Best websites to get an obesity powerpoint presentation single spaced writing from scratch american
- How to write a bibliography examples in mla style a research nbsp
- Buy custom obesity powerpoint presentation online senior 95 pages / 26125 words single spaced 48 hours
- Best website to get college writing help powerpoint presentation obesity academic two hours writing from scratch 29 pages / 7975 words
- Toolkit texas department of state health services
- Best websites to buy college powerpoint presentation obesity cheap british academic double spaced premium
- How to write a obesity powerpoint presentation originality 67 pages / 18425 words double spaced undergrad. (yrs 1-2) 20 days
- Where to get a custom obesity powerpoint presentation business us letter size british ama
How to write a bibliography examples in mla style a research nbsp
Obesity Research & Clinical Practice publishes articles and letters on basic, clinical and public health aspects of obesity and related disorders.Criteria for initial considerations for papers submitted will be originality, statistical provability of all data, and applicability to the aims of the Journal as a whole.
Additional weight will be afforded to those submissions that are concise and comprehensible .Additional weight will be afforded to those submissions that are concise and comprehensible.
All potentially acceptable manuscripts will be subjected to the process of peer review.To aid with the peer review process, please include names, addresses, (email), phone and fax numbers for all individuals suggested to review the manuscript.Journal Principles All manuscripts submitted to Obesity Research & Clinical Practice should report original research not previously published or being considered for publication elsewhere, make explicit any conflict of interest, identify sources of funding and generally be of a high ethical standard.Submission of a manuscript to this journal gives the publisher the right to publish that paper if it is accepted.
Manuscripts may be edited to improve clarity and expression macro economics presentation 10 days 15 pages / 4125 words American.Manuscripts may be edited to improve clarity and expression.Submission of a paper to Obesity Research & Clinical Practice is understood to imply that it has not previously been published and that it is not being considered for publication elsewhere.Submission checklist You can use this list to carry out a final check of your submission before you send it to the journal for review.Please check the relevant section in this Guide for Authors for more details.
Ensure that the following items are present: One author has been designated as the corresponding author with contact details: • E-mail address • All references mentioned in the Reference List are cited in the text, and vice versa • Permission has been obtained for use of copyrighted material from other sources (including the Internet) • A competing interests statement is provided, even if the authors have no competing interests to declare • Journal policies detailed in this guide have been reviewed • Referee suggestions and contact details provided, based on journal requirements For further information, visit our Support Center.
Avoiding Pejorative Language and Images Obesity Research and Clinical Practice's policy is that journal content must not use potentially pejorative adjectives or adverbs when describing individuals with overweight or obesity, as well as language that directly or indirectly attributes moral judgments or character flaws to this population.Importantly, authors should not use "obese" as an adjective or noun to describe an individual person or group of people, but instead use terms such as "people with obesity" and "populations with obesity." This also includes language and images that could be interpreted as stereotyping, biased, or prejudiced.Ethics in publishing Ethical Standards All submissions to the Obesity Research & Clinical Practice must contain experiments that conform to the ethical standards listed below: The authors declare that all experiments on human subjects were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, , and that all procedures were carried out with the adequate understanding and written consent of the subjects.The authors also certify that formal approval to conduct the experiments described has been obtained from the human subjects review board of their institution and could be provided upon request.
If the studies deal with animal experiments, the authors certify that they were carried out in accordance with the National Institute of Health Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (NIH Publications No.80-23) revised 1996 or the UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and associated guidelines, or the European Communities Council Directive of 24 November 1986 (86/609/EEC).The authors also certify that formal approval to conduct the experiments described has been obtained from the animal subjects review board of their institution and could be provided upon request.The authors further attest that all efforts were made to minimize the number of animals used and their suffering.If the ethical standard governing the reported research is different from those guidelines indicated above, the authors must provide information in the submission cover letter about which guidelines and oversight procedures were followed.
