About us

For Authors

For Reviewers

Cover gallery

For Copy-editors

General information

Diabetologia publishes reports of clinical and experimental work on all aspects of diabetes research and related subjects, provided they have scientific merit and represent an important advance in knowledge. The Editor-in-Chief will consider papers from any country whether or not the author(s) is a member of the EASD. Manuscripts must be written in English. There are no page charges. A word count must be provided both for Abstracts (a maximum of 250 words) and the main text (excluding references, tables, acknowledgements, funding, duality of interest and contribution statement). For original full-length articles the figure legends are included in the word count. Legends are not included in the word count for any other types of papers. Diabetologia expects authors of accepted manuscripts to keep original data available for a minimum of 5 years.

Editorial policies



Exclusivity

  • Diabetologia will not consider material that has been published, is in press or has been submitted elsewhere (abstracts under 300 words excepted).
  • PhD theses posted online in open access repositories are not considered to breach our exclusivity policy.
  • When submitting an article authors are asked whether the manuscript is under consideration elsewhere.
  • Authors should acknowledge in the manuscript all financial support for the work and other personal connections and disclose any conflicts of interest that might bias their work.

Redundant publication

In their covering letter authors should notify the Editor of any potentially overlapping papers in preparation, submission or published. Failure to disclose such information is considered grounds for automatic rejection. It is the Editor's judgement, rather than the authors', as to whether any overlap is significant, so copies of papers should be included with the submitted manuscript to allow the Editor to come to an informed decision.

'Salami slicing'

Data should not be sliced to the size of the smallest publishable unit but must be a complete documentation of a study.

Papers rejected by other journals

There is no obligation to state that a manuscript has previously been submitted to another journal, but authors are encouraged to include referees’ reports and their own responses to these. Referees who have already seen a paper for a different journal will not be sympathetic if they find that their previous comments have been ignored.

Back to top of editorial policies

Clinical trials

In accordance with guidelines issued by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME), Diabetologia requires registration of clinical trials in a public trials registry. A clinical trial is defined as any research project that prospectively assigns people to an intervention, with or without concurrent comparison or control groups, to study the cause-and-effect relationship between a health-related intervention and a health outcome. Health-related interventions are those used to modify a biomedical or health-related outcome; examples include drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioural treatments, dietary interventions, quality improvement interventions, and process-of-care changes. Health outcomes are any biomedical or health-related measures obtained in patients or participants, including pharmacokinetic measures and adverse events.

Purely observational studies (those in which the assignment of the medical intervention is not at the discretion of the investigator) do not require registration.

The ICMJE accepts registration in any registry that is a primary register of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (see http://www.who.int/ictrp/network/primary/en/index.html) or in ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov).

The trial registry number should be included at the end of the Abstract.

Reports of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) should include the checklist items set out in the CONSORT guidelines, as well as a patient flow diagram. Authors must submit a completed CONSORT checklist.

Image manipulation

Diabetologia has adopted the following statement developed by Cell Press as its policy on the manipulation of digital images:
Authors should make every attempt to reduce the amount of post-acquisition processing of data. Some degree of processing may be unavoidable in certain instances and is permitted provided that the final data accurately reflect the original. In the case of image processing, alterations must be applied to the entire image (e.g. brightness, contrast, colour balance). In rare instances where this is not possible (e.g. alterations to a single colour channel on a microscopy image), any alterations must be clearly stated in the figure legend and in the methods section. Groupings and consolidation of data (e.g. cropping of images or removal of lanes from gels and blots) must be made apparent by the arrangement of figures (e.g. dividing lines) and should be explicitly indicated in the text of the figure legend. Data comparisons should only be made from comparative experiments, and individual data should not be utilised across multiple figures. In cases where data are used multiple times (e.g. multiple experiments were performed simultaneously with a single control experiment), this must be clearly stated within each figure legend. In the event that it is deemed necessary for proper evaluation of the manuscript, authors will be required to make the original unprocessed data available to the editor.

