BACKOVER

Editors: Edison Andrés Cruz Olivo and Judy Elena Villavicencio

□ Open Submissions □ Indexed □ Peer Reviewed


EDITORIAL

Written by the journal's editors, our gest Editorialist these occasional pieces can cover announcements, highlights of journal content, position statements, and journal updates. The Editor-in-Chief may solicit an Editorial to accompany an accepted manuscript. Editorialists are expected to provide a balanced opinion of the paper in question and must not have conflict of interest that could compromise their objectivity. Any concerns that the editorialist might have regarding conflict of interest should be discussed with the Editor-in-Chief, before the editorial is written. Editorials should be no longer than 1500 words, may contain a total of one table or figure (optional), and should not include an abstract. The Editorial should generally not be divided into subheadings, although on occasion a few subheadings to promote clarity might be permitted at the discretion of the Editor. Opinions stated in Editorials should not be overly speculative and should be supported by facts published in the medical literature. Editorials are subjected to editing and final approval by the Editor-in-Chief.

Editors: Edison Andrés Cruz Olivo and Judy Elena Villavicencio

□ Open Submissions □ Indexed □ Peer Reviewed


CASE REPORT

Thank you for considering Revista Estomatología for the publication of your case report. As healthcare professionals, authors and researchers, Revista Estomatología believes in the value of case reports for dissemination of the best clinical practice, examination of usual and unusual clinical sceneries, and the illustration of clinical guides.

Revista Estomatologia publishes original case reports that contribute significantly to dental-medical knowledge. Manuscripts must meet at least one of the following criteria:

  • Unreported or unusual side effects or adverse interactions involving medications used in dentistry
  • Unexpected or unusual presentations of a disease in stomatognathic system
  • New associations or variations in disease processes in stomatognathic system
  • Presentations, diagnoses and/or management of new and emerging diseases
  • An unexpected association between diseases or symptoms
  • An unexpected event in the course of observing or treating a patient
  • Findings that shed new light on the possible pathogenesis of a disease or an adverse effect
  • Advances in surgical, restorative, and endodontic techniques, as well as in maxillary orthopedics, orthodontics and maxillofacial surgery.

Authors should indicate in the abstract and cover letter how the case report adds to the medical and dental literature. Submissions that do not include this information will be returned to authors prior to peer review.

Case reports should include an up-to-date review of all previous cases in the field. Authors should seek written and signed consent to publish the information from the patients or their guardians prior to submission. Authors will be asked to confirm informed consent was received as part of the submission process, and the manuscript must include a statement to this effect by including a 'Consent' section, as follows: "Written consent was obtained from the patient for publication of this case report and accompanying images”.

A copy of the written consent is available for review by the Editor-in-Chief of this journal

We invite you to follow the CARE guidelines to write the manuscript of case report.

Manuscript format and structure

Articles submitted to Revista Estomatología should include:

  • Title Page
  • Conflict of Interest and Source of Funding
  • Clinical Relevance
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Case description
  • Discussion
  • References
  • Images, tables, figures

Title: Write a title that accurately reflects the case, and contain no more than 150 characters including spaces. Ideally, title could have 5-10 key words. Please include the complete names of institutions for each author, and the name, address, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address for the corresponding author.

Clinical Relevance: Case reports need to have a Key Clinical Message at the start of the case report, which should be no longer than 50 words. The aim of this part of the report is to succinctly summarize the one take-home message the authors would like readers to remember after reading their report.

Abstract: The abstract must be structured and could be written in Spanish/Portuguese/English. It must include the following headings: Case Description, Clinical Findings, Treatment and Outcome, Clinical Relevance.

Introduction: The Introduction should put the focus of the manuscript into a broader context. As you compose the Introduction, think of readers who are not experts in this field. Include a brief review of the key literature and epidemiology. The Introduction should conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the case report and a comment about whether that aim was achieved.

Case Description: A Case Report begins with the signalmen (eg, age, gender,) of the patient, followed by a chronologic description of pertinent aspects of the diagnostic examination, differential diagnosis, treatment, and outcome.

