SUBMISSION OF MANUSCRIPTS: AUTHOR INSTRUCTIONS
These policies and instructions are updated regularly (last updated: November 11, 2021) to reflect changes in guidelines so authors are encouraged to check these before submission. New manuscripts are expected to comply with the current guidelines posted on the website. Operationally, there will be a lag period for implementation of new guidelines in the published papers.
Authors are requested to submit their manuscript electronically to the online submission system Editorial Manager.
Note that the manuscript should be uploaded as one Word document, including title page, body of text (divided by subheadings), Acknowledgments, Funding, Author Contributions, Conflict of Interest, and References. A supplemental file, such as a video can also to be included, accompanying the submission. If the file is too large to submit, please contact email@example.com to arrange a file transfer. For further information, see “Supplementary Data” below.
Resubmissions should clearly mention that the submission is a revision and include the reference number in the submission letter. The author's replies to the reviewer comments should be included in the revised manuscript itself (at the top). The revised paper should always be a Word document. Manuscripts not revised within 6 months of first submission will generally be considered as new submissions and re-refereed accordingly.
Submission of an article is understood to imply that the article is original and unpublished and is not being considered for publication elsewhere. Bladder Cancer is committed to the highest ethical standards and best practices in publishing and follows the code of conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the ICMJE.” Any possible conflict of interest, financial or otherwise, of relevance to the submitted work must be clearly indicated in the manuscript (for further details see our Policy on Conflicts of Interest). Procedures involving experiments on human subjects should be in accord with the ethical standards of the Committee on Human Experimentation of the institution in which the experiments were done or in accord with the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013 (for further details see our Policy on Use of Human Subjects). Procedures involving experimentation on animal subjects should be in accord with either the guide of the institution in which the experiments were done, or with the National Research Council’s guide for the care and use of laboratory animals (for further details see our Policy on Use of Animals).
If the address to which proofs should be sent is different from the correspondence address, authors are kindly requested to indicate this. Both the Editors-in-Chief and the publisher should be informed of any changes in either or both of these addresses. Please also supply a direct telephone number and email address, if available.
PREPARATION OF MANUSCRIPTS
Organization and style of presentation
Manuscripts must be written in English. Authors whose native language is not English are recommended to seek the advice of a native English speaker, if possible, before submitting their manuscripts.
Manuscripts should be double spaced throughout with wide margins (2.5 cm or 1 in), including the abstract and references. Every page of the manuscript, including the title page, references, tables, etc., should include a page number centered at the bottom.
Manuscripts should be organized in the following order with headings and subheadings typed on a separate line, without indentation.
- Title (should be clear, descriptive and concise).
- Full name(s) of author(s).
All authors should meet the following four criteria: (a) have made substantial contributions to the work (conception, performance or interpretation of data); (b) writing the article; (c) approve the final version to be published; (d) agreed to be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the work. Authors are encouraged to include their ORCID identifiers. The ORCID of the corresponding author is required for submission.
If any author is also a member of the Bladder Cancer Editorial Board, this should be declared in the Conflict of Interest section (see instructions in the Policy on Conflicts of Interest).
- Full affiliation(s). Delineate affiliations with lowercase letters.
- Present address of author(s), if different from affiliation.
- Running title (45 characters or less, including spaces).
- Complete correspondence address, including telephone number and email address.*
Leave the author information blank if double-blind peer review is wished for, but do include the information in the submission letter to the editor.
Abstract and Keywords
The abstract for research papers should follow the “structured abstract” format:
The abstract should try to be no longer than 250 words.
For other papers such as Reviews, the abstract should be clear, descriptive, and self-explanatory, and no longer than 250 words.
Include a list of 4-10 keywords. These keywords should be terms from the MeSH database.
The abstract should make clear the context and aims for the study. It should also state how it was conducted, the main findings and conclusions drawn. Clinical trials should list the NCT number, and include in the abstract items deemed essential by the CONSORT group.
This should outline the context for and purpose of the study.
Materials and Methods
There is no word limit to the materials and methods section, as the journal’s policy is that methodological rigor and reproducibility is of great importance. This section should aim to be sufficiently detailed to enable others with access to the data to reproduce the results.
For research involving human subjects, including registry reviews and retrospective cohort studies for example, authors must state that informed signed consent has been obtained from all subjects or provide an explanation as to why consent was waived. However, because of the legacy pipeline after introduction of this policy, this change will not be manifest consistently in all published retrospective studies before Volume 7, Issue 4.
Ethical considerations, compliance and protocol approval
Compliance with guidelines on human experimentation as well as protocol approval by a local Institutional Review Board should be stated and the approval number should be provided, either in the Methods section or in a separate section at the end of the article. Compliance with guidelines on animal experimentation as well as protocol approval by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee should be stated and the approval number should be provided, either in the Methods section or in a separate section at the end of the article. Clinical trials should include the full protocol as a supplement. Studies involving human or animal subjects that are exempt from approval by an Institutional Review Board and Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee should mention this in an Ethical Considerations Statement, either in the Methods section or in a separate section at the end of the article. However, because of the legacy pipeline after introduction of this policy, the inclusion of approval numbers and statements of exemption will not be manifest consistently in all published articles before Volume 7, Issue 4.