Back to top of Editorial Policies

Scientific misconduct

Diabetologia takes seriously its responsibility to help protect the integrity of the public scientific record and will take appropriate action if alerted to possible misconduct. The most common forms of scientific misconduct include:

  • Falsification of data: This ranges from fabrication to deceptive selective reporting of findings and omission of conflicting data, or wilful suppression and/or distortion of data.
  • Improprieties of authorship: Improper assignment of credit, such as excluding others, misrepresentation of the same material as original in more than one publication, inclusion of individuals as authors who have not made a definite contribution to the work published; or submission of multi-authored publications without the concurrence of all authors.
  • Piracy and plagiarism: The unauthorised reproduction or use of ideas, data or methods from others without adequate permission or acknowledgement. The intent of the perpetrator is the untruthful portrayal of the ideas or methods as his or her own. Plagiarism is a form of piracy that involves the unauthorised use or close imitation of the language (including figures or tables) and thoughts of others and the representation of them as one's own original work without permission or acknowledgement by the author of the source of these materials. Plagiarism generally involves the use of materials from others, but can apply to researchers' duplication of their own previously published reports without acknowledgement (sometimes called self-plagiarism or duplicate publication).
  • Inappropriate or fraudulent digital image manipulation: Diabetologia has adopted the statement developed by Cell Press as its policy on the post-acquisition processing of data (see section on Image manipulation). Inappropriate manipulation is the adjustment of image data that violates these guidelines but does not affect the interpretation of the data. Examples include (i) adjustments of brightness/contrast to a gel that completely eliminate the background or obscure background smears or faint background bands and (ii) the splicing of images from different microscope fields into a single image that appears to be a single field. Fraudulent manipulation refers to adjustment of image data that does affect the interpretation of the data. Examples include deleting or adding a band to a gel, insertion of control data from a different series of experiments.
  • Violation of generally accepted research practices: Serious deviation from accepted practices in proposing or carrying out research, improper manipulation of experiments to obtain biased results, deceptive statistical or analytical manipulations, or improper reporting of results.
  • Material failure to comply with legislative and regulatory requirements affecting research: Including but not limited to serious or substantial, wilful violations of applicable local regulations and law involving the use of funds, care of animals, human subjects, investigational drugs, recombinant products, new devices or radioactive, biological or chemical materials.
  • Inappropriate behaviour in relation to misconduct: This includes unfounded or knowingly false accusations of misconduct, withholding or destruction of information relevant to a claim of misconduct and retaliation against persons involved in the allegation or investigation.
  • (The above are taken from the ORI publication Analysis of Institutional Policies for Responding to Allegations of Scientific Misconduct http://ori.hhs.gov/documents/institutional_policies.pdf, accessed 22/10/12 and the Council of Science Editors' White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3331, accessed 2/11/12.)

    Responding to allegations of possible misconduct

    Diabetologia does not have the resources or authority to conduct a formal judicial inquiry or arrive at a formal conclusion regarding misconduct. That process is the role of the suspect's employer, university, granting agency or regulatory body. However, Diabetologia takes seriously its responsibility to help protect the integrity of the public scientific record and will refer all allegations of possible misconduct to the Scientific Integrity Panel of the EASD (Referral Track 1 below). The composition of this Panel will not be made known publicly. Such allegations of possible misconduct may relate to a published article, a submitted manuscript or to the review process, or any other situation involving the editors or the editorial office. The Panel will review the evidence in the strictest confidence and may ask the editorial office to assist in providing documentation under the same terms of confidentiality. The editorial office will not be involved in any other way and neither the office nor any editor will respond to direct enquiries during the course of an investigation by the Panel. If the allegation is against an editor, a member of the Advisory Board or any member of the editorial office staff, the Panel will work entirely independently of the journal and such cases may be referred directly to the Panel (Referral Track 2 below).

    Initial fact-finding will usually include a request to all parties involved to state their case, and explain the circumstances, in writing. In questions of research misconduct centring on methods or technical issues, the Scientific Integrity Panel may confidentially consult experts who will be blinded to the identity of the individuals wherever possible. Since the underlying goal of misconduct is to deliberately deceive others as to the truth, the Scientific Integrity Panel's preliminary investigation of potential misconduct will take into account not only the particular act or omission, but also the apparent intention (as best it can be determined) of the person involved. The Scientific Integrity Panel will follow guidelines recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE; http://publicationethics.org/) for handling cases of misconduct. The Panel will arrive at a conclusion as to whether there is enough evidence to lead a reasonable person to believe there is a possibility of misconduct.

