Roentgen Ray Review (R3) Author Guidelines
General Information
R3 publishes high-quality, clinically oriented articles across all radiology subspecialties. The journal publishes a variety of educationally focused article types, described in detail below, that cover a spectrum of interpretive and noninterpretive topics. Submissions should be relevant to radiologists’ clinical practice. Only solicited articles are currently being considered for publication. Submission of unsolicited manuscripts will be opened at a later date. If you are interested in submitting to R3, please check this page often for updates.
Submitted manuscripts will first be assessed by the Editor in Chief and/or editorial board members. Manuscripts will be evaluated with respect to novelty, impact, clinical relevance, and educational value. The Editor in Chief and/or editorial board may render a final decision based on initial evaluation of the submission or choose to send the manuscript for external peer review using a double-blind review process. Once external reviewers agree to provide a review, they will be granted a 10-day window to complete their review to facilitate a rapid decision. A comprehensive technical check to ensure compliance with journal guidelines will be performed if a revision is requested. The Editor in Chief will issue all final acceptance decisions.
Accepted articles will be published online at https://www.r3journal.org following copyediting, typesetting, page layout, and proof review. Select content will be made freely accessible immediately at publication. All journal content is freely accessible 1 year after publication of the version of record.
Article Types
Case-Based Review (CME)
Between 4 and 6 unknown cases with a common theme to challenge the reader and expand their knowledge in a particular area. Cases should be common enough to be seen in clinical practice but challenging to a typical practicing radiologist. The following structure should be followed: Abstract. Cases numbered in order, each with a brief relevant history and image(s) without annotations clearly showing the finding(s) of interest. Each case should include one or two questions for the reader (e.g. what is the most likely diagnosis?) All of the unknown cases should be shown prior to the answers section. Answers numbered in order (e.g. Case 1, Case 2, etc.) showing the same images with the answer, annotated figure(s) with legend(s), and a brief explanation of each case. Summary of key teaching points should be included at the end of the manuscript. The summary can include a table summarizing the distinguishing characteristics of the entities presented or other key points.
Abstract: Up to 200 words, unstructured.
Maximums: 6 Authors; 1500 words; 25 references; 6 cases with a total of 40 figure parts including answers; 0 videos; 1 table.
Clinical Practice Challenge (CME)
Presents readers with a clinical scenario and a multiple choice management question (MCQ), followed by an expert analysis. The following sections should be included: Clinical Scenario, Next Steps (MCQ with four options), Analysis. The clinical scenario can include images, physical examination findings, laboratory data, and key patient history. The clinical scenario should avoid noncontributory or misleading information. The MCQ asks the reader a “what would you do next?” type question. The analysis should reveal what the author believes is the appropriate management decision based on existing evidence, including the best answer to the MCQ, and include an explanation of why the alternative options are incorrect.
Abstract: Up to 150 words, unstructured. The abstract should not disclose the answers to the MCQ.
Highlights: 3–5 bulleted teaching points.
Maximums: 6 Authors; 1500 words; 10 references; 8 figure parts; 1 video; 1 table.
Pictorial Essay (CME)
Image-rich treatment of a focused and timely topic. Discussion and recommendations are evidence based, but no new information is included. The value of the manuscript turns on the quality of the illustrations as well as the timeliness and utility of the message. The following sections should be included: an Introduction that provides clinically relevant background information and defines the scope and relevance of the article, subsequent headings that are logically organized (e.g., by disease entity, imaging modality, pathophysiology), and a brief Summary that reiterates key points from the article. The text should be concise and should complement the images and figure legends, which are the primary focus of the article. Lengthy or detailed discussions of background information (e.g., embryology) or cutting-edge technology should be avoided. Readers should be able to immediately integrate the information learned into their clinical practice.
Abstract: Up to 200 words, unstructured.
Highlights: 3–5 bulleted teaching points discussed in the article.
Maximums: 6 Authors; 1500 words; 25 references; 40 figure parts; 2 videos; 0 tables.
Categorical Course Highlight (CME)
By invitation only. Same format as a Pictorial Essay but features a categorical course from the ARRS Annual Meeting.
Abstract: Up to 200 words, unstructured.
Highlights: 3–5 bulleted teaching points discussed in the article.
Maximums: 6 Authors; 1500 words; 25 references; 40 figure parts; 1 video; 0 tables.
Case Report
Brief discussion of a single case of an entity that is uncommonly encountered, has unique imaging features, or is evaluated through novel use of imaging. The following sections should be included: Introduction- a short paragraph giving general background and specific interest of the case. Case- Emphasis should be on the radiologic aspects; clinical information must be limited to providing a background for the radiology. Discussion- succinct and focused on the specific message and relevance of radiologic methods. Directly relevant literature may be briefly reviewed.
Abstract: Up to 150 words, unstructured.
Highlights: None.
