly describe the key techniques without going into excessive detail.
• Results: What is the answer? Present the main, most important findings. Identify trends, relative change or differences in answers to questions.
• Conclusion: What are the implications of your answer? Briefly summarise any potential implications. What are the larger implications of your findings, especially for the problem or gap identified in your motivation?
• What this study adds: What key insights into the research results and its future function are revealed? How do these insights link to the focus and scope of the journal? It should be a concise statement of the primary contribution of the manuscript; and how it fits within the scope of the journal.

Do not cite references in the abstract.
Do not use abbreviations unless they are used at least 3 times in the abstract.

 

Main text
Introduction: The Introduction section must contain your argument for the social and scientific value of the study, as well as the aim and objectives. No structural sub-headings should be used. All text should be presented in narrative paragraphs; bulleted or numbered lists are not permitted.

• Social value: The first part of the introduction should make a clear and logical argument for the importance or relevance of the study. Your argument should be supported by the use of evidence from the literature.
• Scientific value: The second part of the introduction should make a clear and logical argument for the originality of the study. This should include a summary of what is already known about the research question or specific topic and should clarify the knowledge gap that this study will address. Your argument should be supported by the use of evidence from the literature.
• Conceptual framework: In some research articles it will also be important to describe the underlying theoretical basis for the research and how these theories are linked together in a conceptual framework. The theoretical evidence used to construct the conceptual framework should be referenced from the literature.
• Aim and objectives: The introduction should conclude with a paragraph that clearly summarises the aim and objectives of the study.

Methods: The Methods section must address the elements listed below. Structural sub-headings are encouraged and required as noted.

• Ethical considerations (required): For studies involving human or animal research, approval must have been obtained for all studies from the author's institution or other relevant ethics committee before the start of the study. Required information:
• Name of Institutional Review Board or ethical review committee
• Study approval number(s)
• Manner of consent (written, oral) for human participants
• Description of measures taken to maintain the confidentiality of data
• If the study was not human or animal research or the study was determined to be non-human subjects research or exempt, the authors must provide a statement with those details in this section
• Study design: An outline of the type of study design.
• Setting: A description of the setting for the study; for example, the type of community from which the participants came or the nature of the health system and services in which the study was conducted.
• Study population and sampling strategy: Describe the study population and any inclusion or exclusion criteria. Describe the intended sample size and your sample size calculation or justification. Describe the sampling strategy used. Describe in practical terms how this was implemented.
• Intervention (if appropriate): If there were intervention and comparison groups, describe the intervention in detail and what happened to the comparison groups.  If a clinical trial, the trial registration number should be indicated.
• Sample and/or data collection: Describe what type of samples were collected (e.g. sputum, blood), the manner of sample collection (e.g. venous blood into EDTA tube), the volume of sample collected (e.g., two 4-ml samples from each patient) and how samples were stored (e.g. in -20°C freezer) and/or transported after collection (e.g. in cooler with ice packs). Define any data collection tools that were used (e.g. worksheets, questionnaires, etc.); briefly describe how questionnaires were validated for the study population. Describe in practical terms how data were collected (e.g., in-person interviews) and any key issues involved (e.g. language barriers). Provide manufacturer information for all supplies and equipment (required: name and location). Cite references for established data collection tools and their validation studies.
• Laboratory analyses: Describe sample preparation and details about all laboratory tests, analyses and/or assays that were conducted. Provide manufacturer information for all supplies and equipment (required: name and location). Cite references for established methods and explain any deviations from these.
• Data analysis (required): Describe how data were captured, checked and cleaned. Describe the analysis process, for example, the statistical tests used or steps followed in qualitative data analysis. Provide manufacturer information for all software used (required: name and location).

Results: Present the results of your study in a logical sequence that addresses the aim and objectives of your study. Use sub-headings, if needed, to organize the presentation of the study findings. Use tables and figures as required to present your findings. Tables should not contain vertical lines. Each table and figure should have a legend. Use quotations as required to establish your interpretation of qualitative data. All units should conform to the SI convention and be abbreviated accordingly. Biomolecular sequence or structure data and datasets must be submitted to appropriate publicly available databases and their accession numbers should be cited in the results section. Metric units and their international symbols must be used throughout, as is the decimal point (not the decimal comma).

• Authors should ensure that:
  • The Results section does not contain descriptions of methods used that should be presented in the Methods section
  • All results presented in the Results section have any associated data/sample collection and assay or analysis methods presented in the Methods section.

Discussion: The discussion section should address the elements listed below. Other than the required sub-headings listed (bold, italics), sub-headings are not expected but may be helpful to readers.