    If the Scientific Integrity Panel concludes there is a reasonable possibility of misconduct, they will consider any of the following options, dependent upon the apparent magnitude of the misconduct. Responses may be applied separately or combined, and their implementation will depend on the circumstances of the case as well as the responses of the participating parties and institutions. The following options are ranked in approximate order of severity:

    • A letter of explanation (and education) sent only to the person(s) against whom the complaint is made, where there appears to be a genuine and innocent misunderstanding of principles or procedure.
    • A letter of reprimand to the person(s) against whom the complaint is made, warning of the consequences of future such instances, where the misunderstanding appears to be not entirely innocent.
    • A letter of reprimand to all co-authors on the paper informing them of the findings of the Panel and warning of the consequences of future such instances.
    • A formal letter as above, including a written request to the supervising institution(s) that an investigation be carried out and the findings of that inquiry be reported in writing to the journal.
    • Publication of a notice of redundant or duplicate publication or plagiarism, if appropriate and unequivocally documented. Such publication will not require approval of authors, and may also be reported to their institution and, if appropriate, funding agency.
    • Formal withdrawal or retraction of the paper from the scientific literature, published in the journal, informing readers and the indexing authorities (National Library of Medicine, etc), if there is a formal finding of misconduct by the author's institution. Such publication will not require approval of authors, will be reported to their institution, and will be readily visible and identifiable in the journal. Diabetologia reserves the right to publish a retraction without the agreement of the authors if these conditions are met.

    Allegations about misconduct can arise regarding authors, reviewers, editors and others. When allegations concern authors, the peer-review and publication process for the manuscript in question will be halted while the above process is carried out. The investigation will be completed even if the authors withdraw their paper, and the responses above will still be considered.

    In the case of allegations against reviewers or editors, they will be replaced in the review process while the matter is investigated. Editors or reviewers who are found to have engaged in scientific misconduct will be removed from further association with the journal, and this fact will be reported to their institution.

    Methods of referral:

    • Track 1: Allegations of possible misconduct involving the journal should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief, Professor Juleen Zierath (email: diabetologia-j@bristol.ac.uk) for referral to the Scientific Integrity Panel who will inform the person making the allegation of the action taken.
    • Track 2: Any individual may refer an allegation of possible misconduct involving the journal directly to the Scientific Integrity Panel if s/he has reason to believe this may avoid a potential conflict of interest or deems this more appropriate for any other reason. This should be addressed by email to: SIP@easd.org. The Panel will only consider allegations of possible misconduct as defined in the above Statement, and not challenges to any editorial decision regarding a submitted manuscript.

    Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers

    Diabetologia endorses the ethical guidelines for peer reviewers issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These guidelines set out the basic principles and standards to which all peer reviewers should adhere during the peer-review process. Referees should familiarise themselves with these guidelines prior to reviewing papers for Diabetologia.

    Data archiving

    Diabetologia expects authors of accepted manuscripts to keep original data available for a minimum of 5 years.

    Back to top of Editorial Policies

    Back to top of Instructions to Authors

Organisation and content of papers

In this section:


a) Title page

This page should state: (1) title of paper (including animal species if appropriate); (2) authors' names (given name, initials and family name – no qualifications); (3) institution(s) of origin; (4) corresponding author plus his/her address, telephone and fax numbers and e-mail address; (5) word count (of both Abstract and main text).

Back to top of section

b) Abstract

The Abstract should be no more than 250 words. Abstracts are to be structured into four paragraphs as follows: (1) Aims/hypothesis; (2) Methods; (3) Results; (4) Conclusions/interpretation. The Abstract should not contain unexplained abbreviations.
For clinical trials, the trial registry number should be included at the end of the Abstract.
For randomised controlled trials (RCTs), abstracts should include the checklist items set out in the CONSORT guidelines (see http://www.consort-statement.org/index.aspx?o=1190)
Keywords. Up to ten keywords (suitable for Index Medicus listing) should be provided at the end of the Abstract.
Abbreviations. Excluding Diabetologia’s standard abbreviations, please define abbreviations used throughout the manuscript, in alphabetical order, after the keywords.

c) Introduction

The Introduction should contain a clear statement of the aim and novelty of the study. It should include neither results nor conclusions.

Back to top of section

d) Methods

Sufficient information should be given to permit repetition of the experimental work.

Randomised controlled trials Reports of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) should include the checklist items set out in the CONSORT guidelines, as well as a patient flow diagram. Authors must submit a completed checklist (available from www.consort-statement.org/index.aspx?o=2965)

Observational studies (cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional designs) should include the items detailed in the STROBE checklist. Authors must submit a completed checklist and, if the study protocol is available, this should be uploaded as a supplemental file.

