The Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine (CJEM) is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes articles of interest to Emergency Medicine care providers in rural, urban, community, and academic settings. CJEM focuses on emergency medicine content relevant to clinical practice, emergency medical services, research, medical education, administration, and continuing professional development and knowledge exchange. CJEM is indexed by the National Library of Medicine and is the official journal of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP).
Scope and Content
We welcome submissions in the following categories: Original Research, State of the Art (Systematic Reviews), Brief Educational Reports, Case Reports, Knowledge Applied to Practice, International Emergency Medicine, Editorials, Clinical Practice Guidelines, and Resident Issues.
Where research involves human and/or animal experimentation, the following statements should be included (as applicable): "The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committees on human experimentation and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008." and "The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional guides on the care and use of laboratory animals." In accordance with Uniform Requirements, manuscripts will be considered only if they have not been previously published nor are they under consideration by another journal. Authors are referred to "Uniform Requirements" for detailed guidelines on previous publication and exceptions.
Authors should conform to the general guidelines laid out in Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals. CJEM uses the Canadian Oxford Dictionary (2nd ed.) for spelling; The Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed.) for grammar, style, and punctuation; and Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary (32nd ed.) for spelling of medical terms; and Vancouver style for referencing cited publications.
Why might we publish your manuscript?
• 1. It provides unique information, either answering a previously unanswered question, providing a new perspective, or clarifying previously ambiguous evidence, especially if it is a common or important issue facing emergency medicine.
• 2. It will help to frame policy and practice in fields relating to emergency medicine.
• 3. It will stimulate new questions or further research.
• 4. The methods used are appropriate, and were applied correctly.
• 5. The data reported supports the conclusions presented.
• 6. The work is appropriately referenced and results add to the current literature.
• 7. It is well written with a narrative that is consistent, as well as easy and enjoyable to read.
Original Research Manuscript
(3000 words or less, excluding abstract, tables, figures, and references)
Several article types are encompassed in this submission category, including: multi-centre original research, randomized control trials, qualitative original research, health record reviews, and systematic reviews.
Brief Original Research
(1000 words or less, excluding abstract. Include ONE table OR figure, and references. Other figures and tables can be included as appendices)
While the article types for the Brief Original Research are the same as Original Research, these articles are limited to less than 1000 words, one table or figure, and references. Submissions of this type will highlight the most important aspects and findings of your research.
Clinicians’ Capsules will be required for all Original Research Manuscript submission types. Please see the Clinicians’ Capsule on page 9 for details.
These articles present primary data arising from original research. Effective September 2007, CJEM requires randomized controlled trials to be registered in a clinical trials registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov. For more information, see Clinical Trial Registration on the ICMJE website [http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html]. The trials registry and research ethics board registration numbers should be included in the manuscript.
Authors of randomized clinical trials should follow and report their use of the CONSORT guidelines [http://www.consort-statement.org]. Cardiac arrest studies should follow the Utstein criteria when appropriate. All papers should include a CONSORT flow diagram.
Authors reporting the performance of a diagnostic test should follow and report their use of the STARD initiative.
Authors of observational studies should follow the STROBE [http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/strobe/] reporting guidelines. Health records reviews, that make use of routinely collected data should additionally follow the RECORD [http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/record/] reporting guidelines.
Authors of quantitative or qualitative systematic reviews of the scientific literature should systematically select articles or data sources for inclusion and critical evaluation. The selection process should be described in the paper. Authors of systematic reviews should refer to the PRISMA statement whether or not they incorporate a meta-analysis in the review. Authors of systematic reviews are encouraged to follow the 27-item PRISMA, and to provide a flow diagram describing the selection of studies. Narrative or non-systematic reviews will not be considered for publication.
(1000-1500 words excluding references)
By invitation of the editors, authors may submit a commentary to accompany an original research article in a given issue.
(1000 words or less and no more than 10 references)
Authors may submit a focused discussion commenting on major current problems of emergency physicians or on controversial matters with significant implications for emergency medicine.
