Example of Orthopedic Reviews format
Recent searches

Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format
Sample paper formatted on SciSpace - SciSpace
This content is only for preview purposes. The original open access content can be found here.
Look Inside
Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format Example of Orthopedic Reviews format
Sample paper formatted on SciSpace - SciSpace
This content is only for preview purposes. The original open access content can be found here.
open access Open Access

Orthopedic Reviews — Template for authors

Categories Rank Trend in last 3 yrs
Orthopedics and Sports Medicine #179 of 262 down down by 31 ranks
journal-quality-icon Journal quality:
Medium
calendar-icon Last 4 years overview: 156 Published Papers | 163 Citations
indexed-in-icon Indexed in: Scopus
last-updated-icon Last updated: 06/07/2020
Related journals
Insights
General info
Top papers
Popular templates
Get started guide
Why choose from SciSpace
FAQ

Related Journals

open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

Taylor and Francis

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 5.3
SJR: 1.287
SNIP: 2.109
open access Open Access

Taylor and Francis

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 4.8
SJR: 1.811
SNIP: 1.877
open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

Springer

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 5.4
SJR: 1.15
SNIP: 1.705
open access Open Access

SAGE

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 5.1
SJR: 1.212
SNIP: 1.695

Journal Performance & Insights

CiteRatio

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR)

Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)

A measure of average citations received per peer-reviewed paper published in the journal.

Measures weighted citations received by the journal. Citation weighting depends on the categories and prestige of the citing journal.

Measures actual citations received relative to citations expected for the journal's category.

1.0

38% from 2019

CiteRatio for Orthopedic Reviews from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 1.0
2019 1.6
2018 1.9
2017 1.2
2016 1.0
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

0.412

0% from 2019

SJR for Orthopedic Reviews from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 0.412
2019 0.411
2018 0.617
2017 0.437
2016 0.218
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

0.747

12% from 2019

SNIP for Orthopedic Reviews from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 0.747
2019 0.846
2018 0.866
2017 0.752
2016 0.376
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

insights Insights

  • CiteRatio of this journal has decreased by 38% in last years.
  • This journal’s CiteRatio is in the top 10 percentile category.

insights Insights

  • SJR of this journal has increased by 0% in last years.
  • This journal’s SJR is in the top 10 percentile category.

insights Insights

  • SNIP of this journal has decreased by 12% in last years.
  • This journal’s SNIP is in the top 10 percentile category.

Orthopedic Reviews

Guideline source: View

All company, product and service names used in this website are for identification purposes only. All product names, trademarks and registered trademarks are property of their respective owners.

Use of these names, trademarks and brands does not imply endorsement or affiliation. Disclaimer Notice

PagePress Publications

Orthopedic Reviews

Approved by publishing and review experts on SciSpace, this template is built as per for Orthopedic Reviews formatting guidelines as mentioned in PagePress Publications author instructions. The current version was created on 06 Jul 2020 and has been used by 511 authors to write and format their manuscripts to this journal.

Geriatric orthopedics

i
Last updated on
06 Jul 2020
i
ISSN
2035-8237
i
Open Access
Yes
i
Sherpa RoMEO Archiving Policy
Green faq
i
Plagiarism Check
Available via Turnitin
i
Endnote Style
Download Available
i
Bibliography Name
Vancouver
i
Citation Type
Numbered (Superscripted)
25
i
Bibliography Example
Blonder GE, Tinkham M, Klapwijk TM. Transition from metallic to tunneling regimes in superconducting microconstrictions: Excess current, charge imbalance, and supercurrent con-version. Phys Rev B. 1982;25(7):4515–4532. Available from: 10.1103/PhysRevB.25.4515.

