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 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



Statement of Principle

We, as representatives of scientific organizations devoted to improving health care and advancing research, reaffirm that it is the mission of our respective medical journals to report and disseminate data from scientific investigation, evolving medical care, and innovative treatments. We believe these reports serve to unite basic scientists, clinical investigators, and medical professionals regardless of their country of origin, ethnic group, or political leaning. We believe that these efforts achieve the common goal of advancing scientific discoveries that lead to improved health of people worldwide. On the basis of our goals and principles, our respective journals will refrain from publishing articles addressing political issues that are outside of either research funding or health care delivery.

William T. Cefalu, MD, Editor in Chief, Diabetes Care
Juleen Zierath, PhD, Editor in Chief, Diabetologia
K. Sreekumaran Nair, MD, PhD, Editor in Chief, Diabetes
Derek LeRoith, MD, PhD, Editor in Chief, Endocrine Practice
Elizabeth R. Seaquist, MD, President, Medicine and Science, American Diabetes Association
Andrew J.M. Boulton, MD, President, European Association for the Study of Diabetes
R. Mack Harrell, MD, President, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists
George Grunberger, MD, President Elect, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists
Leonard Wartofsky, MD, Editor in Chief, The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism
Andrea C. Gore, PhD, Editor in Chief, Endocrinology
Margaret Wierman, MD, Acting Editor in Chief, Endocrine Reviews
Stephen R. Hammes, MD, PhD, Editor in Chief, Molecular Endocrinology
Carol A. Lange, PhD, Editor in Chief, Hormones and Cancer

Exclusivity

  • Diabetologia will not consider material that has been published, is in press or has been submitted elsewhere (abstracts 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.

Peer review

The journal operates a rapid triage system allowing authors to submit to a more appropriate journal without delay. Only the top 40% of papers, as judged by the Editor-in-Chief and Editors, are put through external peer review. The journal operates a single-blind peer review system such that authors are blinded to the identity of peer-reviewers and Editors, but not vice versa. Articles are usually assessed by two independent experts in the field. Authors must be prepared to provide additional information, original images or raw data if requested during the peer-review process. When it is deemed necessary, articles will be seen by an additional statistical reviewer. Editors and Reviewers are required to abide by the ethical guidelines set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics. The journal aims to return a decision on a peer-reviewed paper in less than a month.

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.

Image editing software and investigative techniques will be used to screen images in accepted papers to identify any manipulation. Any untoward manipulation will be investigated by the Scientific Integrity Panel following guidelines set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE; http://publicationethics.org/).

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 (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.

    Research data policy

    Submission to Diabetologia implies that materials described in the manuscript, including all relevant raw data, will be freely available to any researcher wishing to use them for non-commercial purposes, as long as participant confidentiality is not breached.
    Diabetologia strongly encourages authors to make available to readers all datasets on which the conclusions of the paper rely. We encourage authors to ensure that their datasets are either deposited in publicly available repositories (where available and appropriate) or presented in the main manuscript or additional supplementary files whenever possible. Please see Springer Nature's information on recommended repositories. General repositories - for all types of research data - such as figshare) and Dryad may be used where appropriate.
    Where a widely established research community expectation for data archiving in public repositories exists, submission to a community-endorsed, public repository is mandatory. Persistent identifiers (such as DOIs and accession numbers) for relevant datasets must be provided in the paper.
    For the following types of data set, submission to a community-endorsed, public repository is mandatory:

    Mandatory deposition Suitable repositories
    Protein sequences Uniprot
    DNA and RNA sequences Genbank
    DNA DataBank of Japan (DDBJ)
    EMBL Nucleotide Sequence Database (ENA)
    DNA and RNA sequencing data NCBI Trace Archive
    NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA)
    Genetic polymorphisms dbSNP
    dbVar
    European Variation Archive (EVA)
    Linked genotype and phenotype data dbGAP
    The European Genome-phenome Archive (EGA)
    Macromolecular structure Worldwide Protein Data Bank (wwPDB)
    Biological Magnetic Resonance Data Bank (BMRB)
    Electron Microscopy Data Bank (EMDB)
    Microarray data (must be MIAME compliant) Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO)
    ArrayExpress
    Crystallographic data for small molecules Cambridge Structural Database

