CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT: CALL FOR PAPERS Lisbon Addictions 2015. The first European Conference on Addictive Behaviours and Dependencies will be held in Lisbon on 23-25 September 2015. Organised by SICAD, the journal Addiction, the EMCDDA and ISAJE, it will provide a unique networking opportunity for researchers, practitioners and policy experts across countries and disciplines to discuss latest findings on the prevention, treatment and control of addiction. A call for abstracts has just been published on www.lisbonaddictions.eu . To stay updated on the latest developments subscribe to the conference newsletter http://eepurl.com/5fZaP
Articles may look at any addictive behaviour from a distant or contemporary historical perspective. The article must be based on original historical research and not simply provide a review of material that has already been published. It must also have relevance to future theory or practice. The material on which the paper is based must be fully referenced. This category provides an opportunity for historians to publish where they will have impact on the addictions field. A length of 3500 words is preferred but up to a maximum of 4000 words is allowable. The abstract must be structured, using these headings: Aims, Methods, Findings, Conclusions.
Book reviews should be more than simply a summary of the book’s content and should place the book in the content of other literature in the field. Reviewers should aim to make them a ‘good read’. On occasion it may be appropriate for a reviewer to offer a negative appraisal of a book but vituperation is to be avoided. The books reviewed are selected to be of interest to the journal’s international readership and the reviews should identify what is good and worthwhile in the book for Addiction’s varied readers. Book reviews should be no more than 500 words.
Case reports should include a brief statement explaining why the case is worth documenting followed by a thorough account of the case, including sufficient data. There should then be a discussion section that includes evidence that the case is unique or unexpected and outlines any alternative explanations for case features. A conclusion detailing implications should end the case report. It is very important that case reports show written evidence of patient consent. Case reports should be no longer than 3000 words and should include a structured abstract under the following headings: Background, Case Descriptions, Conclusions.
A case series analysis is a paper based on a series of case studies. Each case should be structured in a similar way to case reports and generalisations should be drawn from each of the cases. Again, it is very important that case series show written evidence of patient consent. Case series should be no longer than 3000 words and should include a structured abstract under the following headings: Background, Case Descriptions, Conclusions. When submitting please select ‘Case Report’ as the manuscript type.
A commentary should add a further perspective or point of view to a particularly important research report or learned review. It must be a short piece which is original and thought provoking and should stimulate debate and discussion. Rather than being a review of the article, authors should use the findings as a stepping stone to make one or two points of wider relevance to the field. Commentaries are commissioned by Addiction and are published alongside the paper on which they comment. A commentary should be approximately 800 words with references in Vancouver style (maximum of 19) and 6 key words should be included as part of a commentary. When commenting upon a research report or review, a reference should be made to this text at the beginning of the commentary and included in the reference list.
Published at the start of every issue of Addiction, an editorial should be a significant piece of academic writing. An editorial is distinct from a review – it is shorter and provides a place in which one has the distinct aim of stimulating debate, identifying ideas, and pushing ideas further forward. It should make one or two key points that are more in the way of opinion rather than fact. The point(s) will normally challenge existing thinking, raise an issue that has been neglected, take a current issue forward, or reinforce one side of a debate that is currently under way. It can concern matters of policy, treatment, assessment/diagnosis, theory or methodology and should be written in a lively and engaging style with the point(s) very clearly stated. An editorial should also be written from an international perspective. Editorials should be under 1000 words and should contain no more than 19 references in Vancouver style and up to 6 key words.
‘For debate’ articles are opinion pieces up to 3000 words in length. They synthesise the research literature in a way that adds important new insights, and they are subject to peer review. They should be written in an international context and make one or two key points that are more in the way of opinion rather than fact. The point(s) will normally challenge existing thinking, raise an issue that has been neglected, take an issue forward that is currently being considered, or reinforce one side of a debate that is currently underway. It can concern matters of policy, treatment, assessment/diagnosis, theory or methodology and should be written in a lively and engaging style.
“For debate” articles are usually commissioned but are sometimes unsolicited papers accepted for publication for Addiction and then chosen by the Commissioning Editor. Occasionally particularly topical or more lengthy editorials will be turned into ‘for debate’ articles. Approximately 3–4 commentaries will normally be commissioned to accompany them. Commentators will be chosen carefully to provide alternative opinions on the debatable issue. Addiction strives to commission international commentators. Once the commentaries have been accepted for publication, the author of the ‘for debate’ article will be given the opportunity to respond to the commentaries, and the response will be published alongside the ‘for debate’ article and its commentaries. ‘For debate’ articles should include an abstract (this can be unstructured).
Addiction publishes individual commissioned series based on specific topics. These papers are normally limited to 3500 words but individual guidelines apply to each series – for example, Journal Interviews, Horizons and the Research Centres series.