Top papers written in this journal

open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.4081/OR.2010.E19
Developmental dysplasia of the hip
Shahryar Noordin1, Masood Umer1, Kamran Hafeez1, Haq Nawaz1
13 Oct 2010 - Orthopedic Reviews

Abstract:

Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is a spectrum of anatomical abnormalities of the hip joint in which the femoral head has an abnormal relationship with the acetabulum. Most studies report an incidence of 1 to 34 cases per 1,000 live births and differences could be due to different diagnostic methods and timing of eval... Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is a spectrum of anatomical abnormalities of the hip joint in which the femoral head has an abnormal relationship with the acetabulum. Most studies report an incidence of 1 to 34 cases per 1,000 live births and differences could be due to different diagnostic methods and timing of evaluation. Risk factors include first born status, female sex, positive family history, breech presentation and oligohydramnios. Clinical presentations of DDH depend on the age of the child. Newborns present with hip instability, infants have limited hip abduction on examination, and older children and adolescents present with limping, joint pain, and/or osteoarthritis. Repeated, careful examination of all infants from birth and throughout the first year of life until the child begins walking is important to prevent late cases. Provocative testing includes the Barlow and Ortolani maneuvers. Other signs, such as shorting of the femur with hips and knees flexed (Galeazzi sign), asymmetry of the thigh or gluteal folds, and discrepancy of leg lengths are potential clues. Treatment depends on age at presentation and outcomes are much better when the child is treated early, particularly during the first six months of life. read more read less

Topics:

Femur (52%)52% related to the paper, Femoral head (51%)51% related to the paper, Presentation (obstetrics) (51%)51% related to the paper
View PDF
391 Citations
open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.4081/OR.2011.E16
Total Hip Arthroplasty – over 100 years of operative history
Stephen Richard Knight1, Randeep Aujla1, Satya Prasad Biswas2
07 Nov 2011 - Orthopedic Reviews

Abstract:

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has completely revolutionized the nature in which the arthritic hip is treated, and is considered to be one of the most successful orthopaedic interventions of its generation. With over 100 years of operative history, this review examines the progression of the operation from its origins, together... Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has completely revolutionized the nature in which the arthritic hip is treated, and is considered to be one of the most successful orthopaedic interventions of its generation. With over 100 years of operative history, this review examines the progression of the operation from its origins, together with highlighting the materials and techniques that have contributed to its development. Knowledge of its history contributes to a greater understanding of THA, such as the reasons behind selection of prosthetic materials in certain patient groups, while demonstrating the importance of critically analyzing research to continually determine best operative practice. Finally, we describe current areas of research being undertaken to further advance techniques and improve outcomes. read more read less
190 Citations
open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.4081/OR.2013.E14
Prosthesis infections after orthopedic joint replacement: the possible role of bacterial biofilms.
Zhijun Song, Lotte Borgwardt, Niels Høiby, Hong Wu1, Torben Sandberg Sørensen, Arne Borgwardt
14 Jun 2013 - Orthopedic Reviews

Abstract:

Prosthesis-related infection is a serious complication for patients after orthopedic joint replacement, which is currently difficult to treat with antibiotic therapy. Consequently, in most cases, removal of the infected prosthesis is the only solution to cure the infection. It is, therefore, important to understand the compre... Prosthesis-related infection is a serious complication for patients after orthopedic joint replacement, which is currently difficult to treat with antibiotic therapy. Consequently, in most cases, removal of the infected prosthesis is the only solution to cure the infection. It is, therefore, important to understand the comprehensive interaction between the microbiological situation and the host immune responses that lead to prosthesis infections. Evidence indicates that prosthesis infections are actually biofilm-correlated infections that are highly resistant to antibiotic treatment and the host immune responses. The authors reviewed the related literature in the context of their clinical experience, and discussed the possible etiology and mechanism leading to the infections, especially problems related to bacterial biofilm, and prophylaxis and treatment of infection, including both microbiological and surgical measures. Recent progress in research into bacterial biofilm and possible future treatment options of prosthesis-related infections are discussed. read more read less

Topics:

Joint replacement (54%)54% related to the paper, Prosthesis-Related Infection (52%)52% related to the paper
140 Citations
open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.4081/OR.2012.E5
Diagnosis and treatment of acute ankle injuries: development of an evidence-based algorithm
Hans Polzer1, Karl-Georg Kanz1, Wolf Christian Prall1, Florian Haasters1, Ben Ockert1, Wolf Mutschler1, S. Grote1
14 Dec 2011 - Orthopedic Reviews