Maximums: 4 Authors; 1250 words; 8 references; 2 figures (6 figure parts); 1 video; 0 tables.
Case Series
Collection of cases of a single novel or uncommon clinical entity or imaging sign with limited treatment in existing literature. Emphasis is on imaging features that aid diagnosis. Unlike a Pictorial Essay, a Case Series should contribute new information to existing knowledge. The following sections should be included: Introduction, Cases, and Discussion.
Abstract: Up to 200 words, unstructured.
Highlights: 3 bulleted key points reflecting the article’s key message(s).
Maximums: 6 Authors; 2500 words; 30 references; 20 figure parts; 2 tables.
What’s New?
Concise review of a new technology, clinical or educational resource, software, or practice guideline. The author(s) must have personal experience with the subject matter. This differs from the R3 Explains article type in that the focus is on the performance of the subject matter with only cursory technical details. The following sections should be included: Introduction- A brief description of the subject and its importance. Explain any gaps the new technology or resource fills. Highly technical details should be avoided; include only what a typical clinical radiologist needs to know. Advantages- What is helpful about the new technology or resource? Is it easy to learn and use? Is it accessible and cost-effective? Is it likely to improve outcomes? Limitations- Disadvantages of the new technology or resource (e.g., cost, accessibility). Summary- Overall assessment including whether the new technology or resource fills a gap and is ready for immediate implementation. Is it a must-have or a nice-to-have?
Abstract: Up to 150 words, unstructured.
Highlights: 3 bulleted key points reflecting the article’s key message(s).
Maximums: 4 Authors; 1000 words; 10 references; 5 figure parts; 1 table.
WTF (What’s That Finding)?
Concise/focused review of a single diagnostic imaging sign, finding, or device likely to be of interest to a typical practicing radiologist. Preference will be given to new or novel findings, signs, or devices. A classic sign demonstrated with a new modality might also be considered. The following sections should be included: Introduction– a brief paragraph describing the sign, finding, or device and its importance. Case (or Cases)- brief description of a clinical case or cases that feature the sign, finding, or device with accompanying images. Discussion– any additional information the reader might need to know about the finding or device.
Abstract: Up to 150 words, unstructured.
Highlights: None.
Maximums: 4 Authors; 1000 words; 5 references; 2 figures (8 figure parts); 1 video; 1 table.
R3 Explains
Concise explanation of a new technology or concept relevant to the R3 audience. Highly technical explanations and complex mathematical equations should be avoided. The focus should be on what a typical practicing radiologist needs to know about the subject matter to apply it clinically in a typical practice setting. Explanations should be nonproprietary/vendor-neutral to the extent possible. This differs from the What’s New article type in that the focus is on explaining the technology or concept rather than reviewing advantages and limitations.
Abstract: Up to 150 words, unstructured.
Highlights: None.
Maximums: 4 Authors; 1000 words; 10 references; 5 figure parts; 1 video; 1 table.
Don’t Miss This
Concise description and example of a single commonly or easily missed imaging finding. The following sections should be included: Introduction– a brief paragraph describing the finding and its importance. Case– brief description of a clinical case that features the finding with accompanying images. Discussion– succinct and focused on the specific message and relevance
of finding discussed.
Abstract: Up to 150 words, unstructured.
Highlights: None.
Maximums: 4 Authors; 1000 words; 5 references; 2 figures (8 figure parts); 1 video; 0 tables.
Practice Solutions
Description of the authors’ experience with a specific practice challenge and how it was addressed. Solutions might address challenges in the realms of leadership, clinical operations, peer learning, education, legislative mandates, wellness, and business, for example. The following sections should be included: The Challenge- A concise statement of the challenge and its significance to clinical practice or other aspects of the field of radiology. Our Solution- An explanation of how the author(s) addressed the challenge described. The Outcome- How did performance or other metric(s) improve after implementation of the solution? Preference will be given to articles that are narrowly focused, address pervasive challenges, offer solutions that can be widely and easily implemented, and show clear improvement in appropriate metrics after application of the solution.
Abstract: Up to 200 words, unstructured, briefly explaining the challenge, the solution, and the outcome.
Highlights: 3-5 bulleted key points reflecting the article’s key message(s).
Maximums: 6 Authors; 3000 words; 10 references; 8 figure parts; 0 videos; 1 table.
Letter to the Editor/Reply
Cordial constructive criticism of articles published in R3 within the previous 2 months. Letters will rarely be considered if submitted later than 2 months after the article’s publication. Only data documented in published material should be included in a Letter. Letters should not duplicate published material or be under consideration for publication elsewhere.
Maximums: 3 Authors for a Letter to the Editor, any or all of the authors of the original article for a Reply; 400 words; 4 references (in addition to references to the article being discussed and the Letter, if a Reply); 2 figures (4 figure parts); 0 tables.