Clinical trials mentioned in the text The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends that, where trials are mentioned, for example in secondary analyses or meta-analyses, the trial registration number should be included at first mention of the trial in the manuscript.

Description of patients The terms type 1 diabetes mellitus and type 2 diabetes mellitus should normally be used. Detailed descriptions should be provided of the patients’ clinical characteristics upon which the classification was made. Note: diabetic should not be used as a noun, i.e. use 'diabetic patients' not 'diabetics'. Relative body weight should be expressed in terms of body mass index, i.e. (weight in kg)/(height in metres)2 (not % ideal body weight).

Informed consent and ethics committee approval A paper describing experimental work in humans must (1) indicate that informed consent has been obtained from patients where appropriate, (2) include a statement that the responsible ethics committee (institutional review board) has given approval, and/or indicate that the reported investigations have been carried out in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki as revised in 2008. Do not use patients’ names, initials or hospital numbers, especially in illustrative material. Uniform requirements should be followed for ethical standards [http://www.wma.net/en/20activities/10ethics/index.html].

Experimental animals Age, sex, source and, where appropriate, the genetic background of the animals used should be given. The Editorial Board will pay particular attention to the ethical aspects of animal experimentation. Reports of animal experiments must state that the ‘Principles of laboratory animal care’ (NIH publication no. 85–23, revised 1985; http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/olaw/references/phspol.htm) were followed, as well as specific national laws where applicable. The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfil the above-mentioned requirements. Animals should be described as being killed rather than sacrificed.

Abbreviations A list of accepted abbreviations to be used without definition is available here. Please use other abbreviations only when necessary and define them in a separate list given after the keywords. Abbreviations should not normally appear in the title or Abstract. Endocrine pancreatic cells should be designated as beta cells (not ß cells or b cells), alpha cells, delta cells or PP cells.

Equipment Manufacturer, city, state (if applicable) and country must be given.

Chemical substances must be properly identified. Except for standard laboratory chemicals, the source of supply must be given. Drugs must be identified by the generic or official name wherever possible. Proprietary names should be avoided.

Genes and proteins Italic characters should be used for gene symbols including genotypes, alleles, mRNA etc. Upright font and upper case letters are generally used for protein abbreviations. For example:
Human gene: XYZ
Rat/mouse gene: Xyz
Protein (any species): XYZ
For further details see the guidelines recommended by the Human Gene Nomenclature Committee, (http://www.genenames.org) or by the Jackson Laboratory,
(http://www.informatics.jax.org/mgihome/nomen/gene.shtml).

Radioisotopes Isotopically labelled chemicals should be identified by the atomic number and symbol of the isotope and its location in the molecule. The specific activity of the starting material should be given in terms of becquerels (Bq: disintegrations/second) per molar weight.

Bioassays and radioimmunoassays An appropriate measure of the precision in terms of standard deviation (SD), standard error of the mean (SEM), coefficient of variation or 95% confidence intervals should be given. Reference to the original technique should be included.

Buffers and incubation media Compositions of incubation media should be described, or a reference supplied, together with the pH. Concentrations of solutions should be described in molar terms (mol/l and subunits thereof), equivalents or percentage weight/volume or weight/weight. Mass concentration should be expressed as g/l (or subunits thereof – mg/l or µg/l). It should always be made clear whether concentrations in a mixture are final concentrations or those of solutions added. In the case of insulin, mU/l is acceptable.

Units of measurement. Units should conform to the SI convention, except for blood pressure (which should be expressed in mmHg) and haemoglobin (g/l). Gas or pressure values should be given as mmHg with kPa in parentheses or vice versa. Where molecular weight is known, the amount of a substance should be expressed in mol or appropriate subunit (mmol etc.). Energy should be expressed in kJ. NB: The solidus may be used in a unit but not more than once (e.g. mmol/l is acceptable, but ml/min/kg is not acceptable and should be replaced with ml min–1 kg–1).