Abstract:

Acute ankle injuries are among the most common injuries in emergency departments. However, there are still no standardized examination procedures or evidence-based treatment. Therefore, the aim of this study was to systematically search the current literature, classify the evidence, and develop an algorithm for the diagnosis ... Acute ankle injuries are among the most common injuries in emergency departments. However, there are still no standardized examination procedures or evidence-based treatment. Therefore, the aim of this study was to systematically search the current literature, classify the evidence, and develop an algorithm for the diagnosis and treatment of acute ankle injuries. We systematically searched PubMed and the Cochrane Database for randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews or, if applicable, observational studies and classified them according to their level of evidence. According to the currently available literature, the following recommendations have been formulated: i) the Ottawa Ankle/Foot Rule should be applied in order to rule out fractures; ii) physical examination is sufficient for diagnosing injuries to the lateral ligament complex; iii) classification into stable and unstable injuries is applicable and of clinical importance; iv) the squeeze-, crossed leg- and external rotation test are indicative for injuries of the syndesmosis; v) magnetic resonance imaging is recommended to verify injuries of the syndesmosis; vi) stable ankle sprains have a good prognosis while for unstable ankle sprains, conservative treatment is at least as effective as operative treatment without the related possible complications; vii) early functional treatment leads to the fastest recovery and the least rate of reinjury; viii) supervised rehabilitation reduces residual symptoms and re-injuries. Taken these recommendations into account, we present an applicable and evidence-based, step by step, decision pathway for the diagnosis and treatment of acute ankle injuries, which can be implemented in any emergency department or doctor's practice. It provides quality assurance for the patient and promotes confidence in the attending physician. read more read less

Topics:

Ankle (59%)59% related to the paper, Syndesmosis (58%)58% related to the paper
131 Citations
open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.4081/OR.2013.E8
Cemented versus uncemented fixation in total hip replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Ali Abdulkarim1, Prasad Ellanti2, Nicola Motterlini, Tom Fahey, John M. O'Byrne
15 Mar 2013 - Orthopedic Reviews

Abstract:

The optimal method of fixation for primary total hip replacements (THR), particularly fixation with or without the use of cement is still controversial. In a systematic review and metaanalysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing cemented versus uncemented THRS available in the published literature, we found that the... The optimal method of fixation for primary total hip replacements (THR), particularly fixation with or without the use of cement is still controversial. In a systematic review and metaanalysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing cemented versus uncemented THRS available in the published literature, we found that there is no significant difference between cemented and uncemented THRs in terms of implant survival as measured by the revision rate. Better short-term clinical outcome, particularly an improved pain score can be obtained with cemented fixation. However, the results are unclear for the long-term clinical and functional outcome between the two groups. No difference was evident in the mortality and the post operative complication rate. On the other hand, the radiographic findings were variable and do not seem to correlate with clinical findings as differences in the surgical technique and prosthesis design might be associated with the incidence of osteolysis. We concluded in our review that cemented THR is similar if not superior to uncemented THR, and provides better short term clinical outcomes. Further research, improved methodology and longer follow up are necessary to better define specific subgroups of patients in whom the relative benefits of cemented and uncemented implant fixation can be clearly demonstrated. read more read less

Topics:

Postoperative complication (53%)53% related to the paper
116 Citations
Author Pic

SciSpace is a very innovative solution to the formatting problem and existing providers, such as Mendeley or Word did not really evolve in recent years.

- Andreas Frutiger, Researcher, ETH Zurich, Institute for Biomedical Engineering

Get MS-Word and LaTeX output to any Journal within seconds
1
Choose a template
Select a template from a library of 40,000+ templates
2
Import a MS-Word file or start fresh
It takes only few seconds to import
3
View and edit your final output
SciSpace will automatically format your output to meet journal guidelines
4
Submit directly or Download
Submit to journal directly or Download in PDF, MS Word or LaTeX

(Before submission check for plagiarism via Turnitin)

clock Less than 3 minutes

What to expect from SciSpace?

Speed and accuracy over MS Word

''

With SciSpace, you do not need a word template for Orthopedic Reviews.