    Datasets that are assigned digital object identifiers (DOIs) by a data repository may be cited in the reference list. Data citations should include the minimum information recommended by DataCite: authors, title, publisher (repository name), identifier.
    For more information see Research Data Policy Frequently Asked Questions

    Data availability

    Diabetologia encourages authors to provide a statement of data availability in their article. Data availability statements should include information on where data supporting the results reported in the article can be found, including, where applicable, hyperlinks to publicly archived datasets analysed or generated during the study. Data availability statements can also indicate whether data are available on request from the authors and where no data are available, if appropriate. Click here for examples of data availability statements, including examples of openly available and restricted access datasets.
    Springer Nature provides a research data policy support service for authors and editors: email researchdata@springernature.com. This service provides advice on research data policy compliance and on finding research data repositories but does not advise on specific manuscripts.

    Data archiving

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

    Press releases

    Diabetologia has a dedicated press officer who will issue press releases on selected papers. Authors arranging their own press releases should send a draft to the editorial office. The editorial office will advise on embargoes and will be able to make the press release available to journalists worldwide via the online, global news service, EurekaAlert!

    Back to top of Editorial Policies

    Back to top of Instructions to Authors

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. Please go to Organisation and content of papers below for information on structuring your article.

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). Please go to Organisation and content of papers below for information on structuring your article.

Reviews

Full reviews: a maximum of 5000 words in the main text plus up to 100 references.
Mini reviews: a maximum of 2500 words in the main text plus up to 40 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 the keywords and 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 https://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 https://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. Research letters are formatted as letters, i.e. in individual paragraphs with no headings and no abstract.
The lead authors of Letter-responses are responsible for contacting all authors of the original paper to ascertain whether they wish to be included in the reply.

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 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/diabetologia in the usual way. As a guide, commentaries should be approximately 2000 words in the main text, with no more than 30 references. An unstructured abstract is encouraged but not mandatory.

Back to top

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

Abstracts should be structured into four paragraphs as follows: (1) Aims/hypothesis; (2) Methods; (3) Results; (4) Conclusions/interpretation. The Abstract should not contain unexplained abbreviations. There is no upper word limit.
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)
If data have been deposited in a public repository authors should include the dataset name and repository name and number at the end of the Abstract.
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

Diabetologia endorses the NIH guidelines for reporting preclinical research. The Methods section must be sufficiently detailed so that others with access to the data would be able to reproduce the results. If results in a paper published in Diabetologia cannot be reproduced the journal will consider publication of refutations of that paper.
If an organisation was paid or otherwise contracted to help conduct the research (e.g. data collection and management) then this should be detailed in the methods.

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). For reports of non-pharmacologic treatment interventions, please use the extension to the CONSORT statement.

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 Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals, Eighth edition (2011) (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/guide-for-the-care-and-use-of-laboratory-animals.pdf) was 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.

qPCR. The journal supports the use of the Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments (MIQE) guidelines for the reporting of quantitative real-time PCR experiments.

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. References should not be used by authors, editors or peer-reviewers to promote self-interests. 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

It is the responsibility of the authors to ensure graphs accurately reflect the data they represent. Addition of error bars etc by hand is unacceptable. Graphs may occasionally be scrutinised for evidence of inappropriate manipulation.
Figures should be provided in separate files (and not embedded in the main document). Figure legends should be included at the end of your article. See the current issue of Diabetologia for general style and layout.

Diabetologia offers its authors free use of colour where this is essential for understanding. Please select colours from the Diabetologia colour palette.

Our artwork guidelines should be referred to and followed where possible, and further advice can be obtained from the Editorial Office if needed. The guidelines are given to ensure that figures can be published as clearly as possible, and following our style will mean fewer changes during typesetting.

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.

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

What happens to figures if your paper is accepted?: If your paper is accepted or provisionally accepted, you may be asked to make certain changes to your figures to comply with journal style. In addition, we may make further changes to figures at the copy-editing stage, either by editing them ourselves, marking up the images to be changed by our typesetters, or requesting that you make additional amendments yourself and supply replacement figures. This process will help to ensure that your data are clear and accessible to readers, and that images are consistent between different articles in Diabetologia. You will be given the opportunity to review the figures, with the rest of the article, at the proof stage. It is important to take care when checking the proofs, as changes cannot be made once the article has been published online.

