Manuscript Submission



Purpose of VideourologyTM

VideourologyTM is an international online peer-reviewed journal dedicated to publishing video contributions of minimally invasive surgery and advanced surgical techniques.  Videourology is intended to enable physicians to learn, evaluate, and implement new surgical strategies in their surgical practice using the most up-to-date Flash, QuickTime, and MP4 technologies. The flagship publication, Journal of Endourology, publishes articles while its companion journal, Videourology, publishes original videos containing material that has not been reported elsewhere, except in the form of an abstract or a conference presentation.

Exclusivity

Manuscripts should be submitted with the understanding that they have neither been published, nor are under consideration for publication elsewhere, except in the form of an abstract. Prior abstract publications should be described as a footnote to the title. Published submissions become the sole property of the Journal and will be copyrighted by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., unless alternate licensing is arranged.  By submitting a manuscript to Videourology, the author(s) agree(s) to each of these conditions.

Please be sure to read all instructions before beginning your submission.

Submitting your video to Videourology™ is a two-step process:

1.   Upload your video to http://videos.liebertpub.com 
2.   Complete your submission at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/videourology

 Further instructions for this two-step process are provided after the guidelines below on initial preparation of both the video and the abstract that accompanies it.

Preparation of Video

  • Videos may be up to 10 minutes in duration.  Submission of longer videos require the permission of the Editor.
  • The video must include audio narration explaining the procedure.  Text and audio in the video must be in English. Audio must include narration in clear, grammatically correct English.

The video must be high quality material that describes new surgical techniques or modification of a current technique. Video of classic surgeries that are not part of the Videourology library will be considered.  Videos must be clear, in focus, and without excessive camera movement. Grainy, blurry videos will not be accepted. Editing must involve smooth transitions. Radiographs and other images must not contain any patient-identifiable information. Three to ten PowerPoint® slides may be included in the video to include details of patient history, clinical and laboratory findings, data and analysis. Conclusions must be related to the submission and must not be overstated

Accepted video formats are:

  •  Windows Media Video (WMV)
  •  MPEG (MPG, MPEG, MP4)
  •  Audio Video Interleave (AVI)
  •  QuickTime (MOV)

Most codecs supported by these formats are acceptable. After submission, the editors  may need to request the video submitted in a different codec in the event a non-standard codec is used.

  • High-Definition (HD) video is preferred:
    • · The resolution of the video should be at least 512x384 for 4:3 aspect ratio videos, and 512x288 for 16:9 videos. Videos can be larger than these dimensions, but
         not smaller.
    • · Videos must be in NTSC format (the European PAL format is not supported.)
    • · Videos that are only a PowerPoint® slideshow will not be considered.

Preparation of Word File (Abstract) to Accompany Video: 

A Word document must be provided that contains the following:

  • Full video title
  • Exact running time of video
  • All contributing authors
  • All authors’ affiliations and email addresses
  • A structured abstract up to 500 words, organized as follows: Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Conclusions
  • Basic statistical analysis including statistical significance (p values) must be included.
  • Include references, if applicable (Prior abstract presentations should be mentioned as a footnote to the video title). See below for reference style.
  • Patient Consent Statement (see below under LEGAL.)
  • The source of work or study, and if there are any conflicts of interest or obligations resulting from it.
  • Author Disclosure Statement.  This statement should disclose any commercial associations during the last three years that might create a conflict of interest in connection with the video. See “Author Disclosure” under LEGAL.)
  • Authors must state, “Author(s) have received and archived patient consent for video recording/publication in advance of video recording of procedure.” This sentence will appear near the Author Disclosure Statement online, should the video be accepted.

If a single patient video is submitted, the abstract should include data on a series of patients in whom the technique was utilized.

Submission Process

Step 1:

This step has two parts: Upload your video at http://videos.liebertpub.com. You will then receive instructions via email to select three thumbnail images to include in the final submission. You will be guided through this process by three emails in total; the first confirms your successful video upload to the system. The second part asks you select the three thumbnail images (a URL is provided in this email to view the video and select the thumbnails; do NOT select a thumbnail of  a PowerPoint slide.) You will then receive a third and final email with the video review URL that you will include in your submission in Step 2.

Step 2:

After you receive the series of emails, go to http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/videourology to upload the Word file portion of your submission.  If you do not already have an account in Manuscript Central, you will need to create one.  After logging in to the system, you will be prompted for various information about your submission.

All videos related to minimally invasive surgery, and advanced open surgical techniques will be considered. Videos related to surgical anatomy, embryology, physiology, pathology, or radiology of conditions of interest to surgeons are also acceptable.