General Guidelines for All Submissions
For initial submission, the manuscript should be blinded so as to not reveal authors’ identity. Authors’ names, initials, and affiliations should not appear anywhere in the manuscript text or images. References should not be redacted as this may indirectly identify the authors and thereby unblind the work. References to the authors’ earlier work should be provided in the third person (e.g., “as shown by an earlier investigation”) and maintain the full citation rather than being described in the first person (e.g., “as shown in an earlier study by our group”) with a redacted citation.
Authors will be asked in Editorial Manager if any publications, including manuscripts accepted or under review, might be regarded as very similar to the submission or may have overlap in patient cohort with the submission. In the event of prior similar work or an overlapping patient cohort, the authors will be asked to explain the nature of the overlap.
All submissions are processed automatically through Similarity Check. Authors will need to appropriately address any duplicative content before acceptance.
Authors will be asked in Editorial Manager to provide a copy of any prior abstract or presentation on which the submission is based.
Preprints
Material that has been posted on a preprint server (e.g., medRxiv) can be submitted to R3. If the work has been posted as a preprint, authors must provide the preprint DOI link at submission. If the manuscript is accepted, the preprint posting must be updated to include the DOI and URL link for the published R3 article. Authors may not post the published article or any interim versions produced during the peer review process on the preprint server.
Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Authors must disclose the use of large language models or other generative AI technologies in the manuscript’s preparation, including specific details regarding the relevant manuscript content, the particular technology applied (including name, version number, and manufacturer), and the manner in which the technology was used to create the content. Authors are responsible for any submitted materials created by generative AI technologies, including ensuring the accuracy of such material, the absence of plagiarism, and the appropriate attribution of sources.
Copyright and Permissions
The online submission system provides an option for uploading permission documents. Guidance regarding needed documentation will be provided during the revision process. All copyright- and permission-related issues must be resolved before acceptance.
Material that is reproduced exactly from published material requires the copyright holder’s permission to reproduce the material in electronic media. Examples include figures, tables, abstracts of prior presentations, appendixes, and quoted material of more than 50 words in total from a single source. Material that is not reproduced exactly but that is substantially similar to published material requires the copyright holder’s permission to adapt or modify in electronic media. For reprinted or adapted materials, the originally published version should be provided in addition to the permission documentation.
For material created by a nonauthor that has not been published, including artwork and photographs, documentation is required from the nonauthor that identifies the material, states that the nonauthor holds its copyright, and states that ARRS has permission to publish the material in electronic media. If the nonauthor is not the copyright holder, documentation from the copyright holder is required.
For material created by an author that has not been published, including artwork and photographs, copyright will be transferred to the ARRS as part of the submission process, and separate permission documentation is not needed. However, attestation is required identifying the author as the creator of the material and stating that the material is original to the manuscript (i.e., has not been previously published, and no other person or entity can claim copyright to the material).
Written or oral communications from nonauthors require written permission from the source of the communication.
Names or other identifying information should not appear anywhere in any image or video. If any person is identifiable in an image or video, written consent from the person or their legal representative must be supplied before acceptance. No brands, product logos, or institutional logos should appear in any image or video. Artists’ names included in images should be obscured during the peer review process.
Authorship
All authors must fulfill all criteria for authorship as described by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Guidelines for Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors. The corresponding author must attest to fulfilling the criteria during the initial submission process. If revision is requested, all coauthors must attest to fulfilling these criteria and agree to the Copyright Transfer and Author Certification Agreement.
All authors must approve the submitted manuscript and are accountable for its contents.
To add, remove, or change the order of authors after execution of the Copyright Transfer and Author Certification Agreement, the corresponding author must provide an explanation for the reason for the change; all coauthors will receive an email from the journal office to confirm their consent to the change. Adding or removing coauthors, or changing the order of authors, is not allowed after acceptance.
Manuscript Organization
All submissions must include a Title Page separate from the manuscript file that will not be included in the PDF that goes to the reviewers
Manuscripts should be organized as described in the Article Types table. All manuscript components (including highlights and abstract, when required) should be submitted as a single MS Word document. Pages must be numbered consecutively beginning with the abstract. Do not use line numbering.
Initial Submissions
For initial submissions, providing the complete author list in the Title Page file is sufficient. Only the corresponding author’s information needs to be entered into the author list in the online submission system.
Tables and figures may be incorporated into the text or placed at the end of the manuscript file. Figures must be embedded in the MS Word document. Figure legends should be directly above or below the corresponding image.
Revisions
Revisions must be submitted through the online peer review system and include the following files:
- A point-by-point detailed response to the editors’ and/or reviewers’ comments, submitted as an MS Word document. Responses should be preceded by the reviewer and comment number (e.g., “Rev 2, Comment 4”) and the text of the reviewer comment.