HbA1c In line with current recommendations, Diabetologia includes dual reporting of HbA1c units. Please include values for HbA1c in percentage units with International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (IFCC) units (mmol/mol) in parentheses. e.g. HbA1c level was 5% (31 mmol/mol)
For details of the conversion from NGSP (DCCT) percentage units (used in the UK, USA and many other countries) to IFCC units, see http://www.ngsp.org/docs/IFCCstd.pdf
Note that values <2.15% cannot be directly converted to IFCC units. To calculate IFCC units for small values or changes in HbA1c, please go back to the original data if possible. If not, values below 2.15% can just be given in percentage units.
Some countries, notably Sweden, have traditionally used the Mono-S method for expressing HbA1c in percentage units, which gives values approximately 1% lower than NGSP units. For details of converting Mono-S units to IFCC units, see http://www.ngsp.org/docs/IFCCstd.pdf.
Percentage HbA1c measured using the Japan Diabetes Society (JDS) methods requires a slightly different conversion: see http://www.ngsp.org/docs/IFCCstd.pdf.

Statistical analyses Describe statistical methods in sufficient detail to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to verify the reported results. Computer software packages that are used for anything other than widely known standard statistical procedures should be identified by name or acronym and by author or organisation of origin. Reference for statistical methods should preferably be to standard works (with pages stated) rather than to papers in which designs or methods were originally reported. When variability is expressed in terms of the SEM or SD, the number of observations (n) must also be given. When possible, quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty (such as confidence intervals). Both the sample size and statistical significance should be predefined; p values should be given.

Common errors (1) Using one-tailed instead of two-tailed tests; (2) inappropriate use of parametric analyses; and (3) lack of p correction when using multiple comparisons. If necessary, professional statistical advice will be sought by the Editor-in-Chief.

Back to top of section

e) Footnotes

Footnotes should not be used.

Back to top of section

f) Results

The Results should be stated concisely without discussion and should not normally contain any references. The same data should not be presented in figures and tables. Do not repeat all the data that are set out in the tables or figures in the text; emphasise or summarise only important observations.

Back to top of section

g) Discussion

The Discussion should deal with the interpretation of the results and not recapitulate them. We encourage authors to write their Discussion in a structured way, as follows:

  • statement of principal findings;
  • strengths and weaknesses of the study;
  • strengths and weaknesses in relation to other studies;
  • discussion of important differences in results; meaning of the study;
  • unanswered questions and future research.

Back to top of section

h) Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements should be as brief as possible. Any grant support that requires acknowledgement should be mentioned. Any editorial assistance should be acknowledged. For individuals thanked in this section, or acknowledged elsewhere in the text, please provide full names and affiliations. Acknowledgements are not included in the maximum word count.

Back to top of section

i) Funding

Please include a separate Funding section after your Acknowledgements which details your sources of funding. The names of funding organisations should be written in full. Funding details are not included in the maximum word count.

Back to top of section

j) Duality of interest

Authors are responsible for recognising and disclosing conflicts of interest that might bias their work. They should acknowledge in the manuscript all financial support for the work and other personal connections. Duality of interest details are not included in the maximum word count.

Back to top of section

k) Contribution statement

The ICMJE uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to medical journals state that authorship credit should be based on:

  1. substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data or analysis and interpretation of data
  2. drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content
  3. final approval of the version to be published.

All three conditions must be met by all authors. Participation solely in the acquisition of funding or data or general supervision of the research group does not constitute authorship.

Please include a statement listing each author's contribution. Please ensure that this is discussed with your co-authors and agreement is reached prior to manuscript submission. Post-acceptance changes to the author list will not be permitted. The contribution statement is not included in the maximum word count.

Back to top of section

l) References

References to the literature should be credited to the original findings and be in numerical order in the text, the number being given in square brackets on the line, and should be typed and numbered in the same order at the end of the manuscript. There must be only one reference per number. Reference may only be made to Abstracts published in the current or preceding year.

Reference list In accordance with Springer publishing policy, all references should be in the ELSE-Ciba style. The following formats should be used:

Articles in journals Names of up to six authors with initials (seven authors or more should be abbreviated to et al after the third author’s name); (year); title of paper in full; abbreviated name of journal (according to Index Medicus see http://www.nlm.nih.gov/tsd/serials/lji.html); volume number; first and last page numbers, e.g.: Tanaka Y, Tran PO, Harmon J, Robertson RP (2002) A role for glutathione peroxidase in protecting pancreatic ß cells against oxidative stress in a model of glucose toxicity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:12363–12368

Whole book Names of all authors with initials; (year); title of book; edition; name and city of publisher, e.g.: Ekoé JM, Zimmet P, Williams R (2001) The epidemiology of diabetes mellitus. An international perspective. Wiley, Chichester