The Editors reserve the right to return manuscripts in which there is any question as to the appropriate and ethical use of human or animal subjects.Authors are encouraged to consult the EQUATOR Network website for updated and new reporting guidelines (see /) Observational cohort, case control and cross sectional studies - STROBE - Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology /reporting-guidelines/strobe/ Quasi-experimental/non-randomised evaluations - TREND - Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomized Designs /reporting-guidelines/trend/ Randomised (and quasi-randomised) controlled trial - CONSORT - Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials /reporting-guidelines/consort/ Study of Diagnostic accuracy/assessment scale - STARD - Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies /reporting-guidelines/stard/ Systematic Review of Controlled Trials - PRISMA - Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses /reporting-guidelines/prisma/ Systematic Review of Observational Studies - MOOSE - Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology /reporting-guidelines/moose/ Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments - ARRIVE - Reporting any area of bioscience research using laboratory animals /reporting-guidelines/improving-bioscience-research-reporting-the-arrive-guidelines-for-reporting-animal-research/ To confirm your agreement with this, you are required to include the following statement in your Cover Letter indicating your agreement with these standards: "I have read and have abided by the statement of ethical standards for manuscripts submitted to the Obesity Research & Clinical Practice".Identification of patients in descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees: A signed statement of informed consent to publish (in print and online) patient descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees should be obtained from all persons (parents or legal guardians for minors) who can be identified (including by the patients themselves) in such written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees, and should be Instructions to Authors submitted with the manuscript.Such persons should be shown the manuscript before its submission.Omitting data or making data less specific to deidentify patients is acceptable, but changing any such data is not acceptable.
Human and animal rights If the work involves the use of human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments involving humans; Uniform Requirements for manuscripts submitted to Biomedical journals.Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects.The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.All animal experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelines and should be carried out in accordance with the U.Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, 1986 and associated guidelines, EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments, or the National Institutes of Health guide for the care and use of Laboratory animals (NIH Publications No.8023, revised 1978) and the authors should clearly indicate in the manuscript that such guidelines have been followed.Declaration of interest All authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work.Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding.Authors must disclose any interests in two places: 1.
A summary declaration of interest statement in the title page file (if double-blind) or the manuscript file (if single-blind).If there are no interests to declare then please state this: 'Declarations of interest: none'.This summary statement will be ultimately published if the article is accepted.Detailed disclosures as part of a separate Declaration of Interest form, which forms part of the journal's official records.
It is important for potential interests to be declared in both places and that the information matches.Submission declaration and verification Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis or as an electronic preprint, see 'Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication' section of our ethics policy for more information), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent of the copyright-holder.To verify originality, your article may be checked by the originality detection service CrossCheck.Contributors Each author is required to declare his or her individual contribution to the article: all authors must have materially participated in the research and/or article preparation, so roles for all authors should be described.
The statement that all authors have approved the final article should be true and included in the disclosure.Changes to authorship Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission.Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made only before the manuscript has been accepted and only if approved by the journal Editor.To request such a change, the Editor must receive the following from the corresponding author: (a) the reason for the change in author list and (b) written confirmation (e-mail, letter) from all authors that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement.In the case of addition or removal of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being added or removed.
Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editor consider the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been accepted.While the Editor considers the request, publication of the manuscript will be suspended.If the manuscript has already been published in an online issue, any requests approved by the Editor will result in a corrigendum.Clinical Trials All randomised controlled trials submitted to Obesity Research & Clinical Practice whose primary purpose is to affect clinical practice (phase 3 trials) must be registered in accordance with the principles outlined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE, /).Please include the unique trial number and registry name on manuscript submission.Elsevier supports responsible sharing Role of the funding source You are requested to identify who provided financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article and to briefly describe the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication.If the funding source(s) had no such involvement then this should be stated.Funding body agreements and policies Elsevier has established a number of agreements with funding bodies which allow authors to comply with their funder's open access policies.
Some funding bodies will reimburse the author for the Open Access Publication Fee.
Details of existing agreements are available online.Green open access Authors can share their research in a variety of different ways and Elsevier has a number of green open access options available.
Buy custom obesity powerpoint presentation online senior 95 pages / 26125 words single spaced 48 hours
We recommend authors see our green open access page for further information.Authors can also self-archive their manuscripts immediately and enable public access from their institution's repository after an embargo period.This is the version that has been accepted for publication and which typically includes author-incorporated changes suggested during submission, peer review and in editor-author communications revision is presented to the Indian American c. AAPI. The reader will find that this edition ha chapters include “Do Indian Spices. Therapeutics” & “Renal Diet.” It is our small effo hyperlipidemia, and obesity and manage them if p. With best wishes,. T.G.Patel, MD, MACP. Advisor, Public Health Committee, AAPI v. Preface..
This is the version that has been accepted for publication and which typically includes author-incorporated changes suggested during submission, peer review and in editor-author communications.