Back to top of section

o) Legends for figures

Figure legends should be concise and self explanatory and contain enough information to identify the figures and enable them to stand as a separate entity from the text. However, legends should not give methodological detail—this should be included in the Methods—and repetition of information in the main text should be avoided. Headings, keys to symbols and statistical analysis should be included in the legend rather than the figure. For original full-length papers, legends are included in the word count so should be kept as concise as possible.

Back to top of section

Artwork guidelines

Figure format

  • If your paper is accepted, you will be asked to supply original vector files if possible, or high-resolution TIFF files. Vector-based images are made up of lines rather than pixels. Because they are not comprised of a specific number of dots, they can be scaled to a larger size without loss of image quality. Resolution, which is important for non-vector files, is not an issue for vector files because of this scalability. Supplying vector files in one of the formats shown below will ensure that the final print quality of the images is good.
  • Because of file size limitations you may wish to upload lower resolution versions onto ScholarOne Manuscripts for review purposes when submitting your paper. Higher resolution figures will be requested if your paper is accepted.
The following file types are preferred:

    Vector
    • EPS
    • Adobe Illustrator (AI)
    • PowerPoint
    • Excel
    • Word: generally acceptable only for flow charts
    Non-vector
    • TIFF
    • PNG
Notes on particular software packages

  • Stata and GraphPad For information on converting figures created in Stata and GraphPad to EPS vector files, please see our detailed instructions.
  • SPSS Graphs created in SPSS cannot always be saved with sufficient resolution for publication, although we have been advised by SPSS/IBM that exporting as a PDF is likely to give the best results. Depending on the clearness of your images, you may need to replot data from this program in an alternative program.
  • Microsoft Office The resolution of TIFF files saved from Microsoft Office is not usually high enough for publication, so please send the original Microsoft files (PowerPoint. Excel, Word).
TIFF files