Chapter from a book Names of all authors with initials; (year); chapter title; In: editors’ names with initials (eds); title of book; volume number; name and city of publisher; pp first and last page numbers, e.g.: Hopper JL (2000) Why ‘common environmental effects’ are so uncommon in the literature. In: Spector TD, Snieder H, MacGregor AJ (eds) Advances in twin and sib-pair analysis. Oxford University Press, London, pp 151–165

Letters to the Editor As for articles in journals: e.g.: t’Hart LM, Dekker JM, Heine RJ, Maassen JA (2003) Lack of association between gene variants in the ALMSI gene and Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia 46:1023–1024

Abstracts As for articles in journals, with (Abstract) after the page numbers: e.g. Khalifah RG, Chen Y, Price DL, Booth AA (2002) Mechanism of inhibition of advanced glycation endproducts by Pyridorin™, a novel therapeutic for diabetic complications. Diabetologia 45 [Suppl 2]: A1222 (Abstract)

Website Authors; (year); title; URL; date accessed, e.g.: Regional Office for the Western Pacific of the World Health Organization, International Association for the Study of Obesity and the International Obesity Task Force (2000) The Asia-Pacific perspective: Redefining obesity and its treatment. Available from http://www.obesityasiapacific.com, accessed 10 October 2003

Papers quoted as ‘in press’ Authors should provide an electronic version of any manuscripts cited as ‘in press’ when they submit their manuscript to Diabetologia. If an accepted paper contains references to a manuscript ‘in press’, written evidence that the manuscript has been accepted will be requested. Numbered references to personal communications, unpublished data and manuscripts either ‘in preparation’ or ‘submitted for publication’ are unacceptable. If essential, such references may be incorporated in parentheses in the appropriate place in the text, but written consent to publication must be provided.

The references are the responsibility of the authors. They must be written correctly and be rechecked by the authors in the proofs. References to abstracts (only current and preceding year), letters to the editor, congress proceedings, and non-peer-reviewed publications should be kept to a minimum.

EndNote style template:

A Diabetologia style template is available for EndNote. It can be downloaded from http://www.endnote.com/support/enstyles.asp. Save the file in the appropriate folder in your EndNote program directory, usually:
Windows—C:\Program Files\EndNote
or
Mac OS X—Harddrive:Applications:Endnote.
The style template will be available when you select 'Output Styles' in the Edit menu.

Back to top of section

m) Tables

Use the table function of your word processing program, not spreadsheets, to create tables. Tables should be numbered with Arabic numerals. Each table should have a short informative heading which is self-explanatory without reference to the text. Footnotes should be kept to a minimum. Describe the method used in the text of the Methods section and not in a footnote. Only conditions specific to the particular experiment can be stated. The units in which the results are expressed should be given in parentheses at the head of each column and not repeated on each line of the table. Avoid abbreviations. Superscripts ‘a’, ‘b’, ‘c’ should be used for footnotes (not asterisks or any other symbols). See a recent issue of the journal for examples. Large amounts of additional information can be submitted for publication electronically as supplementary material.

Back to top of section

n) Figures

Diabetologia offers its authors free use of colour where this is essential for understanding.




Image manipulation: Diabetologia has adopted the following statement developed by Cell Press as its policy on the manipulation of digital images:
Authors should make every attempt to reduce the amount of post-acquisition processing of data. Some degree of processing may be unavoidable in certain instances and is permitted provided that the final data accurately reflect the original. In the case of image processing, alterations must be applied to the entire image (e.g. brightness, contrast, colour balance). In rare instances where this is not possible (e.g. alterations to a single colour channel on a microscopy image), any alterations must be clearly stated in the figure legend and in the methods section. Groupings and consolidation of data (e.g. cropping of images or removal of lanes from gels and blots) must be made apparent by the arrangement of figures (e.g. dividing lines) and should be explicitly indicated in the text of the figure legend. Data comparisons should only be made from comparative experiments, and individual data should not be utilised across multiple figures. In cases where data are used multiple times (e.g. multiple experiments were performed simultaneously with a single control experiment), this must be clearly stated within each figure legend. In the event that it is deemed necessary for proper evaluation of the manuscript, authors will be required to make the original unprocessed data available to the editor.