Embargo period: For subscription articles, an appropriate amount of time is needed for journals to deliver value to subscribing customers before an article becomes freely available to the public.This is the embargo period and it begins from the date the article is formally published online in its final and fully citable form 18 Jul 2013 - Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests . Thus, it is both Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may .This is the embargo period and it begins from the date the article is formally published online in its final and fully citable form.This journal has an embargo period of 24 months.Elsevier Publishing Campus The Elsevier Publishing Campus ( ) is an online platform offering free lectures, interactive training and professional advice to support you in publishing your research.
The College of Skills training offers modules on how to prepare, write and structure your article and explains how editors will look at your paper when it is submitted for publication.Use these resources, and more, to ensure that your submission will be the best that you can make it.Language (usage and editing services) Please write your text in good English (American or British usage is accepted, but not a mixture of these).Authors who feel their English language manuscript may require editing to eliminate possible grammatical or spelling errors and to conform to correct scientific English may wish to use the English Language Editing service available from Elsevier's WebShop.Patients and Study Participants Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent which should be documented in your paper.
Therefore identifying information, including patient's photographs, pedigree, images, names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be included in the submissions unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and written informed consent has been obtained for publication in print and electronic form from the patient (or parent, guardian or next of kin ).If such consent is made subject to any conditions, Elsevier must be made aware of all such conditions.Written consents must be provided to the journal on request.Even where consent has been given, identifying details should be omitted if they are not essential.
Complete anonymity is difficult to achieve.For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity.If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic pedigrees, authors should provide assurance that alterations do not distort scientific meaning and editors should so note.Submission Our online submission system guides you stepwise through the process of entering your article details and uploading your files.The system converts your article files to a single PDF file used in the peer-review process.
, Word, LaTeX) are required to typeset your article for final publication.All correspondence, including notification of the Editor's decision and requests for revision, is sent by e-mail.Submit your article Article Types Submitted papers taking heed of the following points will be considered for peer review Novelty - significant new knowledge that resolves a controversy, shifts a paradigm or impacts on clinical care.
Scientific rigour - including following the relevant guidelines: Consort, Strobe, Save etc.People first language Ethical standards need to be met, with funding source and conflicts adequately declared Pilot studies, considered worthy of publication after desk review, will be returned to Authors with a request to resubmit as a Research Letter before being sent for further review.Research Letters will undergo a rapid review and publication time.To increase the usefulness of Obesity Research & Clinical Practice to the readership, submissions in the following categories will be deemed appropriate for consideration by the Editors and Editorial Board: Original Research Articles: Maximum of 3500 words applied to manuscript text only.Maximum of 5 tables/figures and 35 references.
Divide the manuscript into the following sections: Title Page; Structured Abstract; Introduction; Subjects, Materials and Methods; Results; Discussion; Acknowledgements; References; figures and tables with legends.Editorials: Comments by organizations or individuals on topics of current interest will be by invitation only.Review articles: Critical presentations of topics of interest to those active in the prevention and treatment of obesity and its associated conditions, will generally be invited but unsolicited reviews will be considered for publication if topical, of high quality and subject to peer review.Short Communication: Report results of original fundamental research in any branch in the field of obesity.Papers describing new methods or significant developments of recognised methods which provide significant insight into origin of obesity and obesity related-diseases, nervous system, the pathophysiology of an obesity related-disease, or obesity treatment may also be submitted.
Articles should be written in sufficient detail to allow others to verify the above methods.Maximum of 1200 - 1500 words, 3 figures/tables and 20 references.Case Reports: Limited to the presentation and discussion of cases that help advance our understanding of the pathophysiology or management of obesity and related syndromes.Maximum of 1200 - 1500 words, 3 figures/tables and 20 references.Research Letters: Should not exceed 800 words, with a maximum of two figures and two tables.
Letters to the Editor: Responses to previous articles and editorials.Maximum of 350 words, one table or figure, 5 References.Announcements: Announcements to pertinent forthcoming meetings or events.
Meta-analysis: Maximum length 3500 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, references) with no more than a total of 4 tables and/or figures and no more than 70 references.
Systematic Review: Maximum of 4500 words and 100 references.Up to 5 illustrations (graphs, tables, or infographics permitted) Peer review This journal operates a double blind review process.All contributions will be initially assessed by the editor for suitability for the journal.Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the paper.The Editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of articles.