• Key findings: In the first paragraph, summarise the key findings without reiterating details of the results.
• Discussion of key findings: Explain how the key findings relate to previous research or existing knowledge, practice or policy.
• Implications or recommendations: State the implications of your study or recommendations for future research (questions that remain unanswered), policy or practice. Make sure that the recommendations flow directly from your findings.
• Limitations (required second-to-last sub-heading): Describe all inherent weaknesses of the study’s design and/or implementation, how they may have affected your findings, and what you did (or could not do) to mitigate their effect on your findings. Mention any other factors that the reader should take into account when interpreting your results.
• Conclusion (required final sub-heading): Provide a brief conclusion that summarises the results and their meaning or significance to each objective of the study.

Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named. Refer to the acknowledgement structure guide on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

Also provide the following, each under their own heading:

• Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article. Read our policy on competing interests.
• Author contributions:  All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the authorship policy and author contribution statement policies.
• Sources of support: Provide information on funding if relevant.
• Data availability: All research articles are encouraged to have a data availability statement.
• Disclaimer: A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible. References should not be used by authors, editors, or peer reviewers to promote self-interests. Refer to the journal referencing style downloadable on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

 

Systematic Review Article

---

Systematic reviews should follow the same basic structure as other original research articles. The aim and objectives should focus on a clinical question that will be addressed in the review. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses should meet the standards of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

 

Title
The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 95 characters (including spaces).

 

Abstract
The abstract should be no longer than 250 words and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a concise account of the objectives, methods, results and significance of the matter. The abstract must be structured and should consist of six paragraphs labelled Background, Aim, Methods, Results, Conclusion and What this study adds.

• Background: Why is the topic important? State the context of the review.
• Aim: What is the purpose of the review? Describe the aim or purpose of the review.
• Methods: How was the review conducted? Describe the methods used for searching, selecting and appraising your evidence.
• Results: What were the main findings? State the main findings of the literature review.
• Conclusion: What are the implications of the findings? Briefly summarise any potential implications.
• What this study adds: What key insights into the research results and its future function are revealed? How do these insights link to the focus and scope of the journal? It should be a concise statement of the primary contribution of the manuscript; and how it fits within the scope of the journal.

 

Main Text
Introduction: Present an argument for the social and scientific value of your review that is itself supported by the literature. Present the aim and objectives of your literature review.

 

Methods: Outline how you searched for, selected and appraised the literature that you used, and ensured that you met the standards of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Clearly describe in detail the search strategy, criteria used to select or reject articles; attempts made to obtain all important and relevant studies and deal with publication bias (including grey and unpublished literature); how the quality of included studies was appraised; and the methodology used to extract and/or analyse data. Discuss any methodological limitations If the protocol was pre-registered (eg in PROSPERO), the registry number should be provided. 

 

Results: Present your review of the literature and make use of appropriate sub-headings. Your review should be a critical synthesis of the literature and should describe the homogeneity of the different findings, as well as clearly present the overall results and any meta-analysis.

 

Discussion: Clearly state the main conclusions of the review in terms of addressing the original aim and objectives.

 

Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named. Refer to the acknowledgement structure guide on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

Also provide the following, each under their own heading:

• Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article. Read our policy on competing interests.
• Author contributions:  All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the authorship policy and author contribution statement policies.
• Sources of support: Provide information on funding if relevant
• Data availability: All research articles are encouraged to have a data availability statement.
• Disclaimer: A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible. References should not be used by authors, editors, or peer reviewers to promote self-interests. Refer to the journal referencing style downloadable on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

 

Narrative Review Article

---

Systematic reviews are preferred and prospective authors of narrative reviews should contact the editorial office to determine suitability before submission.  Narrative reviews should have a clear aim and objectives and focus on a question that will be addressed in the review. The review should be organized in sections appropriate for the topic.  Reviews should include in detail the search strategy, criteria used to select or reject articles, attempts made to obtain all important and relevant studies and deal with publication bias (including grey and unpublished literature), how the quality of included studies was appraised, and the methodology used to extract and/or analyse data. Results should describe the homogeneity of the different findings, and clearly present the overall results and any meta-analysis. 

 

Title
The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 95 characters (including spaces).

 

Abstract
The abstract should be no longer than 250 words and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a concise overview of the topic and the main findings. Include a heading labelled, What this study adds.

• What this study adds: What key insights into the research results and its future function are revealed? How do these insights link to the focus and scope of the journal? It should be a concise statement of the primary contribution of the manuscript; and how it fits within the scope of the journal.