Graphs and diagrams: See a current issue of Diabetologia for style and layout – wherever possible omit headings, keys to symbols and statistics (which should be included in the legend). Line drawings and graphs should be of professional standard. Freehand or typewritten lettering and numbering are unacceptable. Ruled lines, curves and symbols must be sufficiently bold to withstand reduction to one column width (8.6 cm). Curves should not be drawn beyond the experimental points, nor should experimental points extend beyond the scales of the axes. For scatter diagrams, solid symbols are preferred.

Halftone images: Whenever possible, prints should be cropped to be one column width (8.6 cm) or be capable of being reduced to such size. If grouping into plates is desired, the layout should be indicated as a diagram. Numbers, letters and symbols must be large enough to be read easily after reduction (final size 2 mm or larger for lettering and numbering). Magnification should be indicated in the legend and where appropriate by an internal reference marker on the photograph itself (as a horizontal line at least 1 mm thick after reduction). If photographs of patients are used, either the subject should not be identifiable, or the picture must be accompanied by written permission to use the figure.

Forest plots: Forest plots should include the name of study or first author's name followed by et al (give names of both authors if there are only two authors); year of publication (optional); and the reference citation number [in square brackets]. Click here for an example. Please provide forest plots as Powerpoint or Word files in which the text is editable. If this is not possible please supply them as tif or jpeg files with a resolution of 1000 dpi.

Permissions: If the figure has previously been published, please see our section on Permissions.

Back to top of section

o) Figure format

We would prefer to receive your figures as vector files (e.g. EPS or Adobe Illustrator files), or as Excel, PowerPoint or SigmaPlot files if your figures were created (not imported or resaved) in one of these programs. If this is not possible, please provide TIF files at a resolution of 1000 dpi for graphs and 600 dpi for composite images (mixture of line graphs and halftones) or halftones (gels and micrographs). Colour figures supplied as TIF files should be saved in RGB mode (8 bits per channel).
For information on converting figures created in STATA and GraphPad into EPS vector files, please see our detailed instructions.

Back to top of section

p) Legends for figures

Legends should be short, self-explanatory and contain enough information to identify the figures and enable them to stand as a separate entity from the text. Legends should not, however, describe methodological detail. Keys to symbols and the statistical analysis should be included in the legend, not in the figure. For original full-length papers submitted from 1 September 2013, legends will be included in the word count so should be kept as concise as possible.

Back to top of section

Approved abbreviations and units of expression for use without definition

Please click here for a complete list.

Types of articles


Original articles

A maximum of 4000 words in the main text plus up to 50 references and including figure legends in this word count. The abstract, references and tables are excluded from the word count, as are acknowledgements and details of funding, duality of interest and contribution statements.

Short communications

A maximum of 1500 words in the main text plus up to ten references and normally no more than two illustrations (tables or figures or one of each).

Reviews

Full reviews: a maximum of 5000 words in the main text plus up to 100 references.
Mini reviews: a maximum of 3000 words in the main text plus up to 50 references.
Reviews are usually invited, although unsolicited reviews may be considered for publication. Authors hoping to submit an unsolicited review should first consult the Editor-in-Chief at diabetologia-j@bristol.ac.uk. Proposals should include an abstract or detailed summary and a full outline of the review, along with a full author list with titles, affiliations and areas of expertise; please state which sections of the review each author will be responsible for.
Please be aware that even if you are given the go-ahead to submit your review to Diabetologia, your manuscript will undergo peer review and there can be absolutely no guarantee of eventual acceptance.
If you are considering using figures, data etc from another paper in your review, please note that it will be your responsibility to secure permission to use this material before submission. In most cases permission can be obtained by going to the paper online and navigating via Rightslink.

Systematic Reviews

A maximum of 4000 words in the main text with unlimited references. We recommend that authors register their study and submit the study protocol as supplementary material.

For systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials, follow PRISMA reporting guidelines – include a flow diagram in your manuscript and submit a completed checklist.

For systematic reviews of observational studies in epidemiology, follow MOOSE reporting guidelines and submit a completed checklist.

There is no need to contact the Editor-in-Chief before submitting a systematic review; please upload at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/diabetologia in the usual way.

Meta-analyses

A maximum of 4000 words in the main text with unlimited references. We recommend that authors register their study and submit the study protocol as supplementary material.

For meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials, follow PRISMA reporting guidelines – include a flow diagram in your manuscript and submit a completed checklist.

For meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology, follow MOOSE reporting guidelines and submit a completed checklist.

There is no need to contact the Editor-in-Chief before submitting a meta-analysis; please upload at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/diabetologia in the usual way.