More information on types of peer review.Use of word processing software It is important that the file be saved in the native format of the word processor used.The text should be in single-column format.Keep the layout of the text as simple as possible.
Most formatting codes will be removed and replaced on processing the article.In particular, do not use the word processor's options to justify text or to hyphenate words.However, do use bold face, italics, subscripts, superscripts etc.When preparing tables, if you are using a table grid, use only one grid for each individual table and not a grid for each row.If no grid is used, use tabs, not spaces, to align columns.
The electronic text should be prepared in a way very similar to that of conventional manuscripts (see also the Guide to Publishing with Elsevier).Note that source files of figures, tables and text graphics will be required whether or not you embed your figures in the text.See also the section on Electronic artwork.
Best website to get college writing help powerpoint presentation obesity academic two hours writing from scratch 29 pages / 7975 words
To avoid unnecessary errors you are strongly advised to use the 'spell-check' and 'grammar-check' functions of your word processor.Article structure Subdivision - numbered sections Divide your article into clearly defined and numbered sections.
(the abstract is not included in section numbering) Childhood obesity applying All Our Health GOV UK.(the abstract is not included in section numbering).
Use this numbering also for internal cross-referencing: do not just refer to 'the text'.
Any subsection may be given a brief heading How to purchase a powerpoint presentation obesity at an affordable price CBE A4 (British/European) 14 days 145 pages / 39875 words.Any subsection may be given a brief heading.Each heading should appear on its own separate line How to purchase a powerpoint presentation obesity at an affordable price CBE A4 (British/European) 14 days 145 pages / 39875 words.Each heading should appear on its own separate line.Introduction State the objectives of the work and provide an adequate background, avoiding a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results need to order a college corruption paper Freshman Writing from scratch 6 hours.Introduction State the objectives of the work and provide an adequate background, avoiding a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results.Material and methods Provide sufficient details to allow the work to be reproduced by an independent researcher.Methods that are already published should be summarized, and indicated by a reference.
If quoting directly from a previously published method, use quotation marks and also cite the source.Any modifications to existing methods should also be described.Results Discussion This should explore the significance of the results of the work, not repeat them.A combined Results and Discussion section is often appropriate.Avoid extensive citations and discussion of published literature.
Essential title page information • Title.Titles are often used in information-retrieval systems.Avoid abbreviations and formulae where possible.Please clearly indicate the given name(s) and family name(s) of each author and check that all names are accurately spelled.You can add your name between parentheses in your own script behind the English transliteration.Present the authors' affiliation addresses (where the actual work was done) below the names.Indicate all affiliations with a lower-case superscript letter immediately after the author's name and in front of the appropriate address.
Provide the full postal address of each affiliation, including the country name and, if available, the e-mail address of each author.
Clearly indicate who will handle correspondence at all stages of refereeing and publication, also post-publication.This responsibility includes answering any future queries about Methodology and Materials.Ensure that the e-mail address is given and that contact details are kept up to date by the corresponding author.If an author has moved since the work described in the article was done, or was visiting at the time, a 'Present address' (or 'Permanent address') may be indicated as a footnote to that author's name.The address at which the author actually did the work must be retained as the main, affiliation address.Superscript Arabic numerals are used for such footnotes.Structured Abstract: Original Research Articles An abstract of no more than 250 words for articles (including reviews), or 50 to 100 words for brief communications, should be typed double-spaced on a separate page.It should cover the main factual points, including statements of the problem, methods, results and conclusions.
Highlights Highlights are a short collection of bullet points that convey the core findings of the article.Highlights are optional and should be submitted in a separate editable file in the online submission system.Please use 'Highlights' in the file name and include 3 to 5 bullet points (maximum 85 characters, including spaces, per bullet point).You can view example Highlights on our information site.Keywords Immediately after the abstract, provide a maximum of 6 keywords, avoiding general and plural terms and multiple concepts (avoid, for example, 'and', 'of').
Be sparing with abbreviations: only abbreviations firmly established in the field may be eligible.These keywords will be used for indexing purposes.Acknowledgements All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship as defined above should be listed in an acknowledgements section.Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support.Authors should disclose whether they had any writing assistance and identify the entity that paid for this assistance.
