HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:
Editorial Office | View/Change User Information | CiteTrack Personal Alerts | Subscription HELP | Sign Out

Quick Links Submit Your Manuscript Online Clinical Chemistry Journal Home Page Clinical Chemistry Editorial Board Clinical Chemistry Papers in Press Editorial Office Contacts clinchemed{at}clinchem.aacc.org Conflict-of-Interest Policy for Editors

Information for Authors

• Overview
• Standards for Reporting Scientific Data
• Tools for Diagnostic Accuracy
• Types of Submissions
• Manuscript Preparation
• Online Submission and Tracking
• Post-Acceptance
• Contacts

Submissions of the following nature are welcomed:

• Basic materials or principles
• Analytical techniques
• Molecular diagnostics
• Test utilization or testing-related health or financial outcomes
• Instrumentation
• Data processing
• Statistical analyses of data
• Clinical investigations in which laboratory testing has played a major role
• Laboratory animal studies of chemically-oriented problems of human disease

Contributions should consist of subject matter that is original and significantly advances the state of knowledge of clinical chemistry, and conclusions that are justified from the design of the experiments and the data presented. The information must be sufficiently detailed to permit replication of the work by a competent worker in the field. Lastly, the writing must be clear, concise and grammatically correct.

Equal consideration is given to original manuscripts in English from any country, regardless of membership in the Association. It is, however, advised that all non-English speaking authors enlist the aid of a native-English speaking colleague to correct English language usage before submission. Submissions must adhere to the “Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals” (1).

Submissions are accepted via the manuscript tracking system at http://submit.clinchem.org. The “Information for Authors” will offer assistance with journal style and requirements. Please contact the Editorial Office via e-mail should you have any questions or need assistance: clinchemed{at}clinchem.aacc.org.

References:

1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Ann Intern Med 1997;126:36-47. [Full Text]

• Description of Analytical Methods and Results
• Statistics
• Studies with Human Subjects
• Animal Studies
• NIH Funding/Open Access Requirements
• Checklist for the Description of Sequence Variants at the Human Genome Variation Society
  

Manuscripts describing the development and evaluation of the performance of methods and instruments should discuss linearity, imprecision, analytical specificity, recovery, lower limit of detection, comparability with other analytical methods, lower limit of quantification and reference interval(s). Some clinical data are usually needed.

Document the analytical advantages of the new or modified method over existing methods.

Analytical method validations should conform to the protocols and requirements in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Guidance for Industry: Bioanalytical Method Evaluation, 2001 (1).

Calibration curves and linearity: Data for these studies should be analyzed by linear regression analysis (if a linear response is obtained) and should include the slope, intercept, r², standard deviation of residuals, and the standard deviations of the slope and intercept.

Standard deviations of repeated points may be included.

In preparing nonlinear calibration curves, authors may use any objective, statistically valid method but must specify the method used (see, e.g., Ref. [2]).

Imprecision: Studies must include estimates of "within-run" and "total" standard deviations (2). Each should be determined at low, normal, and above-normal concentrations with use of specimens that are in an appropriate biological matrix.

One method for estimating both within-run and total standard deviations is the analysis of variance experiment described in NCCLS EP5-T (3), which calls for two replicates per specimen per run and two runs per day for 20 days. This permits separate estimation of between-day and between-run, within-day standard deviations, as well as within-run and total standard deviations.

For acceptable alternatives that include only one run per day, see the cited document.

Indicators of Accuracy ("Trueness"): Accuracy (or “trueness” in the recent nomenclature) of a new method can be estimated by (a) analyses of certified Reference Materials by the new method or (b) comparisons of results of a new method with results of a Reference Method. These are the only accepted approaches to trueness. When neither is available, other evidence relevant to the ability of the method to measure the analyte (measurand) is needed. Recovery studies involve analyses after known amounts of analyte are added to the biological fluid on which the determination will be performed. Recovery of added analyte should be calculated [(final concentration – initial concentration)/added concentration], not the observed final concentration as a proportion of expected final concentration.

Interference studies should be performed to assess the effects of common interferents, including lipid particles, hemoglobin, bilirubin, and components of uremic plasma. Exogenous materials, such as ingredients of blood collection containers (tubes) and commonly used or commonly coadministered drugs that might interfere with the determination, should also be tested for interferences. Selection of materials to test should be guided by an understanding of the chemistry and physics of the measuring system. Thus chemicals that are structurally similar to the analyte should be tested to assess the selectivity of the method. (The term “selectivity” is preferred over specificity; selectivity can be quantified.) In characterizing non-spectrophotometric methods, chemicals that may interfere in the detection system should be studied more intensively than chemicals that are historically important for interference in spectrophotometric methods.