Discussion: The Discussion should be concise and tightly argued. Should discuss the main findings, differential diagnosis, and therapeutic alternatives, as appropriate. Do not include the extensive literature reviews. Conclude with the value of the contribution to clinical practice or knowledge of the case report

References: References must be limited to those that are necessary. Revista Estomatologia does not restrict the number of references; however suggests not exceed 20 references. This journal uses the “Vancouver” style of reference citation.

Images, tables, figures: Clinical images are pictures that illustrate a key clinical finding that allow understand and spread an important message for readers. The accompanying text should be no longer than 200 words in length and have no more than 2 references. This text should give a relevant message to educate the reader about specific clinical situation. We invite authors to save photographic images in “ .TIF ” format and the resolution must be greater than 300 dpi.


CASE SERIES

Revista Estomatologia will also consider for publication case series that contain more than one clinical case report. Each report in the series should contain the same key elements as the case reports mentioned above and must have the required sections.

Editors: Edison Andrés Cruz Olivo and Judy Elena Villavicencio

□ Open Submissions □ Indexed □ Peer Reviewed


ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Revista Estomatologia publishes original research articles that describe significant and original experimental observations and provide sufficient detail so that the observations can be critically evaluated and, if necessary, repeated. Original articles will be published and must conform to the highest international standards in the field.

In order to improve quality of your manuscript, we invite you to write it following the criteria set out in the guidelines such as:

  • STROBE, for Cross-sectional, Case-Controls, and Cohort studies
  • CONSORT, for Controlled Clinical Trials
  • Modified CONSORT, for reporting preclinical in vitro studies on dental materials (Faggion, J Evid Base Dent Pract 2012;12:182-189)
  • ARRIVE, for in vivo studies that include animal model

Manuscript format and structure

Articles submitted to Revista Estomatología should include:

  • Title Page
  • Conflict of Interest and Source of Funding
  • Clinical Relevance
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Materials and Methods
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • References
  • Tables (where appropriate)
  • Figure Legends (where appropriate)
  • Figures (where appropriate and uploaded as separate files)

All manuscripts should emphasize clarity and brevity. Authors should pay special attention to the presentation of their findings so that they may be communicated clearly. Technical jargon should be avoided as much as possible and be clearly explained where its use is unavoidable.

Title Page: The title must be concise and contain no more than 100 characters including spaces. The title page should include a running title of no more than 40 characters; 5-10 key words, complete names of institutions for each author, and the name, address, telephone number, fax number and e-mail address for the corresponding author.

Conflict of Interest and Source of Funding: Authors are required to disclose all sources of institutional, private and corporate financial support for their study. Suppliers of materials (for free or at a discount from current rates) should be named in the source of funding and their location (town, state/county, country) included. Other suppliers will be identified in the text. If no funding has been available other than that of the author’s institution, this should be specified upon submission. Authors are also required to disclose any potential conflict of interest. These include financial interests (for example patent, ownership, stock ownership, consultancies, speaker’s fee,) or provision of study materials by their manufacturer for free or at a discount from current rates. Author’s conflict of interest (or information specifying the absence of conflicts of interest) and the sources of funding for the research will be published under a separate heading entitled “Conflict of Interest and Source of Funding Statement”.

Clinical Relevance: This section is aimed at giving clinicians a reading light to put the present research in perspective. It should be no more than 100 words and should not be a repetition of the abstract. It should provide a clear and concise explanation of the rationale for the study, of what was known before and of how the present results advance knowledge of this field. If appropriate, it may also contain suggestions for clinical practice. It should be structured with the following headings: scientific rationale for study, principal findings, and practical implications. Authors should pay particular attention to this text as it will be published in a highlighted box within their manuscript; ideally, reading this section should leave clinicians wishing to learn more about the topic and encourage them to read the full article.

Abstract: The structured abstract appears after the title page in the manuscript file. The structured summary is also entered in a separate field in the shipping system. The summary of the is limited to 250 words in length. Authors should mention the techniques used without going into methodological details and should summarize the most important results. The structured summary should be organized with Background (optional), Aim, Materials and Methods, Results and Conclusions. Do not include references. Avoid specialized abbreviations.

For clinical trials, it is encouraged that the abstract finish with the clinical trial registration number on a free public database such as clinicaltrials.gov.