Formatting of funding sources List funding sources in this standard way to facilitate compliance to funder's requirements: Funding: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health grant numbers xxxx, yyyy ; the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA grant number zzzz ; and the United States Institutes of Peace grant number aaaa .It is not necessary to include detailed descriptions on the program or type of grants and awards.When funding is from a block grant or other resources available to a university, college, or other research institution, submit the name of the institute or organization that provided the funding.If no funding has been provided for the research, please include the following sentence: This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.Artwork • Embed the used fonts if the application provides that option.
• Aim to use the following fonts in your illustrations: Arial, Courier, Times New Roman, Symbol, or use fonts that look similar.• Number the illustrations according to their sequence in the text.• Use a logical naming convention for your artwork files.• Provide captions to illustrations separately.• Size the illustrations close to the desired dimensions of the published version.
• Submit each illustration as a separate file.You are urged to visit this site; some excerpts from the detailed information are given here.Formats If your electronic artwork is created in a Microsoft Office application (Word, PowerPoint, Excel) then please supply 'as is' in the native document format.Regardless of the application used other than Microsoft Office, when your electronic artwork is finalized, please 'Save as' or convert the images to one of the following formats (note the resolution requirements for line drawings, halftones, and line/halftone combinations given below): EPS (or PDF): Vector drawings, embed all used fonts.TIFF (or JPEG): Color or grayscale photographs (halftones), keep to a minimum of 300 dpi.
TIFF (or JPEG): Bitmapped (pure black & white pixels) line drawings, keep to a minimum of 1000 dpi.TIFF (or JPEG): Combinations bitmapped line/half-tone (color or grayscale), keep to a minimum of 500 dpi.Please do not: • Supply files that are optimized for screen use (e., GIF, BMP, PICT, WPG); these typically have a low number of pixels and limited set of colors; • Supply files that are too low in resolution; • Submit graphics that are disproportionately large for the content.
Color artwork Please make sure that artwork files are in an acceptable format (TIFF (or JPEG), EPS (or PDF), or MS Office files) and with the correct resolution.
Toolkit texas department of state health services
If, together with your accepted article, you submit usable color figures then Elsevier will ensure, at no additional charge, that these figures will appear in color online (e., ScienceDirect and other sites) regardless of whether or not these illustrations are reproduced in color in the printed version.For color reproduction in print, you will receive information regarding the costs from Elsevier after receipt of your accepted article Abcpaperwriter com The Best Choice of Paper Writing Service.
For color reproduction in print, you will receive information regarding the costs from Elsevier after receipt of your accepted article.
Please indicate your preference for color: in print or online only.Further information on the preparation of electronic artwork.Illustration services Elsevier's WebShop offers Illustration Services to authors preparing to submit a manuscript but concerned about the quality of the images accompanying their article Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review PLOS.Illustration services Elsevier's WebShop offers Illustration Services to authors preparing to submit a manuscript but concerned about the quality of the images accompanying their article.Elsevier's expert illustrators can produce scientific, technical and medical-style images, as well as a full range of charts, tables and graphs.
Image 'polishing' is also available, where our illustrators take your image(s) and improve them to a professional standard best website to get a consumer sciences case study 50 pages / 13750 words Platinum American.
Image 'polishing' is also available, where our illustrators take your image(s) and improve them to a professional standard.
Please visit the website to find out more.Figure captions Ensure that each illustration has a caption.Supply captions separately, not attached to the figure.A caption should comprise a brief title ( not on the figure itself) and a description of the illustration.Keep text in the illustrations themselves to a minimum but explain all symbols and abbreviations used.
Tables Please submit tables as editable text and not as images.Tables can be placed either next to the relevant text in the article, or on separate page(s) at the end.Number tables consecutively in accordance with their appearance in the text and place any table notes below the table body.Be sparing in the use of tables and ensure that the data presented in them do not duplicate results described elsewhere in the article.Please avoid using vertical rules and shading in table cells.
References Citation in text Please ensure that every reference cited in the text is also present in the reference list (and vice versa).Any references cited in the abstract must be given in full.Unpublished results and personal communications are not recommended in the reference list, but may be mentioned in the text.If these references are included in the reference list they should follow the standard reference style of the journal and should include a substitution of the publication date with either 'Unpublished results' or 'Personal communication'.Citation of a reference as 'in press' implies that the item has been accepted for publication.