CJEM Debate Series
(1000-1500 words excluding references)
The CJEM debate series provides readers with the opportunity to hear differing perspectives on topics pertinent to the practice of Emergency Medicine. The debating authors are allocated opposing arguments on topics where there is some controversy or perhaps scientific equipoise. The series also involves a social media vote and online conversation. The debate format consists of an editorial style component (1000-1500 words) for each side, often incorporating a short rebuttal section.
CJEM Journal Club
(600-1000 words excluding tables, figures, and no more than 10 references)
CJEM Journal Club is designed to allow authors to report their critical appraisal of an important published article, highlighting the results and methodology for CJEM readers. The aims of this section are to demonstrate the use of the critical review format, to review articles of interest to emergency physicians, and to determine the relative validity and usefulness of these articles. To assist readers in keeping abreast of the relevant EM literature, timely reviews of important articles/topics will be a factor in the decision to accept. Articles must address three key questions:
1. What are the results?
2. Are the results valid?
3. Will the results help me care for my patients?
The preferred review methodology, including critical review forms, is described in "Users Guide to the Medical Literature," a series published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Authors wishing specific guidance should consider making use of the critical appraisal tools found at the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine or peruse articles published in ACP Journal.
(750–1000 words and no more than 10 references)
Resident Issue articles should be written on subjects of importance to Canadian emergency medicine residents that have not been well-covered elsewhere. This may include referenced position papers, short research articles, and uniquely resident perspectives on current emergency medicine topics.
Before submitting a full-length Resident Issue article, an outline must be approved by CJEM. Please submit an article outline (maximum 300 words) that lists the proposed authors of the article, the significance of the topic to residents and emergency medicine, and a list of references to the Editorial Office (email@example.com). If your topic is approved, you will be invited to submit a full-length manuscript (maximum length 1,000 words, 5 tables/figures, 10 references), which would then undergo our standard review and consideration process.
(1000 words or less and no more than 10 references)
Submissions should reflect the challenges of working in medicine. Generally, they should be humorous or provide some human interest and add to our understanding of the physician experience, particularly in Canada.
Authors should communicate directly with the Editor-in-Chief as endorsement by the Canadian Association for Emergency Physicians (CAEP) and selected international organizations (such as IFEM) is required. Further information on CAEP position statements and guidelines can be found here [http://caep.ca/CAEPPositionStatementsGuidelines].
CAEP Position Statement
CAEP Academic Symposium Paper
(1000 words or less, excluding abstract, with one figure or table and references)
CJEM will consider original scholarly submissions that are not original research, but that discuss educational advances in emergency medicine. Authors should define how the submission is innovative, builds on existing literature and adds to the scholarship of education. Submissions should be structured as follows: Background; Purpose or Rationale; Description of the Innovation; Discussion; and, Summary. Sufficient detail allowing readers to reproduce the innovation is required. If necessary, forms or other tools required to set up the innovation may be accepted for on-line publication. An unstructured abstract of less than 200 words is also required.
(1000 words or less, no abstract, only one figure or table, and no more than 5 references)
Clinical Correspondence may be considered if they identify a previously un-described finding or phenomenon and/or describe a therapy that could lead to future research or a change in practice. All cases for consideration should have a "take home" clinical message pertinent to Emergency Physicians.
(400 words and no more than 5 references)
Letters should be addressed to the Editor and will be considered for publication if they relate to topics of interest to emergency physicians in urban, rural, community, or academic settings, or if they are in response to (and relevant to) a recent CJEM publication. Letters are generally not peer reviewed but may be edited for brevity and clarity. Letters responding to a previously published CJEM article should be submitted within eight weeks of the article's publication. Authors whose work is discussed will typically be given an opportunity to respond.
All submissions should be double-spaced, using 12-point Times New Roman typeface and a word processing program (i.e. MS Word). Submissions must include the following:
The title page should include the article title, the authors' name(s) as they should appear in print, and the affiliations and degrees of all authors. The name, address, telephone number, fax number, and e-mail address for the corresponding author should be provided. The title page must also include a word count and running header of no more than 150 characters. Choose the article title carefully. Be creative and ensure that the title accurately reflects the content of the article.
Abstract and Keywords
Structured abstracts of up to 250 words are required for all Original Research submission types and must include the following headings: Objectives; Methods; Results; Conclusions; and, Keywords.