Comparison-of-methods studies should compare results by the new or proposed method with those by a reference-quality method or other generally accepted analytical method for which assay performance is documented (4, 5).

It is desirable to test 100 to 200 different samples from patients who have been selected to include a wide variety of pathologic conditions and to present a range of values for the analyte that includes those likely to be encountered in routine application.

For a table of the required number of samples, see Linnet (6).

If regression analysis is used for statistical evaluation of the data, supply slopes and intercepts (and their standard deviations) and standard deviations of residuals (Sy|x, often called standard errors of estimates). Unbiased (e.g., Deming) regression is typically required (7). A program to perform Deming regression is available on-line as a supplement from this journal (8).

The correlation coefficient has limited utility. Residuals plots [e.g., Bland-Altman (9, 10)] are often useful. On the horizontal axis, plot the mean of results by the two studied methods, not the result of one method.

Analytical sensitivity and detection limit: These terms are commonly confused. The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry defines analytical sensitivity as the ability of an analytical procedure to produce a change in signal for a defined change of the quantity This is often visualized as the slope of the calibration curve.

The limit of detection (LOD) is defined as the lowest concentration or amount of an analyte that can be reliably identified as being qualitatively present in the sample. The limit of quantification (LOQ) is defined as the lowest concentration or amount of analyte that can be reproducibly quantified in a sample. The most acceptable criteria for ascertaining the LOQ is the concentration of analyte that can be measured with an imprecision of <20% and a deviation from target of <20% (1). The operational definition of the LOD and LOQ must be supplied by the author. Additional considerations related to this topic are presented by Linnet (11).

Analytical quality: Results obtained for the performance characteristics should be compared objectively with well-documented quality specifications, e.g., published data on the state of the art, performance required by regulatory bodies such as CLIA 88, or recommendations documented by expert professional groups (12).

Reference interval (normal range): Depending on the conclusions of the accuracy studies, modification of an accepted reference interval may be indicated. Description of the reference interval study should include details about sampling; selection of subjects, including their number, age, and sex distribution; the statistical method for summarizing the results (13); and other factors that would influence the values obtained.

Mass spectrometric assays must be evaluated for matrix effects (ion suppression or enhancement) (14, 15).

Chromatograms: Chromatograms from gas-liquid and liquid chromatography should usually be presented so that readers can see the efficiency of the separation and observe the resolution from interferents in the matrix. Similar images are often needed for electrophoretic separations.

Enzyme activities: Enzyme activities may be expressed in international units (U) or katals. Temperature and other key assay features must be described in the text or by reference to a published method.

When first mentioned in the text, enzymes (whether measured by activity or mass assays) must be numbered (EC no.) in accordance with the recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology on the Nomenclature and Classification of Enzymes (16).

References:

1. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Guidance for Industry: Bioanalytical Method Evaluation, 2001.
2. Linnet K, Boyd JC. Selection and analytical evaluation of methods – with statistical techniques. In: Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, Bruns DE. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry and molecular diagnostics. 4th ed. St. Louis: Saunders, 2006: 353-407.
3. NCCLS Tentative Guideline EP5-T. User evaluation of precision performance of clinical chemistry devices. Wayne, PA: National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, June 1984.
4. Carey RN, Garber CC. Evaluation of methods. In: Kaplan LA, Pesce AJ, eds. Clinical chemistry. Theory, practice and correlation, 2nd ed. St. Louis: CV Mosby, 1989:290–310.
5. Koch DO, Peters T Jr. Selection and evaluation of methods. In: Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, eds. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1994:508–25.
6. Linnet K. Necessary sample size for method comparison studies based on regression analysis. Clin Chem 1999;45:882–94. [Abstract/Full Text]
7. Linnet K. Evaluation of regression procedures for methods comparison studies. Clin Chem 1993;39:424–32. [Full Text]
8. Martin RF. General Deming regression for estimating systematic bias and its confidence interval in method-comparison studies. Data supplement. GDR: Executable program for general Deming regression calculations and graphics. [Abstract/Full Text/Data Supplement].
9. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307–10.[Abstract]
10. Altman DG, Bland JM. Commentary on quantifying agreement between two methods of measurement. Clin Chem 2002;48:801-2.[Extract/Full Text]
11. Linnet K, Kondratovich M. Partly nonparametric approach for determining the limit of detection. Clin Chem 2004;50:732-40.[Extract/Full Text]
12. Fraser CG, Petersen PH. Analytical performance characteristics should be judged against objective quality specifications. Clin Chem 1999;45:321–3. [Extract/Full Text]
13. Solberg HE. Establishment and use of reference values. In: Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, eds. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry, 4th ed. St. Louis: Saunders, 2006:425–48.
14. Annesley TM. Ion Suppression in Mass Spectrometry. Clin Chem 2003;49:1041-44. [Full Text]
15. Matuszewski BK, Constanzer ML, Chavez-Eng CM. Strategies for the assessment of matrix effect in quantitative bioanalytical methods based on HPLC-MS.MS. Anal Chem 2003;75:3019-30. [Abstract]
16. International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Nomenclature Committee. Enzyme nomenclature 1992. San Diego: Academic Press, 1992:862pp.