Introduction: The Introduction should put the focus of the manuscript into a broader context. As you compose the Introduction, think of readers who are not experts in this field. Include a brief review of the key literature and epidemiology. If there are relevant controversies or disagreements in the field, they should be mentioned so that a non-expert reader can delve into these issues further. The Introduction should conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the experiments and a comment about whether that aim was achieved.

Materials and Methods: This section should provide enough detail for reproduction of the findings. Protocols for new methods should be included, but well-established protocols may simply be referenced. While we do encourage authors to submit all appendices, detailed protocols, or details of the algorithms for newer or less well-established methods, please do so as Supporting Information files. These are not included in the typeset manuscript, but are downloadable and fully searchable from the HTML version of the article.

(a) Clinical trials should be reported using the CONSORT guidelines available at www.consort-statement.org. A CONSORT checklist should also be included in the submission material. If your study is a randomized clinical trial, you will need to fill in all sections of the CONSORT Checklist. If your study is not a randomized trial, not all sections of the checklist might apply to your manuscript, in which case you simply fill in N/A.

Revista Estomatología encourages authors submitting manuscripts reporting from a clinical trial to register the trials in any of the following free, public clinical trials registries:

www.clinicaltrials.gov

http://clinicaltrials.ifpma.org/clinicaltrials/

The clinical trial registration number and name of the trial register will then be published with the paper.

(b) Statistical Analysis: As papers frequently provide insufficient detail as to the performed statistical analyses, please describe with adequate detail. For clinical trials intention to treat analyses are encouraged (the reasons for choosing other types of analysis should be highlighted in the submission letter and clarified in the manuscript).

(c) DNA Sequences and Crystallographic Structure Determinations: Papers reporting protein or DNA sequences and crystallographic structure determinations will not be accepted without a Genbank or Brookhaven accession number, respectively. Other supporting data sets must be made available on the publication date from the authors directly.

(d) Experimental Subjects: Experimentation involving human subjects will only be published if such research has been conducted in full accordance with ethical principles, including the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (version 2008) and the additional requirements, if any, of the country where the research has been carried out. Manuscripts must be accompanied by a statement that the experiments were undertaken with the understanding and written consent of each subject and according to the above mentioned principles. A statement regarding the fact that the study has been independently reviewed and approved by an ethical board should also be included.

When experimental animals are used the methods section must clearly indicate that adequate measures were taken to minimize pain or discomfort. Experiments should be carried out in accordance with the Guidelines laid down by the National Institute of Health (NIH) in the USA regarding the care and use of animals for experimental procedures or with the European Communities Council Directive of 24 November 1986 (86/609/EEC) and in accordance with local laws and regulations.

All studies using human or animal subjects should include an explicit statement in the Material and Methods section identifying the review and ethics committee approval for each study, if applicable. Editors reserve the right to reject papers if there is doubt as to whether appropriate procedures have been used.

Results: The Results section, we invite you to provide details of all of the experiments that are required to support the conclusions of the paper. There is no specific word limit for this section, but details of experiments that are peripheral to the main thrust of the article and that detract from the focus of the article should not be included. The section may be divided into subsections, each with a concise subheading. The section should be written in the past tense. Large datasets, including raw data, should be submitted as supporting files or in a repository.

Discussion: We invite you to detail the main conclusions of the work together with some explanation or speculation about the meaning of these conclusions and what is their impact on the scientific community. That is, part of the most specific and relevant finding of your research towards the global comparing it with what has already been reported in the literature. How do the conclusions affect the assumptions and models existing in the field? How can future research be based on these observations? What are the key experiments that must be done? The discussion should be concise and strongly argued.