Reference links Increased discoverability of research and high quality peer review are ensured by online links to the sources cited.In order to allow us to create links to abstracting and indexing services, such as Scopus, CrossRef and PubMed, please ensure that data provided in the references are correct.Please note that incorrect surnames, journal/book titles, publication year and pagination may prevent link creation.When copying references, please be careful as they may already contain errors.A DOI can be used to cite and link to electronic articles where an article is in-press and full citation details are not yet known, but the article is available online.A DOI is guaranteed never to change, so you can use it as a permanent link to any electronic article.An example of a citation using DOI for an article not yet in an issue is: VanDecar J.Aseismic continuation of the Lesser Antilles slab beneath northeastern Venezuela.Please note the format of such citations should be in the same style as all other references in the paper.Web references As a minimum, the full URL should be given and the date when the reference was last accessed.Any further information, if known (DOI, author names, dates, reference to a source publication, etc.Web references can be listed separately (e.
, after the reference list) under a different heading if desired, or can be included in the reference list.Data references This journal encourages you to cite underlying or relevant datasets in your manuscript by citing them in your text and including a data reference in your Reference List.Data references should include the following elements: author name(s), dataset title, data repository, version (where available), year, and global persistent identifier.Add dataset immediately before the reference so we can properly identify it as a data reference.
The dataset identifier will not appear in your published article.Reference management software Most Elsevier journals have their reference template available in many of the most popular reference management software products.These include all products that support Citation Style Language styles, such as Mendeley and Zotero, as well as EndNote.Using the word processor plug-ins from these products, authors only need to select the appropriate journal template when preparing their article, after which citations and bibliographies will be automatically formatted in the journal's style.
If no template is yet available for this journal, please follow the format of the sample references and citations as shown in this Guide.
Users of Mendeley Desktop can easily install the reference style for this journal by clicking the following link: Reference formatting There are no strict requirements on reference formatting at submission.References can be in any style or format as long as the style is consistent.Where applicable, author(s) name(s), journal title/book title, chapter title/article title, year of publication, volume number/book chapter and the pagination must be present.The reference style used by the journal will be applied to the accepted article by Elsevier at the proof stage.
Note that missing data will be highlighted at proof stage for the author to correct.If you do wish to format the references yourself they should be arranged according to the following examples: Reference style Text: Indicate references by number(s) in square brackets in line with the text.The actual authors can be referred to, but the reference number(s) must always be given.List: Number the references (numbers in square brackets) in the list in the order in which they appear in the text.Examples: Reference to a journal publication: 1 Van der Geer J, Hanraads JAJ, Lupton RA.
The art of writing a scientific article.Reference to a book: Reference to a chapter in an edited book: 3 Mettam GR, Adams LB.How to prepare an electronic version of your article.Introduction to the electronic age, New York: E-Publishing Inc; 2009, p.Reference to a website: 4 Cancer Research UK.Cancer statistics reports for the UK, /aboutcancer/statistics/cancerstatsreport/; 2003 accessed 13 March 2003 .Reference to a dataset: dataset 5 Oguro M, Imahiro S, Saito S, Nakashizuka T.
Best websites to buy college powerpoint presentation obesity cheap british academic double spaced premium
Mortality data for Japanese oak wilt disease and surrounding forest compositions, Mendeley Data, v1; 2015.Note shortened form for last page number.
, 51–9, and that for more than 6 authors the first 6 should be listed followed by 'et al Something must be done not only to prevent obesity rates continuous rising, but also to dramatically increase the percentage of obese people in america best way course - linkedin -driven presentations with excel and powerpoint course - linkedin sharan mehta, ood obesity research on childhood obesity (essay sample).., 51–9, and that for more than 6 authors the first 6 should be listed followed by 'et al.
' For further details you are referred to 'Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts submitted to Biomedical Journals' (J Am Med Assoc 1997;277:927–34) (see also Samples of Formatted References).Video Elsevier accepts video material and animation sequences to support and enhance your scientific research Searching for the right company that can help you with all of your written needs? You need not look any further because you can buy research paper here at best paper writing service..
Video Elsevier accepts video material and animation sequences to support and enhance your scientific research.
Authors who have video or animation files that they wish to submit with their article are strongly encouraged to include links to these within the body of the article Searching for the right company that can help you with all of your written needs? You need not look any further because you can buy research paper here at best paper writing service..Authors who have video or animation files that they wish to submit with their article are strongly encouraged to include links to these within the body of the article.This can be done in the same way as a figure or table by referring to the video or animation content and noting in the body text where it should be placed.All submitted files should be properly labeled so that they directly relate to the video file's content.In order to ensure that your video or animation material is directly usable, please provide the file in one of our recommended file formats with a preferred maximum size of 150 MB per file, 1 GB in total.