Describe statistical methods with enough detail to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to verify the reported results.

When possible, quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty.

Avoid sole reliance on statistical hypothesis testing, such as the use of P values, which fails to convey important quantitative information.

When appropriate, confidence intervals should be presented; see, e.g., Harris (1), Henderson (2), and references therein.

References:

1. Harris EK. On P values and confidence intervals (why can't we P with more confidence?) [Editorial]. Clin Chem 1993;39:927-8. [Full Text]
2. Henderson AR. Chemistry with confidence: should Clinical Chemistry require confidence intervals for analytical and other data? [Opinion]. Clin Chem 1993;39:929-35. [Abstract/Full Text]

The policy requests that the release date to the public be within 12 months after the official date of final publication. Clinical Chemistry’s existing policy that has been in effect since the Journal first appeared online in 1998 is to make all content publicly available 12 months after publication date.

If an author chooses to submit an accepted manuscript to PMC, he or she will be asked to indicate when that manuscript should be made available to the public. Consistent with our existing policy, the American Association for Clinical Chemistry (AACC) grants the author permission to allow public release of the accepted manuscript through PMC 12 months after publication in Clinical Chemistry.

Accepted manuscripts and published articles in Clinical Chemistry are protected by AACC’s copyright at the time of publication and thereafter. All copyright restrictions apply.

The author’s manuscript available on the PMC site is not the Clinical Chemistry article. This version of the manuscript may contain factual errors that were detected during the post-acceptance editing phase. Data, text, conclusions, tables, and figures may all differ from the published version available at www.clinchem.org. The final published version is the Clinical Chemistry article. Clinical Chemistry assumes no responsibility for earlier versions.

The AACC requires that authors add the following disclaimer to the manuscript before sending it to PMC.

"This is an un-copyedited authored manuscript copyrighted by The American Association for Clinical Chemistry (AACC). This may not be duplicated or reproduced, other than for personal use or within the rule of 'Fair Use of Copyrighted Materials' (section 107, Title 17, U.S. Code) without permission of the copyright owner, AACC. The AACC disclaims any responsibility or liability for errors or omissions in this version of the manuscript or in any version derived from it by the National Institutes of Health or other parties. The final publisher-authenticated version of the article will be made available at http://www.clinchem.org 12 months after its publication in Clinical Chemistry.”

Authors may contact Clinical Chemistry via e-mail, clinchemed{at}clinchem.aacc.org, with any questions related to submitting their accepted manuscript to PMC.


Back to Top

• Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD)
  
• Outcomes Studies (CONSORT)
  
• Minimum Information about a Microarray Experiment (MIAME)
  

STARD Checklist [PDF]

STARD Flowchart [PDF]

Explanatory document, with examples: http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/content/full/49/1/7

STARD guidelines: http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/content/full/49/1/1

For studies of diagnostic accuracy of tests, complete the STARD Checklist for Evaluations of Diagnostic Accuracy (1) upon submission.

The STARD statement (1) and explanatory document (2) provide guidance helping authors to modify their manuscript as needed to provide the requested information.

Provide literature reference(s) describing the evaluated test(s) and criterion "gold standard" test(s) or include detailed descriptions of them.