References: References should be limited to what is necessary. Revista Estomatología does not restrict the number of references; However, we suggests not to exceed 40 for manuscripts. Any and all available works can be cited in the reference list. Acceptable sources include:

  • Published or accepted manuscripts
  • Manuscripts on pre-print servers, if the manuscript is submitted to a journal and also publicly available as a pre-print

Do not cite the following sources in the reference list:

  • Unavailable and unpublished work, including manuscripts that have been submitted but not yet accepted (e.g., “unpublished work,” “data not shown”). Instead, include those data as upplementary material or deposit the data in a publicly available database.
  • Personal communications (these should be supported by a letter from the relevant authors but not included in the reference list)

Editors: Edison Andrés Cruz Olivo and Judy Elena Villavicencio

□ Open Submissions □ Indexed □ Peer Reviewed


NARRATIVE REVIEWS

Review articles are welcome in Revista Estomatolgía and generally solicited by the Editor-in-Chief; authors wishing to submit an unsolicited Review Article are invited to contact the Editor-in-Chief prior to submission in order to screen the proposed topic for relevance and priority, given other review articles that may already be in preparation. Review articles should focus on recent scientific or clinical advances in an area of broad interest to those in the field of dentistry. Such articles must be concise and critical and should include appropriate references to the literature. All Review Articles, including those solicited by the Editors, are rigorously peer reviewed before a final publication decision is made. The authors should be researchers with experience in the subject discussed. In case of students, they should be under the guidance of an expert investigator in the subject.

The word limit for reviews is 4000 words. The main text of Reviews should be organized with:

  • Introduction,
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Review of Current Literature,
  • Discussion and Conclusion,
  • References

Abstract: The Abstract of the paper should be succinct; it must not exceed 200 words. Authors should express the main idea and a concise argument position in one or two paragraphs. Avoid specialist abbreviations.

Introduction: The Introduction should put the focus of the manuscript into a broader context. As you compose the Introduction, think of readers who are not experts in this field. Include a brief review of the key literature and epidemiology. If there are relevant controversies or disagreements in the field, they should be mentioned so that a non-expert reader can delve into these issues further. The Introduction should conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the experiments and a comment about whether that aim was achieved.

Literature Review or Main Text (divided into subsections as appropriate): These short, synthetic, well-focused and attractive reviews should attract a broad reading public. Try to write no more than 4,000 words (introduction and main text), two or three visualization elements and a concise list of the most relevant references. The article should include a general description of the existing literature that locates the topic within a broader context, but should also focus on the future: where is the field going and what interesting developments are expected? It is particularly important to highlight new critical advances, open questions and permanent controversies or paradoxes, since they are especially valued by a general public. We recommend using tables and colored figures to summarize the critical points.

References: references should be limited to those that are necessary. Revista Estomatología does not restrict the number of references; however, it suggests not to exceed 100 for manuscripts.

Editors: Edison Andrés Cruz Olivo and Judy Elena Villavicencio

□ Open Submissions □ Indexed □ Peer Reviewed


SYSTEMATIC REVIEW WITH OR WITHOUT META-ANALYSIS

Thank you for considering Revista Estomatología for the publication of your Systematic Review. We encourage and invite review author teams, working with Systematic Reviews focused on a specific and timely area in dentistry, to submit your manuscript at Revista Estomatología.

The key elements of a Revista Estomatología systematic review considered for publication are:

  • Must follow PRISMA guideline
  • The main text should be succinct and readable, so that someone who is not an expert in the area can understand it.
  • A ‘Studies and references’ section provides a framework for classifying included, excluded and ongoing studies, as well as those for which insufficient information is available, and other references.
  • Tables of characteristics of studies allow the systematic presentation of key descriptors of the studies considered for the review.

Manuscript format and structure

Articles submitted to Revista Estomatología should include:

  • Title Page and review information (or summary of protocol information)
  • Conflict of Interest and Source of Funding
  • Clinical Relevance
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Materials and Methods (protocol information)
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Funding
  • References

Title Page and review information (or summary of protocol information): Title succinctly states the intervention(s) reviewed and the problem at which the intervention is directed. Construct your title following the examples on the table adapted from Chochrane Library:

Table 1. Structure for Chochrane reviews titles adapted for Revista Estomatología

Scenario

Structure

Example

Basic structure.

[Intervention] for [health problem].

Antibiotics for chronic periodontitis.

Comparing two active interventions.

[Intervention A] versus [intervention B] for [health problem].

Immediate versus delayed placement of implants for extraction sockets

Type of people being studied or location of intervention mentioned explicitly.