Unstructured abstracts of up to 200 words are required for Educational Innovation submissions that summarizes the main points of the article.
Abstracts are not required for other submissions including: Clinical Summary, Commentary; CAEP Paper; Clinical Correspondence; and, Letter. However, a minimum of three keywords are required to be included on the title page.
For Original Research and Clinical Summary submission types, please provide a brief simplified Clinicians’ Capsule, comprised of four bullet statements under these headings, and not exceeding 20 words per bullet:
What is known about the topic?
e.g. ED physicians frequently miss opportunities to prescribe oral anticoagulants (OACs) to patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter (AFF)
What did this study ask?
e.g. What was the impact of implementing a new evidence-based AAF clinical pathway on OAC prescribing behaviour
What did this study find?
e.g. This pre-post study found a 20% absolute increase in appropriate OAC prescribing along decreased lengths of stay and decreased return visits
Why does this study matter to clinicians?
e.g. Local implementation of a similar pathway could lead to better and more efficient care of AFF patients
Introduction: This section should succinctly discuss (i.e. three paragraphs) study background, importance, and the a priori study question, objectives or hypothesis.
Methods: This section should include a description of the overall study design as planned, the study setting, time period, population studied (with eligibility criteria and unit of analysis if different from individual patients), a description of the intervention, the primary and secondary outcome measures, and the statistical analysis employed. For investigations involving human subjects, the nature and timing of the consent that was obtained must be specified. There should be sufficient detail to allow a knowledgeable reader to replicate the study, at least in theory. Authors must explicitly name the ethics committee or investigational review board, which approved the research.
Results: In this section, authors should present primary and secondary results, without undue repetition of data reported in tables and figures. Any substantial deviations from the study as planned usually appear in this section. Measurements and rates should be reported using the appropriate number of significant digits, based on the precision of the measure (e.g. "After providing informed consent, 11 (13%) of 82 subjects withdrew from the study before being administered the intervention." rather than "(13.4%)"). All results should be reported using SI units, including molar rather than mass-based units for concentration in most cases.
A core element of CJEM’s philosophy is our emphasis on the importance of estimation over hypothesis testing, i.e., using point and interval estimates rather than P values. Instead, we prefer that each comparative study outcome be reported with an estimated "size of effect" and its associated confidence intervals. Such reporting is advocated by the CONSORT statement and permits readers to gauge the approximate power and clinical importance of the observed magnitude of effect. We therefore ask authors to restrict the reporting of P values for the primary outcome, or to a very small number of principal, a priori outcomes. P values tell only the probability that the observed effect is due to chance alone and communicate nothing regarding its clinical importance.
Discussion: Here, authors highlight the important study findings and their implications especially in the context of previous work, but without exhaustively summarizing the prior literature. In addition, the Discussion should identify limitations of the research and how any biases may affect the interpretation of the findings.
Conclusions: These should be stated in one paragraph and must be supported by the study findings. Avoid extending your conclusion beyond what your data show.
References: References should be formatted using the Vancouver style. Within the text, references should be numbered in the order they appear using standard text and angular brackets (e.g., <1>) rather than using superscript numbers. Do not leave any special word-processing software formatting commands for sections or references embedded in the documents being submitted. References should cite surname and initials for up to six authors. Seventh and subsequent authors should be cited as "et al." Use official abbreviations for titles of journals (if available). Examples of layout include:
Surname Initial(s). Title of article. Journal title/or title abbreviation. Year; volume(issue): page(s). DOI - if available
Surname author Initial(s). Paper title. In: Surname editor Initial(s), editor(s). Conference title. Place of publication: Publisher; Year. page(s).
Surname Initial(s). Book title. Edition - if available. Place of publication: Publisher; Year.
Anthology (book with several authors)
Surname author Initial(s). Chapter title. In: Surname editor Initial(s), editor(s). Book title. Place of publication: Publisher; Year. page(s).
Figure and Table Legends: Most papers will benefit from at least one and not more than five tables or figures. List the figure and table legends, numbered in the order they are cited in the text.