Follow accepted methodologic standards including the following:

1. Specify spectrum of evaluated patients (age and sex distributions, eligibility criteria, and summary of symptoms or disease stage).
2. Analyze pertinent subgroups of subjects (e.g., symptomatic and asymptomatic patients).
3. Avoid verification bias (usually by application of a "gold-standard" test to all subjects rather than to a clinically selected subset).
4. Categorize test results and patients independently to avoid reviewer bias (usually by performance of tests with blinding to patient information and vice versa).
5. Provide confidence intervals (or SE) for indices of diagnostic accuracy such as sensitivity/specificity, likelihood ratios, and areas under receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves (3).
6. Indicate the number of indeterminate test results and their use (if any) in further data analysis.
7. Provide laboratory data on analytical imprecision of the test (usually day-to-day CV at two or more concentrations) or reproducibility of observer interpretation (e.g., for a visually read, dichotomous [positive/negative] test).

A flow diagram is strongly recommended (1,2).

Evaluation of diagnostic accuracy. In clinical studies, simple testing of the significance of differences between mean values of patient groups (e.g., by Student’s t-test) provides insufficient information to assess diagnostic accuracy.

Scatter plots of data, calculations of diagnostic sensitivities and specificities and their confidence intervals (3), and use of approaches such as ROC curves (4), cumulative distribution analyses (5), likelihood ratios (6), and discriminant analysis (7) provide information that is appropriate to specific situations.

Confidence intervals should be provided (1).

Discussions of predictive values in illustrative settings may be useful additions to assess the potential clinical utility of tests.

Analysis of serial measurements requires special attention (8).

The STARD checklist must be completed electronically during submission. Do not send the checklist via e-mail or upload it as supplemental material.

References:

1. STARD Group. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD statement. Clin Chem 2003;49:1-6. [Abstract/Full Text]
2. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Clin Chem 2003;49:7-18. [Abstract/Full Text]
3. Harper R, Reeves B. Reporting of precision of estimates for diagnostic accuracy: a review. BMJ 1999;318:1322-3. [Full Text]
4. Zweig MH, Campbell G. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine [Review]. Note that in Figs. 4-12 in this paper, the labels for the x-axis at the top and bottom are reversed. The (correct) dual labeling of the x-axis solves the problem of whether to plot specificity or 1 - specificity on the x-axis. Clin Chem 1993;39:561-77. [Abstract/Full Text]
5. Krouwer JS. Cumulative distribution analysis graphs-an alternative to ROC curves [Technical Brief]. Clin Chem 1987;33:2305-6.
6. Albert A. On the use and computation of likelihood ratios in Clinical Chemistry. Clin Chem 1982;28:1113-9. . [Abstract/Full Text]
7. Solberg HE. Discriminant analysis. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 1978;9:209-42.
8. Matthews JNS, Altman DG, Campbell MJ, Royston P. Analysis of serial measurements in medical research. Br Med J 1990;300:230-5.

Outcomes studies (CONSORT)
CONSORT Checklist [PDF]
CONSORT Flowchart [PDF]

The CONSORT statement (1), although designed for randomized controlled trials and used for therapeutic rather than diagnostic interventions, is recommended as an often-useful guide.

For questions, contact Clinical Chemistry via e-mail; clinchemed{at}clinchem.aacc.org.

References:

1. Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG for the CONSORT Group. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials. www.consort-statement.org.

MIAME Checklist [PDF]

MIAME describes the minimum information about a microarray experiment that is needed to enable interpretation of the results of the experiment unambiguously and potentially to reproduce the experiment.

The MIAME checklist is a description of MIAME principles designed to help authors, reviewers and editors of scientific journals meet MIAME requirements and to make microarray data available to the community in a useful way.

MIAME is neither a dogma, nor a legal document - it assumes a cooperative data provider and a fair reviewer.

Other MIAME extensions can be found at the following website: http://www.mged.org/Workgroups/MIAME/miame.html


Back to Top

• Author Contribution Requirements
• General Guidelines
• Journal Categories
• Title Page
• Abstract
• Text
• Disclosures/Conflict of Interest
• Acknowledgements
• References
• Tables
• Figure Captions
• Figures
• Color
• Supplemental Data

1. Each author has participated significantly in the work in a substantive way and is prepared to take public responsibility for its content;
2. Each listed author must have

   participated in conception, design, analysis, or interpretation;

   drafted or critically revised the manuscript; and

   read and approved the final submitted manuscript and revisions.

Any change in authors and/or contributors after initial submission must be approved by all authors. This applies to additions, deletions, change of order to the authors, or contributions being attributed differently.

Any alterations made to the manuscript after submission must be approved by the editor. Authors may upload the request letter to the online submission system as a supplemental file or send the letter via e-mail to the Clinical Chemistry editorial office; clinchemed{at}clinchem.aacc.org. The editor may contact any of the authors and/or contributors to ascertain whether they have agreed to any alteration.

1. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Uniform Guidelines for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (1) specifically state that “all contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship, such as a person who . . . provided purely writing assistance" be named in the acknowledgments.
   
   
   
2. Important contributions to an article should be recognized and appropriately attributed in that article.
   
   Good medical writers and editors can make valuable contributions to the publication process, often improving the clarity of the communication, broadening the scope of literature review, providing an extra level of data review, adding balance and objectivity, and shortening the time needed for manuscript development.
   
   The American Medical Writers Association (AMWA) http://www.amwa.org believes that these important contributions deserve recognition.
   
   
   
3. Readers benefit from knowing about the involvement of professional writers and editors.
   
   Disclosing the editorial contribution and the source of funding of the writer and editor allows the reader to make informed judgments about the objectivity of the article.
   
   Note that the AMWA position statement recommends acknowledgment of pertinent professional or financial relationships as well as acknowledgment of the contributions of writers and editors.
   
   It also recommends that the person being acknowledged be given the opportunity to grant or refuse permission for the acknowledgment.

1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Ann Intern Med 1997;126:36-47. [Full Text]

• MS Word document (.doc) is required for all submissions.
• All figures must be uploaded separately as Image Files in Tagged Image File Format (.tiff), Encapsulated Postscript (.eps) or PowerPoint (.ppt) with embedded fonts.
• All submissions must be double-spaced, 1 inch margin, twelve-point font size in Arial, Helvetica, Times New Roman and Symbol font (for non-text characters).
• All submissions must be page numbered.
• Do not use headers or footers.
• Use standard abbreviations and define all nonstandard abbreviations.
• All submissions require a title page.
• SI units must be used throughout your submission. Conventional units may only be added as additional information in parentheses after the SI units. SI units are available at Bureau International des Poids et Mesures.
• Supplemental Data is accepted for online publication only and is limited by submission types (See Types of Submissions for details).
• Follow the guidelines for length restrictions, abstract, reference, table and figure, and supplemental data limits as outlined in the chart below:

• Molecular Diagnostics and Genetics (MDG)
• Evidence-Based Laboratory Medicine and Test Utilization (TUO)
• Hemostasis and Thrombosis (HAT)
• Proteomics and Protein Markers (PPM)
• Cancer Diagnostics
• Lipids, Lipoproteins, and Cardiovascular Risk Factors (LLP)
• Drug Monitoring and Toxicology (DMT)
• Hematology (HEM)
• Endocrinology and Metabolism (END)
• Point-of-Care Testing
• Automation and Analytical Techniques (AAT)
• Informatics and Statistics
• Laboratory Management (LMA)
• General Clinical Chemistry (GCC)
• Animal Clinical Chemistry (ANI)
• Clinical Immunology (CLI)
• Pediatric Clinical Chemistry (PED)
• Nutrition (NUT)
• Infectious Disease
• Other Areas of Clinical Chemistry (OTH)

Unstructured abstracts do not require separate headings.

Bookshelf, Citation Classics, Clinical Case Study, Commentary, Editorial, Inspiring Minds, Letters to the Editor, Reply, Obituary, Opinion, Perspective, Point/Counterpoint submissions do not require an abstract.

Abstracts must be uploaded to the abstract field of the Manuscript Metadata page online upon submission as well as the manuscript.

• Introduction - why was the study undertaken?
• Materials and Methods - how was the study done?
• Results - what did the study find?
• Discussion - what might it mean, why does it matter, what next?

• Italics or boldface type is prohibited in the referenced citations.
• List and number the references in the order that they appear in the text.
• Do not use the MS Word document (.doc) numbering tool. Number each reference manually with the numeral, a period, followed by a space.
• For articles with more than seven authors, list the first six authors followed by "et al." For seven or fewer, list all authors.
• Authors’ names are inverted (last name, first/second initial). Do not add periods or commas within an individual author name; however, separate author names with a comma and end the author list with a period (Smith J, Doe JJ, Adams B.).
• Capitalize only the first word of the title or subtitle, and any proper names that are part of the title. The title should end with a period.
• The Journal names should be abbreviated as indicated at PubMed. For a list of journal abbreviations, please visit: LinkOut Journals.
• Do not add a period after the journal abbreviation, but continue with a space followed by the year.
• The year should be followed by a semicolon and then the volume number which is followed by a colon and then the page numbers; delete redundant numbers, for example 1998;12:231-45.
• Do not include the months in parentheses, this information is not needed.
• Use inclusive page numbers for articles and book chapters.