 

Main Text
The main text should be organized in sections appropriate for the topic and should begin with the presentation of an argument for the social and scientific value of the review that is itself supported by the literature. Present the aim and objectives of the literature review and outline how you searched for, selected and appraised the literature that you used. Discuss any methodological limitations. The review should be a critical synthesis of the literature and should end by stating the main conclusions of the review in terms of addressing the original aim and objectives.

 

Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named. Refer to the acknowledgement structure guide on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

Also provide the following, each under their own heading:

• Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article. Read our policy on competing interests.
• Author contributions:  All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the authorship policy and author contribution statement policies.
• Sources of support: Provide information on funding if relevant
• Data availability: All research articles are encouraged to have a data availability statement.
• Disclaimer: A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible. References should not be used by authors, editors, or peer reviewers to promote self-interests. Refer to the journal referencing style downloadable on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

 

Lessons from the Field

---

Title
The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 95 characters (including spaces).

 

Abstract
The abstract, written in English, should be no longer than 250 words and must be written in the past tense in complete sentences. The abstract should give a succinct account of the intervention, lessons learnt and their significance. The structured abstract for Lessons from the Field articles should consist of five paragraphs labelled Background, Intervention, Lessons Learnt, Recommendation and What this study adds.

• Background: What was the problem? Why was it important to address?  State the context and purpose of the study.
• Intervention: What was done to address the problem? How did you go about solving or making progress on the problem? Clearly describe the scope of the work and name or briefly describe the basic methodology used without going into excessive detail. Avoid using jargon that will not be readily understood by non-expert readers.
• Lessons Learnt: What happened after the intervention? Present the main outcomes, changes, and improvements after the intervention. Identify trends, relative changes or differences from before the intervention.
• Recommendations: What are the implications of the intervention and your results for other laboratories? Briefly summarise the key take-away messages.
• What this study adds: What key insights into the research results and its future function are revealed? How do these insights link to the focus and scope of the journal? It should be a concise statement of the primary contribution of the manuscript; and how it fits within the scope of the journal.

Do not cite references in the abstract.
Do not use abbreviations unless they are used at least 3 times in the abstract.

 

Main Text
All main sections shown below are required for all Lessons from the Field articles. 

 

Background: The purpose of the Background section is to provide a conceptual and historical context for the intervention. Authors should begin with a paragraph on the general issue their intervention addressed as it pertains to medical laboratories in general and in limited-resource settings. The second paragraph should provide readers with specific information on the issue in their local setting, including any relevant history of the country’s laboratory or laboratory system. The final paragraph should explain the rationale and motivation for the intervention. Structural sub-headings may be used to help guide readers. All text should be presented in narrative paragraphs; bulleted or numbered lists are not permitted.

 

Description of the Intervention: The Description of the Intervention section must address the elements listed below. Structural sub-headings are encouraged and required as noted (bold, italics).

• Ethical considerations (required when human subjects research was conducted): Approval must have been obtained before the work began for all studies from the author's institution or other relevant ethics committee. Required elements:
• Name of the institutional review board or ethics committee
• Study approval number
• Manner of consent (written, oral) for human participants
• Description of measures taken to maintain the confidentiality of data
• If the study was not human or animal research or the study was determined to be non-human subjects research or exempt, the authors must provide a statement with those details in this section
• Setting: A brief description of the setting for the study. Include the type(s) of laboratory and community(ies) served, the nature of the local/country health system and usual services provided.
• Study population and sampling strategy: Describe the study population and any inclusion or exclusion criteria. Describe the intended sample size and your sample size calculation or justification. Describe the sampling strategy used. Describe in practical terms how this was implemented.
• Intervention: What were the intervention and comparison groups, describe the intervention in detail and what happened to the comparison groups.
• Data collection: Describe what data were collected and how, and describe any data collection tools that were used (e.g. worksheets, questionnaires, etc.) and their validity. Describe in practical terms how data were collected (e.g., in-person interviews) and any key issues involved (e.g. language barriers). Provide manufacturer information for all supplies and equipment (required: name and location). Cite references for established data collection tools and their validation studies.
• Laboratory analyses: Describe in detail any laboratory tests, analyses and/or assays that were conducted. Cite references for established methods and explain any deviations from these.
• Data analysis (required): Describe how data were checked, cleaned and prepared for analyses. Describe the statistical tests used or steps followed in qualitative data analysis. Provide manufacturer information for all software used (required: name and location).

 

Lessons Learnt: Present the outcomes and results of the intervention in a logical sequence. Use sub-headings, if needed, to organize the presentation of the study findings. Use tables and figures as required to present your findings. Use quotations as required to establish your interpretation of qualitative data. All units should conform to the SI convention and be abbreviated accordingly. Metric units and their international symbols are used throughout, as is the decimal point (not the decimal comma).

