Instructions for authors

Journal Home

Contribute

Browse

Instructions for Authors

Format

All submitted manuscripts should follow the formatting outlined below.

  • All text to be calibri, justified with 1.5 spacing.
  • Title – Bold and font size 22.
  • Author – Authors should be listed with first author first and senior author last. An asterix should be placed by the corresponding author and contact details provided. Font should be bold and size 12.
  • Subsection headings – Bold, caps and font size 12.
  • Main text – Font size 11.
  • All figures should be placed at the end of the text with figure legends placed underneath.
  • Text should be referenced using the Harvard format.
  • No manuscripts will be confined to a word count. However brevity will be welcomed.

Technical Report

All technical reports should include novel techniques not previously reported. Modifications of existing techniques will be permitted. All manuscripts should include an abstract, introduction, method and discussion.

Abstract

This should be no longer than 200 words and introduce the technique being described and why it is useful. The abstract should also include up to 5 keywords.

Introduction

The introduction should give the background as to why the technique was developed.

Method

This should fully describe the new technique that has been developed. It should be written in the 3rd person and in the past tense. It must be written in such a fashion that it could be followed by another anatomy technician. The use of figures to help describe the methods is encouraged for this section.

Discussion

The discussion should give an overview of the technique and how the technique has improved teaching/learning/specimen presentation/anatomy understanding. It should account for both advantages and disadvantages of the method as well as any difficulties faced in carrying out the technique and how these were solved. It should discuss other similar techniques that are published in the literature and make note as to how this technique compares. Finally, it may also be useful to comment on future changes that could improve or evolve the technique.

Dissection Report

The dissection report should discuss the dissection process leading to the production of a prosection. It should include an abstract, introduction, method and discussion.

Abstract

This should be no longer than 200 words and describe the prosection that has been produced. You may briefly describe the general technique that was used to get to the final prosection. The abstract should also include up to 5 keywords.

Introduction

The introduction should be brief and present the prosection produced. It should mention any similar prosections that are in the literature and how this differs.

Methods

This should fully describe the dissection that was carried out. It should be written in the 3rd person and in the past tense. It must be written in such a fashion that it could be followed by another anatomist to produce a similar prosection. The use of figures to help describe the dissection is encouraged for this section.

Discussion

The discussion should give an overview of the dissection and how it is compares to other similar published dissections. It is essential that you comment on how this prosection helps student understanding that region. You should also discuss any problems encountered and how you overcame these. It is also useful to suggest plans to improve the dissection in any further work.

Review Articles

We encourage authors to write reviews related to current technical practices, published prosection work and anatomy pedagogy. The review should have an abstract, an introduction, main body and discussion

Abstract

The abstract should be no longer that 200 and succinctly give an overall view of the literature reviewed and state the conclusion.

Introduction

This should introduce the topic under discussion.

Main body

This will vary dependent on the topic under review, however this section should critically review all the recent literature surrounding the subject and discuss how they relate. Subheadings should be used here as appropriate.

Discussion

This section should succinctly examine what has been written in the main body. It should point out any major gaps within the literature and suggest areas of future research.

Case Studies

We will accept case studies discussing anatomical anomalies as well as pathological findings. The case studies should have an abstract, introduction, case report, discussion.

Abstract

The abstract should be no longer than 200 words and introduce the case study, the background and why this is a unique/rare case under discussion

Introduction

This should be brief and introduce the area under discussion and the circumstances surrounding the case.

Case report

This should give a background to the specimen that is being presented. It should give a detailed account of the method undertook to examine the anomaly/pathology as well as presenting the findings. It is essentially that good figures are used here to present the findings

Discussion

The information should be summarised in the discussion and it should relate it to other findings in the literature. The clinical implications of any findings should also be discussed.

Anatomy Pedagogy Reports

We will accept manuscripts either detailing the introduction of novel teaching/assessment method and/or distinct pedagogical research. These reports should include an abstract, an introduction, a methods section, a results section and a discussion. If the manuscript is introducing a new teaching/assessment method then the results section need not be included.

Abstract

The abstract should be no longer than 200 words and succinctly describe the methods, results and any major conclusion from the study.

Introduction

The introduction should give the background to topic being investigated. It should state the aims of the research and why the research was necessary.

Methods

This should outline the implementation of the novel teaching method or assessment as well as any methods to investigate its effectiveness.

Results

This results section should report any findings from investigations. Figures and tables should be used to provide evidence for findings.

Discussion

The discussion should summarise the report and its findings. It is essential to put the report in context by comparing into to current, relevant literature. It is also useful to comment on directions of any future research.

The information should be summarised in the discussion and it should relate it to other findings in the literature. The clinical implications of any findings should also be discussed.