  • Resolution is important for these non-vector files because the image will be fuzzy and pixelated if the resolution is not high enough.
  • For non-vector files, please supply TIFFs saved at a resolution of 1,200 ppi (often referred to as dpi) for black and white graphs; and 600 ppi for graphs containing grey or coloured bar fills, gels, blots, micrographs and composite images (a mixture of line graphs and other images).
  • When increasing the resolution of figures, please avoid resampling (for example in the 'Image size' function in Adobe Photoshop), as resampling will result in the artificial addition of pixels (essentially adding data by guesswork), which may lead to inaccurate or blurry Images.
  • TIFF files created in Photoshop or similar artwork software should not be flattened.
  • When saving graphs and line art as TIFF files, select 'none' for compression, if possible; for halftones use LZW compression.
  • Colour images should be encoded as RGB (8 bits per channel) rather than CMYK. Please select colours from the Diabetologia colour palette.
Graphs and diagrams
  • Graphs and diagrams are best provided as EPS vector files, or in another vector format such as PowerPoint or Excel, so that lines and text will remain clear when the figure is resized for publication.
  • To keep figures uncluttered please omit headings, captions and keys to symbols and statistics-this information should be included in the main figure legend instead, which should be supplied at the end of the main text after the references.
  • Printed keys should only be included in the figure when they are particularly complex (for example 6 or more different groups or samples).
  • Please avoid borders or frames around graphs.
  • Please use a weight of approximately 0.75 pt (3/4 pt) for axis lines and lines within graphs.
  • Text and symbols should be sized so that they are easily visible when the figure is reduced for publication (See Multipart figures for details of figure sizing; see Labels and wording in figures for more information on text.)
  • Symbols on line graphs should be clear and easy to distinguish from one another, and in black and white in preference to grey. If there are only two symbols used, it is clearest to have one black symbol and one white. Otherwise use, for example, black squares, white squares, black triangles, white triangles etc. For scatter diagrams and line graphs, solid symbols are preferred.
  • Where dashed lines are used, dashes should be sufficiently large and spaced to be seen clearly when figures are reduced.
  • Fills in bar charts should be easy to distinguish. If bars are labelled, only one type of bar fill is needed (solid black or white). Otherwise use solid fill black, white and grey; if you need to use a patterned fill, widely spaced horizontal or diagonal stripes are most effective. Shades of grey should be sufficiently distinct for them to be clearly differentiated. Colour is only allowed for more complex graphs with several conditions, which would be difficult to show in black/white/grey.
  • Curves should not be drawn beyond experimental points, nor should experimental points extend beyond the scales of the axes.
Forest plots
  • Forest plots should include the name of the 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. If possible, please provide forest plots as PowerPoint files in which the text is editable, or as EPS or Adobe Illustrator vector files. If this is not possible, please supply them as TIFF files at a resolution of 1,200 dpi.
Flow charts
  • Flow charts should be supplied as editable Word or PowerPoint documents.
  • Flow charts should be in black and white using right-angled boxes and arrows of 0.5–1.5 pt, with no bold formatting.
  • Please check that values add up where appropriate.
Schematic diagrams
  • Schematic diagrams should be provided as editable PowerPoint files if possible. If other file types are supplied, authors may be asked to make stylistic changes themselves.
  • For schematic diagrams, colours should be selected from the Diabetologia colour palette. Different styles can be used for boxes and shapes but, similarly to flow charts, please avoid bold and use a weight of 0.5–1.5 pt for lines, borders and arrows.
Halftones
  • Halftones include colour or greyscale graphs, images of gels, micrographs or photographs. Labels must be large enough to be read easily after reduction for publication, and should contrast clearly against the background.
  • If possible, please insert labels using a vector package such as Adobe Illustrator or PowerPoint. For example, images could be checked and cropped in Photoshop, and then imported into Adobe Illustrator or PowerPoint for any text and symbols to be added.
  • Magnification should be indicated in the legend and where appropriate by an internal reference marker (scale bar) on the photograph itself (as a horizontal line at least 1 mm thick after reduction). The scale should be given in the legend (e.g. 'scale bars, 20 nm'), rather than on the image itself.
  • If photographs of patients are used, the subject should not be identifiable or the picture must be accompanied by written permission to use the figure.
Colour images
  • There is no charge for colour in Diabetologia figures; the use of colour is encouraged for micrographs and some schematic diagrams, particularly in reviews. Colour should be used sparingly in graphs, and only when necessary. Any colours used should be selected from the Diabetologia colour palette. Please see Graphs and diagrams for more information.
Labels and wording in figures
  • If possible, please use editable vector fonts for all labelling and lettering in your figures.
  • All figures should be numbered using Arabic numerals (Fig. 1, Fig. 2 etc.) and figure parts should be labelled with lower case letters (Fig. 1a, b etc.).
  • Use a sans serif font for numbers and lettering: Helvetica if available, otherwise Arial. Please use the same font for all figure labels in your manuscript.
  • Courier can be used for sequence alignments.
  • Font size should be selected so that it is easily readable (final size 2–3 mm, 8–12 pt) when the figure is reduced for publication. This means that the font may need to be considerably larger when preparing the figure, so that it will be 8–12 pt once the image has been reduced.
  • Variations in font size within the figure should be minimised—for example, don't use 8 pt type on the axis and 20 pt type for the axis label!
  • Labels should be in sentence case (the first letter of the first word upper case, and the rest of the label lower case, except for proper names, abbreviations etc.).
  • If the axis shows a measurement, please ensure that units are included in parentheses at the end of the axis label, e.g. 'Plasma glucose (mmol/l)'.
  • Please use SI units for all measurements in figures and in the main text. For an SI conversion table see the AMA Manual of Style conversion calculator.
  • Please ensure that the terminology, formatting and spelling in figure labels is the same as in the text. For example, where gene symbols are included, please use gene formatting (italic), and please also use UK English spelling.
Embedding fonts
  • For figures generated in Adobe Illustrator or Microsoft Office, or for other vector files, please embed the fonts when you save the document. This ensures that any non-standard fonts used will remain part of the file.
  • In Adobe Illustrator, if you save as AI format, the subset of the font used in the image will be embedded automatically. If you save in EPS format, please tick the 'Embed fonts (for other applications)' box when saving.
  • In MS Office, when you click 'Save as', the tools menu (next to the 'Save' option in the dialogue box) gives you the option of embedding fonts.
Multipart figures
  • Figure parts should not be supplied as individual files—please incorporate them into a composite figure as you would like them to appear in the final version of the paper. When deciding on the layout, please consider how it will look in print, and how clear it will be to readers. Try to minimise white space.
  • Figure layout will sometimes be changed by the Editorial Office to make sure that space is optimised.
  • Separate parts should be sized so that they are consistent across the figure—similar graphs should be the same size and font sizes should be the same throughout the figure, as far as possible.
  • Separate figure parts should be labelled with lower case letters and should be in alphabetical order (either horizontally or vertically).
  • Each individual graph should have its own x- and y-axis labels, even where these are repeated along rows or columns of graphs.
  • The composite figure should be sized to an appropriate size for typesetting. Generally figures will be set in a single column (8.4 cm) or less with the legend below, or in 1.5 columns (12.9 cm) with the legend to one side. Larger composite figures will be set at up to full page width (17.4 cm). These sizes may be changed slightly by the Editorial Office to ensure consistency.
  • If possible, use editable vector fonts for all labels and symbols, by using a vector program such as Adobe Illustrator or PowerPoint to put together your figures. See here for more information on labels and wording.
  • Halftone images can be prepared in Photoshop and then inserted into Adobe Illustrator or PowerPoint for layout and labelling.
  • Where images are inserted into other programs, such as PowerPoint, Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop, please ensure the image is inserted at the correct resolution. This can generally be done by using the 'insert' function, provided the image file to be inserted is at the right resolution. Cutting and pasting will result in a low-resolution image.

