Authors

• At what stage in the research process were patients/the public first involved in the research and how?
• How were patients/the public involved in the design of this study?

• How were they involved in the recruitment to and conduct of the study?
• Were they asked to assess the burden of the intervention and time required to participate in the research?
• How were (or will) they be involved in your plans to disseminate the study results to participants and relevant wider patient communities (e.g. by choosing what information/results to share, when, and in what format)?

• Tips for publishing clinical cardiology research: paper and podcast
• Presenting tables, graphs and statistics: videos and an article series: Designing effective tables Designing effective graphs Comparing categorical and continuous variables Survival analysis Data visualisation for meta-analysis Clinical prediction rules
• Ethical approval for studies involving human participants and animals

• How to review a paper for Heart (editorial)
• How to review a paper for Heart (powerpoint slides)

• Background - include the specific study aims or hypothesis
• Methods – include study design, setting, patients, interventions and main outcome measures.
• Results - give numerical data rather than vague statements that drug x produced a better response than drug y. Favour confidence intervals over p values, and give the numerical data on which any p value is based. Include absolute as well as relative risk numerical data.
• Conclusions - do not make any claims that are not supported by data in the paper.

• Randomised controlled trials (RCTs): CONSORT guidelines
• Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: PRISMA guidelines and MOOSE guidelines
• Observational studies: STROBE guidelines and MOOSE guidelines
• Diagnostic accuracy studies: STARD guidelines
• Quality improvement studies: SQUIRE guidelines
• Multivariate prediction models: TRIPOD guidelines

• What is already known on this topic – summarise the state of scientific knowledge on this subject before you did your study and why this study needed to be done
• What this study adds – summarise what we now know as a result of this study that we did not know before
• How this study might affect research, practice or policy – summarise the implications of this study in context of all available evidence

• • • Describe statistical methods with enough detail to enable the reader to judge its appropriateness for the study and to verify the reported results.
    • When possible, quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty (such as confidence intervals). Avoid relying solely on statistical hypothesis testing, such as P values.
    • Distinguish prespecified from exploratory analyses, including subgroup analyses.

• • • Use tables to summarise data when possible, rather than text.
    • Ensure that the data are easy to read and understand, and kept in context.
    • Use categories and sub-categories effectively to highlight patterns in the data.
    • Keep table titles, labels and footnotes brief.
    • Tables may be no longer than 2 pages in length.

• • • Use graphical displays of quantitative data if this is the best way to present the information.
    • Ensure that the message is easy to visualise and understand, and kept in context.
    • Avoid graphical forms that distort the data or are prone to misinterpretation.
    • Choose your graph type carefully for best visual clarity, and avoid chart ‘art’.
    • Ensure data symbols and lines can be easily distinguished i.e. more prominent than axis lines, use solid greyscale or colour lines rather than pixellated/dashed lines.
    • Avoid bar or column graphs; instead use boxplots or other graphical displays to show the data distribution, as well as mean values. Use solid greyscale or colour fills rather than patterned fills.
    • Avoid non-essential grids, background shading, or explanatory text inside the graph. Avoid legends in the graph itself; instead put labels next to the data line or include this information in the text figure legend.
    • Keep axis titles and labels brief. Use clear labels for units of measure on each axis.
    • Aim to fill the frame to avoid large areas of white space.
    • On life-table graphs, include the number of subjects at risk in each group at several time points along the x-axis.

Short opinion piece by experts on topics relating to cardiovascular research, clinical medicine, public health or policy. There should be no more than 3 authors and supplementary material should not be included.

• The journal editor, an editorial board member or a learned society may wish to organise a meeting, sponsorship may be sought and the proceedings published as a supplement.
• The journal editor, editorial board member or learned society may wish to commission a supplement on a particular theme or topic. Again, sponsorship may be sought.
• The BMJPG itself may have proposals for supplements where sponsorship may be necessary.
• A sponsoring organisation, often a pharmaceutical company or a charitable foundation, that wishes to arrange a meeting, the proceedings of which will be published as a supplement.

• Journal in which you would like the supplement published
• Title of supplement and/or meeting on which it is based
• Date of meeting on which it is based
• Proposed table of contents with provisional article titles and proposed authors
• An indication of whether authors have agreed to participate
• Sponsor information including any relevant deadlines
• An indication of the expected length of each paper Guest Editor proposals if appropriate