Tables: Tables must be prepared in MS Word or equivalent using the Table feature and be part of the main manuscript document. Tables cannot be used if they are in PowerPoint or Excel, or if they are supplied as images. Each table should appear on a separate page at the end of the article after the references. Each table should have a title and be numbered in order of callout within the text. Excessive use of horizontal lines and all shading should be avoided. Non-standard abbreviations and units of measure should appear in the table or legend.
Figures: Each individual figure should be uploaded as a separate digital file and should not be imbedded in the main manuscript (see below for further advice).
Acknowledgements: You may acknowledge individuals or organizations that provided advice, support (non-financial). Formal financial support and funding should be listed in the following section.
Financial support: Please provide details of the sources of financial support for all authors, including grant numbers. For example, "This work was supported by the Medical Research Council (grant number XXXXXXX)". Multiple grant numbers should be separated by a comma and space, and where research was funded by more than one agency the different agencies should be separated by a semi-colon, with 'and' before the final funder. Grants held by different authors should be identified as belonging to individual authors by the authors' initials. For example, "This work was supported by the Welcome Trust (A.B., grant numbers XXXX, YYYY), (C.D., grant number ZZZZ); the Natural Environment Research Council (E.F., grant number FFFF); and the National Institutes of Health (A.B., grant number GGGG), (E.F., grant number HHHH)". Where no specific funding has been provided for research, please provide the following statement: "This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors."
Conflict of Interest: Please provide details of all known financial, professional and personal relationships with the potential to bias the work. Where no known conflicts of interest exist, please include the following statement: "None."). Such conflicts might arise from personal relationships or from institutional relationships. CJEM has adopted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors policy on disclosure of conflicts, including the glossary which provides a definition of conflict of interest and other terms surrounding potential conflicts. Each author of a work must complete and submit a conflict of interest form (See below).
Review and Editorial Processes
All submissions are initially reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or one of the Senior Associate Editors. Articles judged unsuitable for CJEM will be returned to the authors following this step, typically within two weeks. Those meeting screening criteria will be forwarded for blinded peer review, with the exception of Letters to the Editor and Images.
To revise your manuscript, log in and enter your Author Centre, where you will find your manuscript title listed under "Manuscripts with Decisions." Under "Actions," click on "Create a Revision." Your manuscript number will be appended to denote a revision. You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of the manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer. Please also highlight the changes to your manuscript within the document, ideally by using the track changes mode in MS Word or by using bold or colored text. Once the revised manuscript is prepared, you can upload it and submit it through your Author Centre.
When submitting your revised manuscript, you will be able to respond to the comments made by the reviewer(s) in the space provided. In this space, please address each of the suggestions and cite where in the manuscript the change has been made. If no change was made, please explain why. In order to expedite the processing of the revised manuscript, please be as specific as possible in your response to the reviewer(s).
All revisions will be reviewed by the Decision Editor, who may consult with the original or new peer reviewers, to determine whether review comments have been addressed. The Decision Editor, along with the Editor-in-Chief or a Senior Associate Editor, will make a final decision regarding publication. Accepted articles will be edited, and authors will have the opportunity to review and approve revisions prior to publication. Manuscripts submitted to CJEM will be treated with respect and confidentiality.
Published manuscripts become the property of CAEP and may not be published elsewhere without permission.
Contacting CJEM Editors
Authors with questions regarding a submission or prospective authors who wish to discuss a paper in the development stage are encouraged to contact the Editor-in-Chief or the appropriate Section Editor by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org. Further information can be obtained from the Editor-in-Chief or the Managing Editor at email@example.com.
Authors are encouraged to submit articles in many areas of research. Common methodological guidelines for reporting different types of studies have been summarized below. Authors should generally follow these reporting guidelines for a given study design, in an effort to improve the overall quality of the medical literature. Please be advised that this list should not be considered comprehensive for all possible study designs.
Further information can be obtained from the Editor-in-Chief or the Managing Editor at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Randomized Controlled Trial - Superiority design
Randomized Controlled Trial - Non-Inferiority/Equivalence design
Diagnostic Test Performance Study
Systematic Review of Diagnostic Tests
Meta-analysis of Observational Studies