Otolaryngology Online Journal

Guidelines for Authors

Otolaryngology welcomes the submission of manuscripts in the fields of otolaryngology, otology, Laryngology, Sinonasal Disorders, Nasal Disorders, neurotology, audiology, Head, Neck and Oral Oncology that meet the general criteria of significance and scientific excellence.

Manuscripts are received with the understanding that they have not been published or are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Manuscripts are accepted based on the recommendations of the referees. Published papers become the sole property of otolaryngology and will be copyrighted by the journal. You may submit manuscripts online at Otolaryngology or you may send the article as an email attachment otolary@esciencejournal.org 

Peer-Review Policy:

Otolaryngology Online Journal is an open access international journal. The journal follows a peer review process where our expert reviewers provide comments on the quality and content of the submitted articles on the discoveries and current novel developments in the mode of original articles, review articles, case reports, short communications, etc. while making them freely available through online without any restrictions or any other subscriptions to universal researchers.

Every submitted manuscript processed for preliminary quality control check by editorial office followed by external peer review process. Usually preliminary quality control completes within 7 days and majorly with reference to journal formatting, English and journal scope.

Article Processing Charges (APC) :

Journal of Otolaryngology Open Access is self-financed and does not receive funding from any institution/government. Hence, the Journal operates solely through processing charges we receive from the authors and some academic/corporate sponsors. The handling fee is required to meet its maintenance. Being an Open Access Journal, jorl does not collect subscription charges from readers that enjoy free online access to the articles. Authors are hence required to pay a fair handling fee for processing their articles. However, there are no submission charges. Authors are required to make payment only after their manuscript has been accepted for publication.

Preparation of Manuscripts
Manuscripts should consist of the following subdivisions: Title page, Abstract, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results/Observations, Discussion, Acknowledgements, References, Tables, Figures and Legends. All manuscripts should be written in English and number all the pages consecutively beginning with the title page. You may submit manuscripts online at Otolaryngology or you may send the article as an email attachment otolary@esciencejournal.org 

The title must concise and informative and should not exceed the 60 characters (12-15 words) including spaces (with key words appropriate for retrieval purposes) and provide peer readers with a quick overview of the paper's contents. Avoid abbreviations and formulae wherever possible.

Name of the author(s) with initials and the name and address of the institution where the work was done must be given. Present address (es) of author(s) may be given if they are different from the above. Provide, also, with the e-mail address of first and/or the corresponding author so that an immediate communication with the editor is possible. This e-mail address also appears on the first page of the printed article.

Abstracts
All papers must have an abstract not more than 250 words of clear, informative and giving significant objectives, methodology, results and conclusion in the paper. Presentation of numerical results should be avoided as far as possible in the abstract.

Keywords Between 4 and 6 key words must be provided for the purpose of indexing and information retrieval.

Introduction
The introduction should introduce the research problem that the study was designed to address and its significance. It should provide a clear statement of the problem, the relevant literature on the subject, and the proposed approach or solution. What gap is the current study designed to fill? In other words, the introduction should provide the information for the reader that he/she will need in order to understand and appreciate the science you will report on later in the article.

References
References should be listed at the end of the paper in alphabetical order. Articles in preparation or articles submitted for publication, unpublished observations, personal communications, etc. should not be included in the reference list. Journal names are abbreviated according to Biological Abstracts and correctly format the references of your paper. Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy of the references. Please use the following style for the reference list:

Examples: All the references must be in the following order.

Von Pirquet C. Allergie. MunchenerMedizinische Wochenschrift. 1906; 53:1457-1458.
Sibbald B. Familial inheritance of asthma and allergy. In: Kay AB, Allergy and allergic disease. Oxford: Blackwell Science. 1997; p 1177-1186.
S. A. Gelfand, “The acoustic reflex,” in Hand Book of Clinical Audiology, J. Katz, L. Medwetsky, R. Burkard, and L. J. Hood, Eds., pp.189–221, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, New York, NY, USA, 6rd edition, 2009.

Tables
Do not submit tables as photographs or scanned documents. Number tables consecutively in the order of their first citation in the text and supply a brief title for each. The tables should be typed on separate sheets. Place explanatory details as footnotes. Give each column a short or abbreviated heading.

Figures
All figures should be listed together. Figures should not exceed 16.5 x 22.0 cm and should be numbered. For the reproduction of illustrations, only good quality drawings and original photographs can be accepted. When possible, group several illustrations on one page for reproduction. Photomicrographs should have internal scale markers. Symbols, arrows, or letters used in the photomicrographs should contrast with the back¬ground. Electronically submitted b/w half-tone and colour illustrations must have a final resolution of 300 dpi after scaling, and 800-1200 dpi for line drawings.