For Debate

A maximum of 3000 words in the main text plus up to 50 references and two illustrations (tables or figures or one of each). These will normally be solicited by the Editor-in-Chief although unsolicited articles will be considered.

Letters to the Editor

A maximum of 1000 words, plus 8 references and normally no more than one table or one figure. Letters will be considered for publication in the Correspondence section and are the forum for either: (1) Correspondence – comments with critical assessment of papers recently published in Diabetologia which, at the Editor-in-Chief’s discretion, will be sent to the authors of the original paper for comment and both letter and reply published together; or (2) Research Letters – observations providing concise and important new information.

Commentaries

Commentaries are usually invited, although unsolicited commentaries may be considered for publication. There is no need to contact the Editor-in-Chief before submitting an unsolicited commentary; please upload at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/diabetologia in the usual way.

Back to top

Electronic Supplementary Material (ESM)

Additional information (e.g. gene sequences) can be submitted for publication electronically as supplementary material provided that it is not essential for a basic understanding of the main paper. You should include references to the supplementary material at appropriate places in your article; these will become hyperlinks to the ESM in the electronic version of article.

ESM can be used in conjunction with full-length papers and short communications.

ESM will be peer-reviewed but will not undergo any copyediting and will be published online exactly as supplied by the author.

Back to top

Supplements

Diabetologia does not publish supplements other than the Abstract volume of the annual EASD meeting.

Back to top

Revised manuscripts

If you are asked to revise your manuscript you will be expected to provide a covering letter that responds in detail to each point raised by reviewers or editors, and to indicate using a different colour font all changes and new material in your paper, ensuring that such changes will be clear if referees print your manuscript in black and white (do not use the 'track changes' mode of Word). If a manuscript returned to the authors for revision is not returned to the Editorial Office within the stipulated time-period (usually 4 weeks), it may be treated as a new manuscript.

When you submit your revised manuscript please fax a completed author signed statement to +44(0)845 0582542

Back to top

Resubmitted manuscripts

If your manuscript was rejected with an invitation to resubmit as a new paper, there is no time limit for submitting your new manuscript as extensive reworking/new experiments may be required. This is in contrast to papers that are returned for revision (see above). If you choose to resubmit your manuscript, you will be expected to include a response to the referees' comments in a covering letter; this could be a point-by-point list or you may find that a more general summary is appropriate if the paper has been rewritten. You will be expected to indicate using a different colour font all changes and new material in your paper, ensuring that such changes will be clear if referees print your manuscript in black and white (do not use the 'track changes' mode of Word). Please be aware that we might ask new referees to review your resubmitted manuscript.

When you resubmit your manuscript please fax a completed author signed statement to +44(0)845 0582542

Back to top

Proofs

An electronic proof (URL) is sent to the corresponding author. Only typographical errors should be corrected. The corrected proof should be returned within 48 h. Failure to comply with this deadline will delay publication. Please ensure that proofs are checked carefully – by several authors if possible. Once the paper is published online mistakes can only be corrected by issuing an erratum.

Back to top

Open access

Authors have the option to make their paper freely available immediately after publication (see Springer's Open Choice program)

Back to top

Errata

Mistakes in a published article can only be corrected by publishing an erratum. If you notice a mistake in your article please contact the Editorial Office (diabetologia-j@bristol.ac.uk)

Back to top

Offprints

Authors will receive an electronic offprint (pdf) free of charge and will have the opportunity to purchase additional printed offprints.

Back to top

Permissions

Verbatim material or figures/tables taken from other published sources must be accompanied by a written statement from the author of the original material, and from the publishers if they hold the copyright, giving permission to Diabetologia for reproduction in print and electronic formats. Please note that, for many journals, permission is required for publication of an adapted figure/table. It is the responsibility of the submitting author to investigate whether permission is needed and to pay any fees associated with obtaining permission.

Back to top

Authors transfer the copyright to their article to Springer effective if and when the article is accepted for publication. The copyright covers the exclusive and unlimited rights to reproduce and distribute the article in any form of reproduction (printing, electronic media or any other form); it also covers translation rights for all languages and countries. For authors from the United States the copyright is transferred to the extent transferable. A Copyright Transfer Form will be sent to the corresponding author along with proofs of the paper.

Springer operates an Open Choice programme whereby authors can choose to make their article available with full open access following payment of an article processing fee.

Back to top