Reference Style

• Journal article with seven or fewer authors:
  1. Vermeersch P, Mariën G, Bossuyt X. A case of pseudoparaproteinemia on capillary zone electrophoresis caused by geloplasma. Clin Chem 2006;52:2309-11.
  
  
• Journal article with more than seven authors:
  2. Fiechtner M, Ramp J, England B, Knudson MA, Little RR, England JD, et al. Affinity binding assay of glycohemoglobin by two-dimensional centrifugation referenced to hemoglobin Alc. Clin Chem 1992;38:2372–9.
  
  
• Abstract:
  3. Hortin GL, King C, Kopp J. Quantification of rhesus monkey albumin with assays for human microalbumin [Abstract]. Clin Chem 2000;46:A140-1.
  
  
• Editorial:
  4. Demers LM. New biochemical marker for bone disease: is it a breakthrough? [Editorial]. Clin Chem 1992;38:2169–70.
  
  
• Letter to the Editor:
  5. Davey L, Naidoo L. Urinary screen for acetaminophen (paracetamol) in the presence of N-acetylcysteine [Letter]. Clin Chem 1993;39:2348–9.
  
  
• Book Chapter:
  6. Rifai N, Warnick GR. Lipids, lipoproteins, apolipoproteins, and other cardiovascular risk factors. In: Burtis CA, Ashwood ER, Bruns DE, eds. Tietz textbook of clinical chemistry and molecular diagnostics. 4th Ed. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders 2006:903-81.
  
  
• Thesis:
  7. Haughton MA. Immunonephelometric measurement of vitamin D binding protein [MAppSci thesis]. Sydney, Australia: University of Technology, 1989:87pp.
  
  
• Books and Monographs (serial volumes should be treated as journals):
  8. Harrell FE Jr. Regression modeling strategies. New York: Springer; 2001.
  9. Bailar JC III, Mosteller F, eds. Medical uses of statistics, 2nd Ed. Boston: NEJM Books; 1992:449pp.
  
  
• Publish-Ahead of Print:
  10. Milbury CA, Li J, Makrigiorgos GM. PCR-based methods for the enrichment of minority alleles and mutations. [Epub ahead of print] Clin Chem February 6, 2009 as doi:10.1373/clinchem.2008.113035.
  
  
• Supplement:
  11. Castelli WP. Lipids, risk factors and ischaemic heart disease. Atherosclerosis 1996;124 Suppl:S1-9.
  
  
• Internet Source:
  12. American Association for Clinical Chemistry. AACC continuing education. http://www.aacc.org/services/default.stm (Accessed November 1998).

Each table should be clearly labeled and numbered consecutively with Arabic numerals (Table 1, Table 2, etc.). The abbreviations used must be defined. As with the text, SI units must be used; however, conventional units may be added in parentheses. Conversion factors may be added as footnotes. Indicate explanatory footnotes with superscript lowercase italic letters in alphabetical order.

Tables should not include parts. Tables with parts (Table 1A, Table 1B, etc.) will be returned to authors for correction.

Table captions should be limited to 60 words.

Each column of an individual table must have a heading and be clearly defined. Indicate explanatory footnotes with superscript lowercase italic letters in alphabetical order.

Color tables will be considered for publication. As in the case with color figures, the costs of publishing color illustrations will be borne by the author. Costs are $1500 for the first color table and $500 for each subsequent color table, or part thereof. Please note the author agreement to pay in the cover letter.

Large, complex, or tables that include graphic elements should be submitted as figures or as supplemental data for online publication only. The Editor may choose to make any table supplemental as he/she deems necessary.

Figure captions should be limited to 60 words.

If a figure has been published previously, acknowledge the original source in the figure caption and submit written permission from the copyright holder to reproduce the figure as supplemental data.

The submission system is designed to retrieve the manuscript file and separate image file(s) and combine or merge the files into an individual Portable Document Format (.PDF) for reviewing purposes. It is the responsibility of the author to verify the quality of the image file(s) remains after the conversion to PDF. It may be necessary to alter the individual image file(s) to ensure the content is not lost or misconstrued in the merged PDF.

Submissions will be returned to authors if the figures are embedded within the manuscript file and not uploaded separately, or the figures have become eligible in the merged PDF.