Technical assistance is available by emailing authorservices@liebertpub.com

 References

Authors are strongly encouraged to provide references with their video, if applicable.   References will help acknowledge the video as a contribution to the literature. In addition, any previous presentation of the video or abstract should be stated as a reference.   Publications citing the video will automatically be linked. References should be presented in the following style:


Journal articles with up to 6 authors:

 J Withington, J Armitage, W Finch, O Wiseman, J Glass, N Burgess. Assessment of stone complexity for PCNL:  a systematic review of the literature, how best can we record stone complexity in PCNL? J Endourol 2016;30:13-23.

 Journal articles with more than 6 authors (show first 3 followed by et al):

 D Glassman, M Yiasemidou, H Ishii, et al. Effect of playing video games on laparoscopic skills performance: a systematic review. J Endourol 2016;30:146-152.

 Books:

 Ellison EC, Zollinger, Jr RM.  Zollinger's Atlas of Surgical Operations, 10e. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Professional; 2016.

 Videos:

 Qin C, Shao P, Ju X, Li J, Meng X, Ly W, Yin C.  Retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy with segmental renal artery clamping. Videourology. 2010;24: DOI: 10.1089/vid.2010.0097.

 Websites:

File T. Computer and internet use in the United States. U.S. Census Bureau. 2013. Available at: www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p20-569.pdf (accessed July 12, 2016).


If it is necessary to cite an abstract, this should be so designated.  Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the references. Abbreviations of journal titles should follow those used in MEDLINE.

Peer Review

Authors are encouraged to suggest names of appropriate reviewers and may also request that a particular individual not serve in that capacity. At least two reviewers will review the abstract and the video as part of the peer-review process. Reviewer selection is ultimately at the discretion of the Editor.  Major revisions may require changes in the video with resubmission.

Videourology uses a single-blind process where the authors’ names are available to the each reviewer, but the reviewers’ names are not revealed to the authors. Peer reviewers are chosen based on their areas of clinical and research interests and their performance with past reviews. Reviewers with any real or perceived conflict of interest with the submission are not considered.

Letters to the Editor

Comments from viewers regarding previously published videos in Videourology will be considered by the Editor. The letter must not exceed 200 words. The authors of the video will be requested to respond.

LEGAL:

Experimentation in Human Subjects, Patient Consent, and Internal Review Board Approvals/Waivers

Papers reporting human experimentation will be reviewed in accordance with the precepts established by the Declaration of Helsinki (2013). https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/

Papers containing studies performed on human subjects must include a statement that the investigations were performed after approval by a local Human Investigations Committee or Institutional Review Board, and after obtaining informed consent from a patient (or other responsible individuals).  If it is deemed necessary during the peer review process, the editors may require that the authors provide the editorial office with copies of such documentation. It is required that the author(s) retain and archive all relevant forms, releases, statements, and consents.

Anonymity of patients, healthy volunteers, and other study participants is paramount and must be protected as required by law. In most cases, a general description of the study participants is sufficient insofar as meaning is not lost.  Nonessential data (age, sex, occupation, etc.) of individual subjects should not be included in a manuscript unless it is clinically or epidemiologically relevant or important to the manuscript.

When reporting research involving human data, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed have been assessed by the responsible review committee (institutional and national), or if no formal ethics committee is available, were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki as revised in 2013. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. Approval by a responsible review committee does not preclude editors from forming their own judgment whether the conduct of the research was appropriate.

A sentence declaring adherence to Institutional Review Board protocols and informed consent should be included in the submission.  If the study is judged exempt from approval from an Institutional Review Board, a statement from the committee is required indicating a waiver has been issued. Informed consent by participants should always be secured. If securing consent is not possible or waived by an institutional review board, a statement and evidence to this effect must be noted by the authors in the submission. The information on ethics committee review and approval, and securing of informed consent from the study participants should also be outlined in the cover letter accompanying the submission.

The participant confidentiality and consent requirements contained herein are applicable to any text, photograph, image, video, or any other media submitted to Videourology.

Animal Experimentation

Authors must clearly state in the text that the experiments were carried out in compliance with the relevant local institutionally reviewed animal use regulations and/or national laws relating to the conduct of animal experimentation, or, where such laws do not exist, that the studies were performed in accordance with an internationally recognized code of practice.  Authors should clearly state source(s) and numbers of animals being used in all experiments in their manuscript.

Copyright

Videos previously presented at meetings will be considered as long as the authors have retained ownership of its copyright at the time of submission. Copyrighted background music cannot be used in the video without permission from the copyright owners. All accepted videos will become the property of Videourology. However, after being published in Videourology, the videos may be presented and viewed at scientific meetings, but may not be republished elsewhere.
 

The copyright agreement process between the author and the Publisher is handled via email when the video is accepted for publication. Authors will receive a follow-up email with instructions on how to complete the online Copyright Agreement form.

The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with coauthors to ensure they have completed the online copyright form. Authors not permitted to release copyright must still return the form acknowledging the statement of the reason for not releasing the copyright. 

