Clinical reviews

We welcome submissions for this section, and also commission some contributions.

Types of article for this section include:

• clinical reviews
• recent developments
• science, medicine, and the future
• drug points

Clinical reviews, and articles for recent developments and science, medicine, and the future should include the usual items required for all LJPC manuscripts, plus:

• no more than 2000 words, including the introduction and methods sections
• introduction: a paragraph or two of up to 150 words explaining what the article will cover and why it’s important.
• methods: a section of up to 150 words stating what sources of information were used to write the paper. We don’t expect you to perform a systematic review yourself, but we do hope you will consult Cochrane and other systematic reviews if that's appropriate. Please say whether you have done a Medline search, used a personal archive of references, or consulted other experts
• no more than 25 references in the Vancouver style (however, you can provide more for publication only on bmj.com in a separate list numbered w1,w2,w3 etc and marked as such in the main text of the article)
• evidence-based writing: please clarify throughout the paper the sources and strength of the evidence for key statements
• writing for general readers: please avoid specialist jargon or abbreviations, and try to break up the text with subheadings
• a patient's story: If you can, please include a box of up to 200 words containing a personal account by a real patient about their experience of being ill and getting professional support and treatment, and perhaps about managing their own disease. The patient should use his or her full name in the piece (given and family names) or, if preferred, remain anonymous. We always need to see the patient's signed consent to publication using the LJPC consent form (coming soon)
• web extras: we may be able to publish some additional boxes, figures, and references on our website at (www.londonjournalofprimarycare.org)
• a summary box containing no more than 5 key messages in the form of short sentences highlighting the main points
• a box of up to 5 additional educational resources (Cochrane reviews, other systematic reviews, clinical management guidelines, useful and authoritative websites) for those readers who want to read more about the subject – please list any URLs and please describe each site in a sentence or two
• a box of up to 5 information resources for patients – please describe any website in a sentence or two and give the URL
• a box listing up to 5 key ongoing research studies, stating briefly what questions each study may answer and giving any relevant references and URLs [only for recent developments articles]
• figures: please provide two or three illustrations, including clinical photographs and line drawings, preferably in the form of jpeg files. We welcome colour illustrations.

Clinical Reviews

These articles should be authoritative but attractive and accessible to general readers. They should follow the detailed format above.

Recent Developments

The aim of this series is to provide general readers with a broad update of recent developments (from the past 1-2 years) and their clinical applications, in a wide range of medical and surgical specialities. Please try to inform readers usefully (particularly specialists in other fields, general practitioners and candidates for postgraduate examinations) and stimulate them to read further.

Please follow the general format for clinical review articles and provide an additional box of key ongoing research studies, indicating which questions they aim to answer.

Science, medicine, and the future

This series aims to inform general readers about cutting edge research in medicine and science, and to discuss the potential clinical, ethical, economic, and psychosocial implications for the next 15 years or so.

The summary box should highlight predicted developments, particularly in how clinical management may change over the next 5-15 years.

Drug points

These usually report new adverse drug reactions or drug interactions. Priority will be given to drug points that report more than one case; those in which the patient is rechallenged with the drug; and those which exclude other possible causative factors (disease process, other drugs, environmental agents). Please ensure that your drug point follows our checklist:

• please ensure that the main text is no longer than 300 words with no more than 5 references
• as with any report of adverse drug reactions, your drug point should include the following information:
• the age and sex of all patients described
• the suspected drug, and all drugs currently being taken, with start dates, stop dates, restart dates, and outcome (generally something more than simple coincidence in time is required: e.g. re-challenge, with the patient’s informed consent, or immunological investigations may tip the balance of probabilities)
• details of the patient’s prior experience with this drug and of any adverse reactions to related drugs
• details of other diseases and/or environmental factors, and their timing
• ancillary information from the pharmaceutical company and regulatory agency
• references to relevant published reports
• other factors relevant to verify specific types of adverse drug reactions (e.g. blood concentration in overdose, baseline laboratory data, ethnic group)
• there should be no more than four authors
• please do not use proprietary drug names
• we welcome relevant clinical photographs
• we expect you to contact the UK Committee on Safety of Medicines (or the equivalent committee in your country) and the manufacturer of the drug to enquire if they have had similar reports. You must include their responses within the text of the drug point
• We do need to see the signed consent to publication of all patients described in the drug point, using the LJPC's consent form, unless this proves impossible and we decide that that publication without consent has sufficient benefits to public health