Approved abbreviations and units of expression for use without definition

Please click here for a complete list.

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 Methods:
The main text should present sufficient information to allow a knowledgeable reader to understand what was done, why, and how, and to assess the biological relevance of the study and the reliability and validity of the findings. Sufficient information should be given to allow the experiment to be repeated but this level of detail may be given in the supplementary material if space does not permit inclusion in the main text.
There are two options for giving experimental details in the supplementary material:
(1) Describe the majority of the methods in the main text and refer readers to the ESM for details of a specific technique. In this case there must be a call out in the main text to each subheading in the ESM. Please ensure that the subheadings in the ESM are in the same order as the call outs in the main text. For an example of a paper with ESM methods, please see http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00125-014-3485-4
(2) If the experimental techniques are complex we suggest that you describe the methods used in brief in the main text and then give detailed methodology for readers who want to repeat the experiment in the ESM, inserting a note to this effect in the main text. The ESM methods should be able to be read without referring back to the main text

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 send a completed author signed statement to the Editorial Office by email (diabetologia-j@bristol.ac.uk) or fax (+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 send a completed author signed statement to the Editorial Office by email (diabetologia-j@bristol.ac.uk) or fax (+44(0)845 0582542).

Back to top

Proofs

An electronic proof (URL) is sent to the corresponding author. Only typographical errors should be corrected. Corresponding authors are strongly advised to circulate proofs among all their co-authors so that all those who have contributed to the paper have the opportunity to check it carefully. Note that once an article has been published online, mistakes can be corrected only by publishing an erratum. The corrected proof should normally be returned within 48 h but please do contact the Editorial Office for an extension if you are circulating proofs to your co-authors.

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 and Retractions

Requests for errata or retractions should be sent to the Editorial Office (diabetologia-j@bristol.ac.uk). Depending on the nature of the request, the Editorial Office may consult with members of the Editorial Board or Diabetologia's Scientific Integrity Panel.

Errata

Errata refer to errors introduced into the article by the author(s), editorial office or the publisher. Note that once an article has been published online, mistakes can be corrected only by publishing an erratum. Diabetologia will publish errata to communicate necessary corrections to such errors. Once published, the erratum will be linked to the original paper, but neither the print or electronic versions of the original paper will be amended. Errata will appear in the table of contents and are indexed in public databases such as PubMed.

Retractions

Requests for retractions may be referred to Diabetologia's Scientifc Integrity Panel. Diabetologia follows the guidelines set out by COPE (http://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf) and will consider retracting a publication if:

  • there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
  • if the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification
  • if plagiarism is detected
  • if the research is unethical.

Co-authors listed on the original paper should be made aware of the problems with the paper and the pending retraction request. Notices of retraction will clearly outline the reason for the retraction and at whose request the paper is being retracted. In cases where co-authors disagree, dissenting author(s) will be noted in the text of the retraction note. All retractions must be approved by our publisher, Springer-Verlag.

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