Where applicable, a statement of compliance with guidelines, and inclusion of a flow chart, for respectively:
- randomized trials: CONSORT (consort-statement.org);
- observational studies: STROBE (strobe-statement.org);
- studies of diagnostic accuracy: STARD (stard-statement.org/);
- systematic reviews and meta-analyses: PRISMA (prisma-statement.org).
Cell line identity
In keeping with scientific consensus guidelines, Bladder Cancer considers it to be good practice for cultured cell lines to be authenticated. For each cell line, authors should include in the Methods section a statement that specifies:
- Source of the cell lines
- Are any cell lines used in this paper listed in the database of commonly misidentified cell lines maintained by the International Cell Line Authentication Committee (ICLAC)? If yes, include in the Methods section a scientific justification of their use
- If the cell lines been authenticated and by which method
- If the cell lines been tested for mycoplasma contamination and if so, date last tested.
The Journal has adopted the microarray data standard developed by the Microarray Gene Expression Data Society (MGED), requiring that all authors using microarray data analysis in their research submit a complete data set to the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) Gene Expression Omnibus database (GEO; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/) prior to manuscript submission. Papers submitted to the Journal that use microarray data analysis must comply with the “minimum information about microarray experiments” (MIAME) standard. Access to the GEO database is free and open for all, and the database is maintained by NCBI (Cheadle C, Cho-Chung YS, Becker KG, and Vawter MP. Application of z-score transformation to Affymetrix data. Appl Bioinformatics. 2003; 2(4): 209-217.)
These should be presented in a logical order and summarize the salient findings.
This should link the conclusions with the aims of the study but avoid conclusions not adequately supported by the data.
If there are none, do still include this section and insert "The authors have no acknowledgments".
Authors acknowledging individuals should include a letter from the individual(s) providing written permission for this acknowledgment.
Specify sources of funding.
If there are none, do still include this section and insert "The authors report no funding".
For every author, his or her contribution to the manuscript needs to be provided using the following categories: conception; performance of work; or interpretation of data; writing the article. All authors should also state whether they had access to the data. However, because of the legacy pipeline after introduction of this policy, statements on data access will not be manifest consistently in all published articles before Volume 7, Issue 4.
Conflict of Interest
Please see our Policy on Conflicts of Interest.
Policy on Datasets and Data Availability
Research Reports, Short Communications, and Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses are required to include a Data Availability statement at the end of the manuscript (before the References). For details, please see our data sharing requirements at Policy on Datasets and Data Availability.
- Place citations as numbers in square brackets in the text. All publications cited in the text should be presented in a list of references following the text of the manuscript. Only articles published or accepted for publication should be listed in the reference list. Submitted articles can be listed in the text as (Author(s), unpublished data).
- All authors should be listed in the reference list.
- References should be listed in the order of appearance in Vancouver style:
 Grossman HB, Natale RB, Tangen CM, Speights VO, Vogelzang NJ, Trump DL, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus cystectomy compared with cystectomy alone for locally advanced bladder cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(9):859-66.
 Murray PR, Rosenthal KS, Kobayashi GS, Pfaller MA. Medical microbiology. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002.
 Berkow R, Fletcher AJ, editors. The Merck manual of diagnosis and therapy. 16th ed. Rahway (NJ): Merck Research Laboratories; 1992.
 Meltzer PS, Kallioniemi A, Trent JM. Chromosome alterations in human solid tumors. In: Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW, editors. The genetic basis of human cancer. New York: McGrawHill; 2002. p. 93113.
 Canadian Cancer Society [homepage on the Internet]. Toronto: The Society; 2006 [updated 2006 May 12; cited 2006 Oct 17]. Available from: http://www.cancer.ca/.
Number according to their sequence in the text. The text should include references to all tables.
Provide each table on a separate page of the manuscript after the references.
Include a brief and self-explanatory title with any explanations essential to the understanding of the table given in footnotes at the bottom of the table.
Vertical lines should not be used to separate columns. Leave some extra space between the columns instead.
The author is required to have obtained patient permission from all recognizable participants in photographs, videos, or other information that may be published in the Journal or on the journal’s website. A statement that permission was granted by the patient must accompany the figure legend. Do not use study participants' names, initials, or hospital numbers in the legend, figure, or anywhere in the manuscript.
Number the figures according to their sequence in the text. The text should include references to all figures.
For the file formats of the figures please take the following into account:
- Line art should have a minimum resolution of 1200 dpi, save as EPS or TIFF:
- Do not use faint lines and/or lettering and check that all lines and lettering within the figures are legible at final size.