Proofs and Reprints
Electronic proofs will be sent (e-mail attachment) to the corresponding author as a PDF file and should be returned with one week of receipt. Corrections should be restricted to type setting errors. Authors are advised to check their proofs very carefully before return, since inclusion of late corrections cannot be acceptable. Corrected proofs are to be returned to the publishers. The authors are responsible for the contents appeared in their published manuscripts
Page proofs are considered to be the final version of the manuscript. The Editorial Board reserves the right to make changes like typographical or minor clerical errors if necessary in the research articles. No changes will be made in the manuscript at the proof stage.
Authors will have free electronic access to the full text (PDF) of the article. Authors can freely download the PDF file.
Reprints may be purchased. Order for supply of reprints may be sent while returning the galley proofs after corrections. No reprint/s will be supplied free of charge. Reprint Order Form and Price List will be sent with the galley proofs.

Publication Ethics and Malpratice Guidelines

Duties of Editors:

Otolaryngology Online Journal editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published in current volume of the journal. Editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

Otolaryngology Online Journal editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the nature of the authors or the host institution including race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Otolaryngology Online Journal editor must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

When genuine errors in published work are pointed out by readers, authors, or members of editorial board, which do not render the work invalid, a correction (or erratum) will be published as soon as possible. The online version of the paper may be corrected with a date of correction and a link to the printed erratum. If the error renders the work or substantial parts of it invalid, the process of retraction can be initiated. In such case, the retraction communication with explanations as to the reason for retraction will be published as soon as possible. Consequently, the message about retraction will be indicated on article page and in PDF version of retracted article.

If serious concerns are raised by readers, reviewers, or others, about the conduct, validity, or reporting of academic work, editor will initially contact the authors and allow them to respond to the concerns. If that response is unsatisfactory, allied academies will take this to the institutional level.

Otolaryngology Online Journal will respond to all allegations or suspicions of research or publication misconduct raised by readers, reviewers, or other editors. Cases of possible plagiarism or duplicate/redundant publication will be assessed by the journal. In other cases, allied academies may request an investigation by the institution or other appropriate bodies (after seeking an explanation from the authors first and if that explanation is unsatisfactory).

Retracted papers will be retained online, and they will be prominently marked as a retraction in all online versions, including the PDF, for the benefit of future readers.

Duties of Reviewers:

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Editor will take reviewer misconduct seriously and pursue any allegation of breach of confidentiality, non-declaration of conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial), inappropriate use of confidential material, or delay of peer review for competitive advantage. Allegations of serious reviewer misconduct, such as plagiarism, will be taken to the institutional level.

Duties of Authors:

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Authors should ensure that submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere in any language, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement.

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Copyright
Each manuscript must be accompanied by a statement that it has been neither published nor submitted for publication (except thesis), in whole or in part, either in a serial, professional journal or as a part in a book which is formally published and made available to the public. For the mutual benefit and protection of authors and publishers it is necessary that the authors agree to automatic transfer of the copyright (download here) to the publisher before publication of the work.

Referees
Generally, submitted manuscripts are sent to two experienced referees from our panel. The contributor’s may submit names of three qualified reviewers who have had experience in the subject of the submitted manuscript, but are not associated with the same institution(s) as the contributors nor have published manuscripts with the contributors in the past 10 years.

Statistics
When possible, quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty (such as confidence intervals). Report losses to observation (such as dropouts from a clinical trial). Put a general description of methods in the Methods section. When data are summarized in the Results section, specify the statistical methods used to analyse them. Avoid non-technical uses of technical terms in statistics, such as 'random' (which implies a randomising device), 'normal', 'significant', 'correlations', and 'sample'. Define statistical terms, abbreviations, and most symbols.

Fast Editorial Execution and Review Process (FEE-Review Process)

Otolaryngology Online Journal is participating in the Fast Editorial Execution and Review Process (FEE-Review Process) with an additional prepayment of $99 apart from the regular article processing fee. Fast Editorial Execution and Review Process is a special service for the article that enables it to get a faster response in the pre-review stage from the handling editor as well as a review from the reviewer. An author can get a faster response of pre-review maximum in 3 days since submission, and a review process by the reviewer maximum in 5 days, followed by revision/publication in 2 days. If the article gets notified for revision by the handling editor, then it will take another 5 days for external review by the previous reviewer or alternative reviewer.

Acceptance of manuscripts is driven entirely by handling editorial team considerations and independent peer-review, ensuring the highest standards are maintained no matter the route to regular peer-reviewed publication or a fast editorial review process. The handling editor and the article contributor are responsible for adhering to scientific standards. The article FEE-Review process of $99 will not be refunded even if the article is rejected or withdrawn for publication.

The corresponding author or institution/organization is responsible for making the manuscript FEE-Review Process payment. The additional FEE-Review Process payment covers the fast review processing and quick editorial decisions, and regular article publication covers the preparation in various formats for online publication, securing full-text inclusion in a number of permanent archives like HTML, XML, and PDF, and feeding to different indexing agencies.