Journal Club papers provide an opportunity to present an instructive discussion on important or influential publications (papers, reports, books). They may involve a detailed critique of the publication, assessing how far the conclusions it draws are justified, or draw attention to a publication that has particularly important implications that have not been picked up in the literature. The issues must be sufficiently important for the field and require explication beyond what can be achieved with a letter. In the first instance, potential contributors such send a 50 word concept to Addiction’s head office. This will be discussed by the editorial team and if the idea looks promising an invitation will be sent out. The article need have no specific format but must include a 50 word summary at the front and in terms of general formatting and referencing conform to Addiction’s requirements. The usual word limit is 3000 excluding references. Journal Club articles will be subject to peer review and may be declined if the review process identifies problems with the analysis, assumptions or argument. In some cases the authors of the original publication being critiqued may be offered a right of reply after the Journal Club article has been accepted.
Addiction publishes solicited and unsolicited letters. They may express opinions about articles published in the journal, report on a development, or comment on some issue of potential interest to the readership of the journal. They will normally be refereed. Addiction does not generally use letters to report findings that are not sufficiently important to go into papers. Letters should be no longer than 500 words with fewer than 19 references in Vancouver style. They should not normally contain tables, diagrams or figures. If a letter comments upon a paper already published in the journal, this should be cited at the beginning of the letter. Letters may also be invited by the Commissioning Editor.
Articles for this category deal with methodological issues. Papers will include descriptions, assessments or comparisons of 1) methods of diagnosing or quantifying addiction or dependence; 2) any measures or instruments (biochemical, physiological, behavioural, questionnaire-based etc.) used to study addictive behaviours, their features, causes or consequences; 3) statistical methods; 4) methods for obtaining study participants; 5) study designs; and 6) discussion or investigation concerning the nature and publication of addiction research. The scope of the category is wide, ranging from state-of-science primers on methods that are popular but frequently misunderstood through methods that are emerging and underused to original techniques.
It is expected that the articles will be written in style that will engage readers without specialist expertise and have a strong relevance to research in the addictions. Methods articles should be a maximum of 3500 words excluding abstract, tables and references (for full details see Instructions for Authors). The abstract must be structured (250-word limit) and include the following headings: Aims, Design, Settings, Participants, Measurements, Findings, Conclusions, although in the case of non-empirical articles flexibility will be necessarily allowed. Further details for authors considering writing under this category are given in the editorial note, “Research methods and statistical techniques in Addiction” (Addiction 2012; 107(10): 1724-1725). Prospective authors are invited to send ideas and outlines to the Statistics and Methodology Editor (via email@example.com), who will be able to offer guidance.
Addiction publishes occasional monographs of up to 10,000 words, including references. Not more than one monograph will be published per issue at the discretion of the editor. Monographs are distinct from research reports and constitute major pieces of writing that cannot be expressed within the usual length limits. Monographs might include extensive systematic reviews of major topics or a series of linked studies addressing a common research question. These articles will go through the usual peer review process; however, the editor will only accept monographs that are of substantial importance. There will be no appeals for rejected monographs, but rejection will not preclude authors from submitting papers based on the material as standard research reports.
Authors wishing to submit monographs for consideration should submit in the usual way, but should add a note in their cover letter explaining that they would like the submission to be treated as a monograph. Monographs should carry structured abstracts (no more than 300 words) and include headings similar to those of research reports (see below).
Research reports are papers reporting original findings from primary data. The study may be qualitative or quantitative and may involve experimental or non-experimental designs. Addiction does not publish research involving non-human animals; such papers can be sent to Addiction Biology. Research reports should be a maximum of 3500 words excluding abstract, tables and references (for full details see Instructions for Authors). Qualitative manuscripts may be up to 4500 words to facilitate the inclusion of direct quotations within the main text, but this is in lieu of any tables. Abstracts for both qualitative and quantitative papers must be structured (250 word limit) and include the following headings: Aims, Design, Settings, Participants, Measurements, Findings, Conclusions. We carry commentaries on approximately 25% of published articles.
Reviews draw together a body of literature to reach one or more major conclusions. It is expected that reviews will be ‘systematic’, which means they will set out very clearly the search strategy (including key words where appropriate), the selection criteria for articles to include, and the basis for integrating findings. A review may be up to 4000 words. The abstract must be structured and include the following headings: Aims, Methods, Results and Conclusions. We may commission commentaries on reviews if appropriate. Addiction will not consider unsolicited reviews written by authors with a specific conflict of interest relating to the topic of the review.
Protocols should relate to major clinical evaluations of interventions aimed to combat addiction. Trial protocols of pilot trials and proof-of-concept studies (i.e. without any results) will not be considered. We will, however, consider publication of papers reporting the results of innovative and rigorously conducted pilot or proof-of-concept studies. Trials must have adequate control for potential confounding factors and adequate sample sizes, use accepted measures of outcome that are of clinical significance, and specify the primary outcome variable and analysis plan and expected timeline for completion and reporting. We will only consider protocols relating to interventions in which there is a commitment to public sharing of the intervention content in full. Arrange abstracts under these headings: Background and aims, Methods, and Discussion. The report itself should follow CONSORT headings (www.consort-statement.org). Word limit 3500.
*If you are interested in contributing to invited article categories, please contact the appropriate Editor:
Book Reviews Editor: John Witton (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Editorials Editor: Nancy Petry (email@example.com)
Commissioning Editor: Peter Miller (firstname.lastname@example.org)