Do not place unnecessary graphics, such as borders, in or around your figure. Pay particular attention to the quality of the lines, symbols, and patterns. Published figures are reduced to 1 column (85mm) or 2 columns (176 mm) in width. If, at that width, the figure symbols or lettering are not clear, you will need to increase the font size. Letters should be 8/10 points when reduced, subscripts no less than 6 point. Initial capitals and lower case letters and a medium (not bold) sans serif font is required. European PI, Helvetica, Mathematical PI, Times Roman, and Symbol fonts are Type 1 PostScript fonts supported by our printer for the creation of digital art figures.

If publication quality electronic figure files cannot be provided, acceptable publication prints are:

• Halftone: glossy prints
• Line drawing: glossy prints, laser prints on coated (nonabsorbent) laser-printer paper, or drawings in black India ink on tracing paper.
• Color: glossy prints, laser prints on coated (nonabsorbent) laser-printer paper

The x-axis and y-axis should be clearly labeled, and the units of measurements given. This includes using decimal points instead of commas, italicizing species or gene symbols, and using U.S. English.

Captions for the supplemental data should be uploaded as a separate supplemental file or embedded within the supplemental data/table/figure file. Do not include the supplemental captions in your manuscript file.

Please be advised, supplemental data is permitted for Article, Brief Communication, Inspiring Minds, Mini-Review, Review, and Special Report submissions only. Manuscripts of all other types with supplemental data will be returned to authors.

Supplemental data will be reviewed as part of the manuscript and will be evaluated for its importance and relevance; however, it should not appear in the “Peer-reviewed PDF” file created by the submission system.

If accepted and posted online, the supplemental data will be referenced in the text of the print article directing readers to the URL of the Web site.


Back to Top

• What is Bench>Press?
• Registering
• Changing Contact Information and Password
• Troubleshooting

Clinical Chemistry uses the Bench>Press™ (B>P) manuscript submission, tracking, review, and publishing system, developed by Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press.

B>P is an Internet application and operates with standard browsers, although a JavaScript-enabled browser (such as Internet Explorer) is recommended.

For user convenience and accessiblity, B>P converts uploaded manuscript files to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view these files and is available at no cost. Click the following link to download: http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html

B>P uses a series of pages, presented one at a time, to guide the author through the submission process. For help at anytime, contact Clinical Chemistry via e-mail; clinchemed{at}clinchem.aacc.org.

After accessing the registration page, you will need to verify your e-mail address. If there is an existing account with an old e-mail address, do not create a new account with a different e-mail address. Simply access the account with the out-of-date e-mail address, and use the system to update/change your e-mail address.

Always use the same e-mail when accessing the system. Multiple e-mail addresses will cause repeated registrations and the creation of multiple accounts, which could lead to future system access problems.

NOTE: If you have used other Bench>Press journals, you must use the same e-mail address and password to register with Clinical Chemistry. Although all Bench>Press journals require the same e-mail address and password for access, this is the only shared information. You must be registered individually with each journal you are trying to access.

Feel free to contact the Editorial Office via e-mail should you need assistance; clinchemed{at}clinchem.aacc.org.

Trouble Registering
All authors must be registered with Clinical Chemistry. To register, go to http://submit.clinchem.org, and click the “Create a New Account” button to the left of the login screen. If you do not receive a request to create a password and answer a security question, you are most likely registered with Clinical Chemistry or another Bench>Press journal. Clinical Chemistry uses an online manuscript management system, Bench>Press. Bench>Press is used by hundreds of journals, all of which share the same registration system. If you have already registered with another Bench>Press journal, you do not need to repeat the registration process. You simply need to sign in with the same e-mail and password, and complete a profile page for Clinical Chemistry.

If you can't remember with which journal(s) you registered, this information can be sent by clicking the "Send My Registration Details" button on the registration page.

No e-mail response after registering:
If you have registered and have not received a verification e-mail, this may be due to a spam blocking filter associated with your institutional server. You may need to manually register clinchemed@clinchem.aacc.org so as to accept mail from Clinical Chemistry. Your Systems Manager should be able to help you with this problem.

Java Difficulties:
If you are using Internet Explorer as your browser, and having trouble accessing pages, you might want to try the following:

Tools

Internet Options

Advanced

Under heading Microsoft VM, make sure all 3 boxes are checked:

Java console

Java logging

JIT Compiler

Click okay.

Restart machine

Please note that login information (e-mail and password) for the submission and review site will not be the same login information you use if you subscribe to the online journal.

Duplicate Accounts:
Often, due to problems with the initial registration or infrequent use, an author may have two accounts listed. Multiple accounts lead to future system access problems, and therefore must be merged.