- All lines should be at least 0.1 mm (0.3 pt) wide.
- Vector graphics containing fonts must have the fonts embedded in the files.
- Grayscales (incl. photos) should have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi, or 600 dpi for combination art (lettering and images); save as TIFF.
- Do not save figures as JPEG, this format may lose information in the process.
- Do not use figures taken from the Internet, the resolution will be too low for printing.
- Do not use color in your figures if they are to be printed in black & white, as this will reduce the print quality (note that in software often the default is color, you should change the settings).
- For figures that should be printed in color, please send a CMYK encoded EPS or TIFF.
Figures should be designed with the format of BLC in mind and preferable sized as they will appear when printed. A single column of the journal is 77 mm and two columns are 165 mm.
Figures should be cropped to include the figure only (no blank space).
On figures where a scale is needed, use bar scales to avoid problems if the figure needs to be reduced.
Each illustration should have a brief self-explanatory legend that should be typed separately from the figure in the section of the manuscript following the tables.
We encourage authors to make their data publicly available. Supplementary data can be submitted with the manuscript, included within the manuscript after the Figures and Tables (or otherwise after the References). Each supplementary item should have a legend and should not exceed the file size of 10 MB. Supplemental videos can be submitted separately (see top of page for submission guidelines of videos). A short description of the supplementary items should be included under the header of “Supplementary Material” within the manuscript before the “References”. Large datasets should be hosted on the author’s own or institute’s website or in an appropriate database, and should be properly cited within the manuscript.
Reviews should be authoritative and topical and provide comprehensive and balanced coverage of a timely and/or controversial issue. When possible, systematic reviews are strongly encouraged and will be given stronger consideration for publication. For systematic reviews, authors should consult PRISMA (prisma-statement.org) and prepare their reviews as per the "PRISMA 2009 Checklist document" at this site, and this compliance stated in the manuscript. Title of the review should be in the following format "SYSTEMATIC REVIEW: full article title". We recommend the EQUATOR Network (equator-network.org) and the NLM’s Research Reporting Guidelines and Initiatives (nlm.nih.gov/services/research_report_guide.html) as good sources for reporting guidelines.
Short Communications/Brief Reports
Short Communications and Brief Reports are articles of original scholarship of unusual interest of less than 1500 words (not including references). They should be structured as Research Reports (see above) and may have a structured abstract. However, because of the legacy pipeline after introduction of this policy, this change will not be manifest consistently in all published articles until Volume 7, Issue 4. References should be formatted as above. A total of two tables and/or figures are allowed.
A hypothesis article should be a balanced and insightful consideration of a topic with novel hypotheses well presented and supported. The article should be prepared as a Research Report but without Methods or Results sections.
Book reviews should be 750 words or less and without sections. Suggestions can be proposed to the Editors-in-Chief.
Letters to the Editor
Authors can submit comments of 1000 words or less concerning prior articles published in BLC to the Editors-in-Chief through the Editorial Office (firstname.lastname@example.org) including any conflicts of interest. The Editors-in-Chief will consider the merits of any comments received and decide whether or not they should be published in the journal.
Commentaries can be around 1000 words with an abstract and no other subdivisions.
REMEMBER TO INCLUDE
In cover letter
- Name, postal address, phone number and email address of the corresponding author.
- Suggest one or more Associate Editors to evaluate the work.
- Statement that all authors agree with being listed as an author.
- Statement that the work has not been published before or being considered for publication.
- A list of at least 4-6 potential reviewers knowledgeable in the area of the study and potential reviewer conflicts.
- Statement that procedures involving experiments on human subjects are done in accord with the ethical standards of the Committee on Human Experimentation of the institution in which the experiments were done or in accord with the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013 (for further details see our Policy on Use of Human Subjects).
- Statement that procedures involving experimentation on animal subjects are done in accord with either the guide of the institution in which the experiments were done, or with the National Research Council's guide for the care and use of laboratory animals (for further details see our Policy on Use of Animals).
- Full disclosure of conflicts of interest, according to our Policy on Conflicts of Interest
- Statement that authors adhere to the Bladder Cancer Policy on Datasets and Data Availability
Resubmissions should include the manuscript number and a reference that the paper is a revision. The point-by-point response to the previous reviews should be included at the top of the manuscript.
Authors of published articles (non-prepress, final articles) will be contacted by Kudos. Kudos is a service that helps researchers maximize the impact and visibility of their research. It allows authors to enrich their articles with lay metadata, add links to related materials and promote their articles through the Kudos system to a wider public. Authors will receive no more than three emails: one invitation and a maximum of two reminders to register for the service and link the published article to their profile. Using and registering for Kudos remains entirely optional. For more information, please have a look at our authors section.
More information about IOS Press can be found at the following website address: iospress.com/about-ios-press.