Video and animation files supplied will be published online in the electronic version of your article in Elsevier Web products, including ScienceDirect.Please supply 'stills' with your files: you can choose any frame from the video or animation or make a separate image.These will be used instead of standard icons and will personalize the link to your video data.For more detailed instructions please visit our video instruction pages.Note: since video and animation cannot be embedded in the print version of the journal, please provide text for both the electronic and the print version for the portions of the article that refer to this content.
Supplementary material Supplementary material such as applications, images and sound clips, can be published with your article to enhance it.Submitted supplementary items are published exactly as they are received (Excel or PowerPoint files will appear as such online).Please submit your material together with the article and supply a concise, descriptive caption for each supplementary file.If you wish to make changes to supplementary material during any stage of the process, please make sure to provide an updated file.Do not annotate any corrections on a previous version.
Please switch off the 'Track Changes' option in Microsoft Office files as these will appear in the published version.RESEARCH DATA This journal encourages and enables you to share data that supports your research publication where appropriate, and enables you to interlink the data with your published articles.Research data refers to the results of observations or experimentation that validate research findings.To facilitate reproducibility and data reuse, this journal also encourages you to share your software, code, models, algorithms, protocols, methods and other useful materials related to the project.
Below are a number of ways in which you can associate data with your article or make a statement about the availability of your data when submitting your manuscript.
If you are sharing data in one of these ways, you are encouraged to cite the data in your manuscript and reference list.Please refer to the "References" section for more information about data citation.For more information on depositing, sharing and using research data and other relevant research materials, visit the research data page.Data linking If you have made your research data available in a data repository, you can link your article directly to the dataset.Elsevier collaborates with a number of repositories to link articles on ScienceDirect with relevant repositories, giving readers access to underlying data that gives them a better understanding of the research described.
There are different ways to link your datasets to your article.When available, you can directly link your dataset to your article by providing the relevant information in the submission system.For more information, visit the database linking page.For supported data repositories a repository banner will automatically appear next to your published article on ScienceDirect.In addition, you can link to relevant data or entities through identifiers within the text of your manuscript, using the following format: Database: xxxx (e.
, TAIR: AT1G01020; CCDC: 734053; PDB: 1XFN).Mendeley Data This journal supports Mendeley Data, enabling you to deposit any research data (including raw and processed data, video, code, software, algorithms, protocols, and methods) associated with your manuscript in a free-to-use, open access repository.Before submitting your article, you can deposit the relevant datasets to Mendeley Data.Please include the DOI of the deposited dataset(s) in your main manuscript file.
The datasets will be listed and directly accessible to readers next to your published article online.Data statement To foster transparency, we encourage you to state the availability of your data in your submission.This may be a requirement of your funding body or institution.If your data is unavailable to access or unsuitable to post, you will have the opportunity to indicate why during the submission process, for example by stating that the research data is confidential.The statement will appear with your published article on ScienceDirect.
For more information, visit the Data Statement page.Authorship The Corresponding Author must submit a completed Author Consent Form to ORCP with their manuscript.All authors must sign the Author Consent Form.All authors should have made substantial contributions to all of the following: (1) the conception and design of the study, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, (2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content, (3) final approval of the version to be submitted.Online proof correction Corresponding authors will receive an e-mail with a link to our online proofing system, allowing annotation and correction of proofs online.
The environment is similar to MS Word: in addition to editing text, you can also comment on figures/tables and answer questions from the Copy Editor.Web-based proofing provides a faster and less error-prone process by allowing you to directly type your corrections, eliminating the potential introduction of errors.If preferred, you can still choose to annotate and upload your edits on the PDF version.All instructions for proofing will be given in the e-mail we send to authors, including alternative methods to the online version and PDF.We will do everything possible to get your article published quickly and accurately.
Please use this proof only for checking the typesetting, editing, completeness and correctness of the text, tables and figures.Significant changes to the article as accepted for publication will only be considered at this stage with permission from the Editor.It is important to ensure that all corrections are sent back to us in one communication.Please check carefully before replying, as inclusion of any subsequent corrections cannot be guaranteed.Proofreading is solely your responsibility.