If an author or reviewer suspects this is the problem, send a request with the preferred e-mail address, current contact information, and the suspected invalid e-mail address to the Clinical Chemistry editorial office at clinchemed{at}clinchem.aacc.org.

Cookies preventing login:
Bench>Press requires users to have their browser set to accept cookies in order to maintain their logged-in status throughout the system. A "cookie" is a message given to a browser by a server. The browser stores the message, and the message is sent back to the server each time the browser requests a page from the server.

If the user does not have cookies enabled, the user will be required to repeatedly sign in to the system.

Most browsers will allow the user to manually alter the cookie settings from the Tool or Internet Option bar.

Expertise Terms:
The Area of Expertise list was developed to help editors choose reviewers who possess specific knowledge in a given area.

Our tracking system has been set to allow this page to appear---as a gentle reminder---until the reviewer has selected at least one item on the list. As soon as the reviewer selects a topic and saves it, it will no longer appear.

Changing these areas of expertise or adding more detailed information can be accomplished by simply logging into the account http://submit.clinchem.org/ at any time and clicking the Personal Info area at the top of the page.

On the lower right side of the page, the user will find "Expertise Terms: Edit Expertise Terms." Click on this link and change the data accordingly.

Conversion Errors:
Receiving a conversion error means that conversion of your manuscript to PDF format has failed.

Invalid file types are the most common cause of conversion failure. Be sure your file names end with extensions appropriate to the file type (i.e. ".doc", ".tif" or ".eps"). Macintosh machines generally leave off the file type extension and it must be added manually.

Formats that are not supported include the following: Bitmap (.bmp), PICT (.pict), Excel (.xls - Excel tables can be embedded in word processing documents), Photoshop (.psd), Canvas (.cnv) and CorelDRAW (.cdr). Multi-slide PowerPoint files (.ppt). If any of these have been used to create your file, you will need to convert the file to an acceptable file format for submission in order for the files to convert properly.

Large or numerous files may slow the conversion process of submission, sometimes resulting in a system "time out" or conversion failure. It may be appropriate to upload and wait for the conversion of an individual file before proceeding with the remaining files. The Bench>Press submission and tracking system has limits of how much data can be uploaded at one time. Generally most files become unwieldy when they pass the 1 MB (megabyte) mark.

For reference:

1000 Bytes (B) = 1 Kilobyte (KB)

1000 Kilobytes (KB) = 1 Megabyte (MB)

1000 Megabytes (MB) = 1 Gigabyte (GB)

Empty HTML references field:
You may find that your HTML references section is empty. This can be remedied by including the heading "References" before the references section in your paper.

HTML references cannot be edited directly; any changes must be made by re-uploading your manuscript file during the proofing stage.

In addition, uploading a PDF file as your manuscript source file will prevent the references from parsing to the Clinical Chemistry HTML reference window.


Back to Top

• Copyright
• Permissions and Reprints
• Publish Ahead of Print

Manuscripts will be held until all copyrights are received. In the event copyrights are not received, the manuscript will not be published.

Manuscripts will not be prohibited from publication solely on the basis of a web-posting of a talk at a medical or scientific meeting that presents all or part of the content of the submitted manuscript.

Authors are expected to retain – for a minimum of 1 year after publication – the raw data from laboratory or clinical studies and to present this data upon request of the Editor if the data is contested.

Authors are expected to identify to the Editor any other manuscripts (in print, accepted, have been submitted, in preparation) that relates to the submitted manuscript, especially if any patients or results are described in both.

Questions related to the possibility of perceived redundant publication or fragmentation of results should be directed to the Editor.

Permissions Coordinator
AACC Office
1850 K Street, NW
Suite 625
Washington, DC 20006 USA
Phone: 800-892-1400 or 202-857-0717
Fax: 202-887-5093
E-mail: permissions{at}aacc.org

Reprints of papers published in Clinical Chemistry can be obtained at any time in multiples of 100.

Authors will receive a reprint order form with their page proof or they can contact the Cadmus Reprint Department at 1-800-407-9190.

Author Reprint Order Form [PDF]

Authors of invited Editorials and Reviews receive 100 reprints free of charge upon request. Complete mailing addresses should be included with requests.

The proofs are available as PDFs, 3-5 weeks before their publication in print or in their final on-line format. The version posted ahead of print is an uncorrected page proof. Author corrections have not been made.

For current articles, click Clinical Chemistry Papers in Press.


Back to Top