[Intervention] for [health problem] in [participant group/location].

Apical surgery for endodontic lesions in pregnant wonan.

Sometimes it is necessary to specify that the intervention is for preventing, treating, or preventing and treating the health problem(s).

If necessary, the word ‘for’ is followed by ‘preventing’, ‘treating’, or ‘preventing and treating’. This is better than using ‘for the prevention of’ etc.

 

Tooth brush technique for preventing caries in children;

Scaling and root planing for treating periodontitis;

Vitamin C for preventing and treating the periodontal disease.

 

Conflict of Interest and Source of Funding: Authors are required to disclose all sources of institutional, private and corporate financial support for their study. Suppliers of materials (for free or at a discount from current rates) should be named in the source of funding and their location (town, state/county, country) included. Other suppliers will be identified in the text. If no funding has been available other than that of the author’s institution, this should be specified upon submission. Authors are also required to disclose any potential conflict of interest. These include financial interests (for example patent, ownership, stock ownership, consultancies, speaker’s fee,) or provision of study materials by their manufacturer for free or at a discount from current rates. Author’s conflict of interest (or information specifying the absence of conflicts of interest) and the sources of funding for the research will be published under a separate heading entitled “Conflict of Interest and Source of Funding Statement”.

Clinical Relevance: This section is aimed at giving clinicians a reading light to put the present research in perspective. It should be no more than 100 words and should not be a repetition of the abstract. It should provide a clear and concise explanation of the rationale for the study, of what was known before and of how the present results advance knowledge of this field. If appropriate, it may also contain suggestions for clinical practice. It should be structured with the following headings: scientific rationale for study, principal findings, and practical implications. Authors should pay particular attention to this text as it will be published in a highlighted box within their manuscript; ideally, reading this section should leave clinicians wishing to learn more about the topic and encourage them to read the full article.

Abstract: The summary is limited to 250 words in length. Authors should mention the protocol used without going into methodological details and should summarize the most important results. Please provide a structured summary including: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.

Introduction: Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).

Materials and Methods: Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide registration information including registration number. Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow‐up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify additional studies) in the search and date last searched. Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be repeated. State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility criteria, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, included in the meta‐analysis). Describe method of data extraction from selected papers (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators. List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and simplifications made. Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis. State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means). Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency (e.g., I2 ) for each meta‐analysis. Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective reporting within studies). Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression), if done, indicating which were pre‐specified.

Results: Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, follow-up period) and provide the citations. Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment. Present the results of individual studies for all outcomes considered (benefits or harms): (a) simple summary data for each intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot. Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies. Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression.

Discussion: Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers). Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias), and at review-level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of identified research, reporting bias). Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence, and implications for future research.

Funding: Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the systematic review.

References: References should be limited to what is necessary for the development of the systematic review. Revista Estomatología does not restrict the number of references.

Editors: Edison Andrés Cruz Olivo and Judy Elena Villavicencio

□ Open Submissions □ Indexed □ Peer Reviewed


LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Letter to the Editor submissions must be no longer than 750 words, no more than 10 references, and no more than a total of 2 figures and tables (combined). If the Letter to the Editor is written in response to Revista Estomatología article, the Editor-in-Chief may choose to invite the article's authors to write a Letter to the Editor reply. The Letter to the Editor section is not considered to be an appropriate venue for publishing new data without peer review, nor for comments made in response to a previously published Correspondence. Studies with scientific merit should be considered for submission as an Original Report to an appropriate journal.

Instructions for Letter to the Editor: Letters in reference to a Journal article must be received within 12 weeks after online publication of the article. Limit text to 750 words or fewer, limit of 10 references, no more than a total of 2 figures and tables (combined). Provide a succinctly worded title, which differs from the previously published Revista Estomatología article. Include a title page.

Editors: Edison Andrés Cruz Olivo and Judy Elena Villavicencio

□ Open Submissions □ Indexed □ Peer Reviewed


SPECIAL ISSUE

Manuscripts for a thematic volume or issue. This manuscripts are requested by the editor in chief.

Editors: Edison Andrés Cruz Olivo and Judy Elena Villavicencio

□ Open Submissions □ Indexed □ Peer Reviewed