Offprints The corresponding author will, at no cost, receive a customized Share Link providing 50 days free access to the final published version of the article on ScienceDirect.The Share Link can be used for sharing the article via any communication channel, including email and social media.
How to write a obesity powerpoint presentation originality 67 pages / 18425 words double spaced undergrad. (yrs 1-2) 20 days
For an extra charge, paper offprints can be ordered via the offprint order form which is sent once the article is accepted for publication.Both corresponding and co-authors may order offprints at any time via Elsevier's Webshop.Corresponding authors who have published their article open access do not receive a Share Link as their final published version of the article is available open access on ScienceDirect and can be shared through the article DOI link complaint) and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information The 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines focuses on the big picture with recommendations to help Americans make choices that Obesity is most prevalent in those ages 40 years and older and in African..
Corresponding authors who have published their article open access do not receive a Share Link as their final published version of the article is available open access on ScienceDirect and can be shared through the article DOI link.
Visit the Elsevier Support Center to find the answers you need.Here you will find everything from Frequently Asked Questions to ways to get in touch Guide for authors Obesity Research Clinical Practice ISSN 1871 nbsp.Here you will find everything from Frequently Asked Questions to ways to get in touch.Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review Marco Pautasso Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review Marco Pautasso Figures Citation: Pautasso M (2013) Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review.Bourne, University of California San Diego, United States of America Published: July 18, 2013 Copyright: © 2013 Marco Pautasso.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project.
The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.Competing interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist.Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields.Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications 1 .For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively 2 .
Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests 3 .Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature.Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read 4 .For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way 5 .When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work.
That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature.Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue 6 .However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills 7 .In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student.
Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review.On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime.On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review 8 .The topic must at least be: interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary), an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).
Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered 9 , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions.In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.
, computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers.Five pieces of advice here: keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated 10 ), keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies), use a paper management system (e., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente), define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review (Figure 1), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic.
If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review, Download: Figure 1.A conceptual diagram of the need for different types of literature reviews depending on the amount of published research papers and literature reviews.The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies 33 .trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply: be thorough, use different keywords and database sources (e.
, DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper.My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write.This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.
Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument 11 , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document.Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature.It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft.It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions.
Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.
Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review.This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review.Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations.A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations.A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.
There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews.The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs.While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material 12 .A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias 13 , 14 .
Where to get a custom obesity powerpoint presentation business us letter size british ama
When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses.The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors 15 .Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16,17 See Bibliography Sample Page for a properly double-spaced Bibliography or Works Cited sample page. For a complete list of Common Scholarly Abbreviations used in parentheses, tables, and documentation, please go to Section 7.4 of the 6th edition of the MLA Handbook. Encyclopedia of North American Indians..Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16,17.
Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once.The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields 18Indian Foods AAPI s Guide to Nutrition Health and Diabetes 2nd nbsp.
The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields 18 .
If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion.This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas elrubius.es/essay/get-a-theological-studies-essay-rewriting-125-pages-34375-words-oxford-online.This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience.This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting.
A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps 19 .After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of: the major achievements in the reviewed field, the main areas of debate, and the outstanding research questions.It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts.A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from.If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs.
Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical.With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used.
However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews.For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) 20 .How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review 21 .This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure.A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too 22 .Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so 23 .As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft.
Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times.It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft.This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback.A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue 24 .
Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing.This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work 25 ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review.However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial.
If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings.
In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published.Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” 26 )).This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases.Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile.
Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review.But this is the nature of science 27 – 32 .I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.Xu for insights and discussions, and to P.Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.Rapple C (2011) The role of the critical review article in alleviating information overload.Available: /userimages/ContentEditor/1300384004941/Annual Reviews WhitePaper Web .Pautasso M (2010) Worsening file-drawer problem in the abstracts of natural, medical and social science databases.Budgen D, Brereton P (2006) Performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering.Proc 28th Int Conf Software Engineering, ACM New York, NY, USA, pp.Maier HR (2013) What constitutes a good literature review and why does its quality matter? Environ Model Softw 43: 3–4 17.Hart C (1998) Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination.Wagner CS, Roessner JD, Bobb K, Klein JT, Boyack KW, et al.(2011) Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): a review of the literature.Ridley D (2008) The literature review: a step-by-step guide for students.
Kelleher C, Wagener T (2011) Ten guidelines for effective data visualization in scientific publications.