Permissions for Use of Republished Material

The author is responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce figures, tables, and text from previously published materials, even if it is the author’s own work.  Written permission must be obtained from the original copyright holder (generally the publisher, the author, or editor) of the journal, book, or video concerned.  An appropriate credit line should be included in the figure legend or table footnote, and full publication information should be included in the reference list.  Written permission must be obtained from the author of any unpublished material cited from other institutions and should accompany the submission.

Author Disclosure Statement(s)

When uploading your video submission, you will be asked to disclose any commercial associations that might create a conflict of interest in connection with submitted manuscripts.  This Author Disclosure Statement should include appropriate information for EACH author, thereby representing that competing financial interests of all authors have been appropriately disclosed according to the policy of the Journal.  It is important that all information will remain confidential while the video is being reviewed and will not influence the editorial decision.  

If no conflicts exist, the authors must state “No competing financial interests exist.”

Music

If music is used in your video, please provide the source of the music, and whether or not it is copyrighted material. Copyrighted music cannot be used in the video without permission from the copyright owners.   Written permission from the copyright holder must be supplied by the submitting author at the time of submission.  There are several websites that offer royalty-free music and are listed below.  Note that these are third-party sites and the Publisher does not endorse and/or support any of these sites in any capacity:

Reprints (Copies of Videos)

 After the video is published it may not be published elsewhere without explicit permission from the Publisher. While personal copies of the video can be downloaded and saved for personal use only, any systematic download that would create a new database will not be allowed.

Responding to Allegations of Possible Misconduct

The Publisher is committed to helping protect the integrity of the public scientific record by sharing reasonable concerns with authorities who are in the position to conduct an appropriate investigation into an allegation.  As such, all allegations of misconduct will be referred to the Editor-In-Chief of the Journal who in turn will review the circumstances, possibly in consultation with associate editors and/or members of the editorial board. Initial fact-finding will usually include a request to all the involved parties to state their case and explain the circumstances in writing. In questions of research misconduct centering on methods or technical issues, the Editor-In-Chief may confidentially consult experts who are blinded to the identity of the individuals, or if the allegation is against an editor, an outside expert. The Editor-In-Chief will arrive at a conclusion as to whether there is enough reasonable evidence that the possibility of misconduct occurred.

When allegations concern authors, the peer review and publication process for the manuscript in question will cease while the process described herein is researched. The investigation will be taken to completion even if the authors withdraw their paper.  In the case of allegations against reviewers or editors, they will be replaced in the review process while the matter is investigated.

Editors or reviewers who are found to have engaged in scientific misconduct will be removed from further association with the Journal, and reported to their institution.

If an inquiry concludes there is a reasonable possibility of misconduct, the Editor-in-Chief will retract the paper from the Journal and the scientific record.  If the paper is still under peer review, the Editor-in-Chief will withdraw the paper from consideration to the Journal.

All allegations will be kept confidential.

 Definitions of Scientific Misconduct

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers follows the guidelines and rules regarding scientific misconduct put forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the Office of Research Integrity (ORI).

Scientific misconduct and violation of publishing ethics vary and can be intentionally or unintentionally perpetrated. Some examples of misconduct and violations include, but are not limited to, the following:

  • · Scientific Misconduct: Fabrication, falsification, concealment, deceptive reporting, or misrepresentation of any data constitutes misconduct and/or fraud.
  •   Authorship Disputes: Deliberate misrepresentation of a scientist’s contribution to the published work, or purposefully omitting the contributions of a scientist.
  • · Misappropriation of the ideas of others: Improper use of scholarly exchange and activity may constitute fraud. Wholesale appropriation of such material constitutes
      misconduct.
  • · Violation of generally accepted research practices: Serious deviation from accepted practices in proposing or carrying out research, improper manipulation of experiments
      to obtain biased results, deceptive statistical or analytical manipulations, or improper reporting of results constitutes misconduct and/or fraud.
  • · Material failure to comply with legislative and regulatory requirements affecting research: 
      Including but not limited to serious or substantial, repeated, willful violations of applicable local regulations and law involving the use of funds, care of animals, human subjects,
      investigational drugs, recombinant products, new devices, or radioactive, biologic, or chemical materials constitutes misconduct.
  • · Conflict of Interest:  Nondisclosure of any conflicts, direct or indirect, to the Journal which prevents you from being unbiased constitutes misconduct.
  • · Deliberate misrepresentation: of qualifications, experience, or research accomplishments to advance the research program, to obtain external funding, or for other
      professional advancement constitutes misconduct and/or fraud.
  • · Plagiarism: Purposely claiming another’s work or idea as your own constitutes misconduct and/or fraud.
  • · Simultaneous Submission:  Submitting a paper to more than one publication at the same time constitutes misconduct.

 


The views, opinions, findings, conclusions and recommendations set forth in any Journal article are solely those of the authors of those articles and do not necessarily reflect the views, policy or position of the Journal, its Publisher, its editorial staff or any affiliated Societies and should not be attributed to any of them.