• Authors should ensure that:
• The Lessons Learnt section does not contain descriptions of interventions used that should be presented in the Intervention section
• All outcomes and results presented in the Lessons Learnt section must have any associated data/sample collection and assay or analysis methods presented in the Intervention section.

 

Recommendations: The Recommendations section should place your outcomes in context with published results or current policies and practice in other laboratories and discuss key take-away messages from your experience.

 

Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named. Refer to the acknowledgement structure guide on our Formatting Requirements page.

Also provide the following, each under their own heading:

• Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article. Read our policy on competing interests.
• Author contributions:  All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the authorship policy and author contribution statement policies.
• Sources of support: Provide information on funding if relevant
• Data availability: All research articles are encouraged to have a data availability statement.
• Disclaimer: A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible. References should not be used by authors, editors, or peer reviewers to promote self-interests. Refer to the journal referencing style downloadable on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

 

Case Studies

---

Title
The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 95 characters (including spaces).

 

Abstract
The abstract, written in English, should be no longer than 250 words and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a succinct account of the case, its management and outcomes and their significance. The structured abstract for a Case Study article should consist of five paragraphs labelled Introduction, Case Presentation, Management and Outcomes, Conclusion, and What this study adds.

 

Introduction: Set the context for the report. What is known / unknown about the disease, condition or situation being reported?

 

Case Presentation: Present the most important details about the case(s) in your report. Include relevant date(s) and location(s), how case(s) presented or were discovered, etc. Avoid using jargon that will not be readily understood by non-expert readers.

 

Management and Outcomes: In chronological order, explain what was done with special attention to laboratory-related components.

 

Conclusion: Briefly summarise the larger implications of the case(s) and its outcomes. What is the ‘big picture’ take-away message?

Do not cite references in the abstract.
Do not use abbreviations unless they are used at least 3 times in the abstract.

What this study adds: What key insights into the research results and its future function are revealed? How do these insights link to the focus and scope of the journal? It should be a concise statement of the primary contribution of the manuscript; and how it fits within the scope of the journal.

 

Main text
All main sections are required. Authors should consult the CARE guidelines for case reports for expected content.

 

Introduction: The Introduction section establishes the context and motivation for the report. The Introduction should present the topic and other concepts important to the case, such as historical or social context or traditional challenges with diagnosis or management. No structural sub-headings should be used. All text should be presented in narrative paragraphs; bulleted or numbered lists are not permitted.

 

Ethical considerations: For studies involving human or animal research, approval must have been obtained for all studies from the author's institution or other relevant ethics committee before the start of the study. Required information:

• Name of Institutional Review Board or ethical review committee, if the study was reviewed by one
• Study approval number (s), if review conducted
• Description of measures taken to maintain the confidentiality of patient data, clinical details and photographs
• For reports on human patients, a statement of patients’ consent to publish clinical details and photographs is required.
• If the study was not human or animal research or the study was determined to be non-human subjects research or exempt, the authors must provide a statement with those details in this section

Case Presentation: The Case Presentation section presents relevant details of the case and how it was discovered and investigated. Include the initial complaints of patients, the patient(s) history taken by healthcare workers, the results of clinical examinations, and laboratory and other tests and investigations. End the section with the initial diagnosis. This section must be written in complete sentences; bulleted or numbered lists are not permitted. Structural sub-headings are not required but may be useful for readers.

 

Management and Outcomes: Describe the initial treatments and whether the patient(s) improved, then any subsequent clinical and laboratory investigations, modifications to treatments and improvement/worsening of the patient(s) condition.

 

Discussion: The Discussion should place the details of the case(s) and outcomes in the context of other published reports. Provide a scientific rationale for any conclusions drawn, such as possible causes of the case(s). Other than the required sub-headings listed, sub-headings are not expected but may be helpful to readers. 

• Strengths and Limitations (required second-to-last sub-heading): Describe the strengths and weaknesses of the report. 
• Conclusion (required final sub-heading): Provide a brief conclusion with no references that summarises the key take-away messages from the report.

 

Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named. Refer to the acknowledgement structure guide on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

Also provide the following, each under their own heading:

• Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article. Read our policy on competing interests.
• Author contributions:  All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the authorship policy and author contribution statement policies.
• Sources of support: Provide information on funding if relevant
• Data availability: All research articles are encouraged to have a data availability statement.
• Disclaimer: A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible. References should not be used by authors, editors, or peer reviewers to promote self-interests. Refer to the journal referencing style downloadable on our Formatting Requirements page.