- An annotated copy of the revised manuscript with changes tracked or highlighted. Changes should be identified by the reviewer number and comment number in the margins or in the text to make it clear to the editors and/or reviewers which comment the change is addressing.
- A clean, unannotated version of the revised manuscript, with references, tables, figures, and figure legends formatted as described below.
- A Full Title Page formatted as described below.
All coauthor information needs to be entered in the online submission system when submitting a revision.
Unless approved by the EIC, revisions not adhering to applicable limits for the applicable article type will be returned to the authors to be corrected. Revisions are expected to adhere to such limits after incorporating any content requested by reviewers or editors.
Full Title Page
A separate MS Word document that contains:
- Title of article
- Article type
- Names, academic degrees, email addresses, telephone numbers, complete institutional addresses (including zip code), and X/Twitter handles (if available) of all authors and coauthors with one corresponding author clearly identified. Co-corresponding authors are not allowed. The Full Title Page is the primary source used when determining the final author order at manuscript acceptance.
- Present affiliations of authors who have moved since the study was completed
- Funding sources (from grants and other sources)
- Author disclosures, listed individually. If there are no disclosures, that fact must be explicitly stated.
References
All references are cited in the text and are numbered consecutively in the order in which they appear in the text. Reference numbers are enclosed in brackets and are typed on line with the text (i.e., not superscripted).
Authors are responsible for the accuracy of cited references. Cited materials must be retrievable (i.e., published online or in print) as of the date of publication in R3. Do not cite manuscripts in preparation, under review or revision, or accepted but not yet published in some form.
Style and punctuation of references follow the formats illustrated in the following examples. For materials with six or fewer authors, list all author names; for seven or more authors, list the first three, followed by et al. Inclusive page numbers (e.g., 333–335) are given for all paginated references. Journal names are abbreviated according to Index Medicus.
Journal article
1. Long RS, Roe EW, Wu EU, et al. Membrane oxygenation: radiographic appearance. AJR 1986; 146:1257–1260
Book
2. Smith LW, Cohen AR. Pathology of tumors, 6th ed. Williams & Wilkins, 1977:100–109
Chapter in a book
3. Breon AJ. Serum monitors of bone metastasis. In: Clark SA, ed. Bone metastases. Williams & Wilkins, 1983:165–180
Website/Internet source
4. Smith AB, Jones CD, Johnson EF, Roberts GH, Washington IJ. Principles of scientific writing. Scientific Writing website. www.sciwri.org. Published Jan 10, 2022. Accessed Apr 12, 2024
Personal communications are cited parenthetically in the text rather than in the reference list, for example: (Smith DJ, written communication, 2023). Papers presented at a meeting are also cited parenthetically in the text rather than in the reference list, for example: (Smith AB, et al., presented at the 2003 annual meeting of the American Roentgen Ray Society). After first mention, use (Smith AB, et al., 2003 ARRS meeting)
Tables
Tables should be included at the end of the manuscript MS Word file, following the References, and be in an editable format. Embedded images of tables, tables in MS Excel format, and links to tables in other applications, are not allowed. Figures should NOT be embedded in table cells as these will not display correctly in the laid-out article.
Each table has a short, descriptive title, and each column has a heading. Tables do not exceed two pages in length and must contain at least two columns and at least two rows (in addition to the header rows). Tables are numbered in the order in which they are cited in the text. Each table has a discrete number; multipart tables (e.g., Table 1A, Table 1B) are not allowed. Abbreviations are defined in an explanatory note below each table.
Figures
All figure parts relating to one patient should have the same figure number. Each image is considered a single part when counting total number of figure parts.
Files containing figure parts should be named using the following naming convention: Figure_01a.tif, Figure_01b.tif, Figure_02a.tif, etc.
All figure parts must be uploaded as individual TIFF or PNG files (even if there are no changes or revisions to the figures). Other formats (e.g., JPEG, GIF, PowerPoint) or resolutions lower than stated in the technical specifications below will not be usable.
- Images should be no more than 5 inches in height or width.
- Black & white images: Grayscale mode, 300 DPI resolution, no layered files, no alpha channels, no color profiles assigned
- Color images: 300 DPI resolution, no layered files, no alpha channels, color profile if used: CMYK (no Indexed color, Lab, or RGB profiles)
- Line art: 1200 DPI resolution, Grayscale or Bitmap mode, no layered files, no alpha channels, color profile if used: CMYK (no Indexed color, Lab, or RGB profiles)
Figure Legends
Legends should be prepared using the following style: Fig. 1—47-year-old patient with rheumatoid arthritis. For images depicting a person, supply age, medical condition or diagnosis, and sex, if relevant.
Electronic manipulation of images that materially alters the medical information must be identified and the nature of the alterations described in the corresponding figure legend.
Videos
Accepted video file formats include .AVI, .MP4, and .WMV. Videos cannot exceed 500 MB in size or 5 minutes in length.