It automatically formats your research paper to PagePress Publications formatting guidelines and citation style.

You can download a submission ready research paper in pdf, LaTeX and docx formats.

Time comparison

Time taken to format a paper and Compliance with guidelines

Plagiarism Reports via Turnitin

SciSpace has partnered with Turnitin, the leading provider of Plagiarism Check software.

Using this service, researchers can compare submissions against more than 170 million scholarly articles, a database of 70+ billion current and archived web pages. How Turnitin Integration works?

Turnitin Stats
Publisher Logos

Freedom from formatting guidelines

One editor, 100K journal formats – world's largest collection of journal templates

With such a huge verified library, what you need is already there.

publisher-logos

Easy support from all your favorite tools

Orthopedic Reviews format uses Vancouver citation style.

Automatically format and order your citations and bibliography in a click.

SciSpace allows imports from all reference managers like Mendeley, Zotero, Endnote, Google Scholar etc.

Frequently asked questions

1. Can I write Orthopedic Reviews in LaTeX?

Absolutely not! Our tool has been designed to help you focus on writing. You can write your entire paper as per the Orthopedic Reviews guidelines and auto format it.

2. Do you follow the Orthopedic Reviews guidelines?

Yes, the template is compliant with the Orthopedic Reviews guidelines. Our experts at SciSpace ensure that. If there are any changes to the journal's guidelines, we'll change our algorithm accordingly.

3. Can I cite my article in multiple styles in Orthopedic Reviews?

Of course! We support all the top citation styles, such as APA style, MLA style, Vancouver style, Harvard style, and Chicago style. For example, when you write your paper and hit autoformat, our system will automatically update your article as per the Orthopedic Reviews citation style.

4. Can I use the Orthopedic Reviews templates for free?

Sign up for our free trial, and you'll be able to use all our features for seven days. You'll see how helpful they are and how inexpensive they are compared to other options, Especially for Orthopedic Reviews.

5. Can I use a manuscript in Orthopedic Reviews that I have written in MS Word?

Yes. You can choose the right template, copy-paste the contents from the word document, and click on auto-format. Once you're done, you'll have a publish-ready paper Orthopedic Reviews that you can download at the end.

6. How long does it usually take you to format my papers in Orthopedic Reviews?

It only takes a matter of seconds to edit your manuscript. Besides that, our intuitive editor saves you from writing and formatting it in Orthopedic Reviews.

7. Where can I find the template for the Orthopedic Reviews?

It is possible to find the Word template for any journal on Google. However, why use a template when you can write your entire manuscript on SciSpace , auto format it as per Orthopedic Reviews's guidelines and download the same in Word, PDF and LaTeX formats? Give us a try!.

8. Can I reformat my paper to fit the Orthopedic Reviews's guidelines?

Of course! You can do this using our intuitive editor. It's very easy. If you need help, our support team is always ready to assist you.

9. Orthopedic Reviews an online tool or is there a desktop version?

SciSpace's Orthopedic Reviews is currently available as an online tool. We're developing a desktop version, too. You can request (or upvote) any features that you think would be helpful for you and other researchers in the "feature request" section of your account once you've signed up with us.

10. I cannot find my template in your gallery. Can you create it for me like Orthopedic Reviews?

Sure. You can request any template and we'll have it setup within a few days. You can find the request box in Journal Gallery on the right side bar under the heading, "Couldn't find the format you were looking for like Orthopedic Reviews?”

11. What is the output that I would get after using Orthopedic Reviews?

After writing your paper autoformatting in Orthopedic Reviews, you can download it in multiple formats, viz., PDF, Docx, and LaTeX.

12. Is Orthopedic Reviews's impact factor high enough that I should try publishing my article there?

To be honest, the answer is no. The impact factor is one of the many elements that determine the quality of a journal. Few of these factors include review board, rejection rates, frequency of inclusion in indexes, and Eigenfactor. You need to assess all these factors before you make your final call.

13. What is Sherpa RoMEO Archiving Policy for Orthopedic Reviews?

SHERPA/RoMEO Database

We extracted this data from Sherpa Romeo to help researchers understand the access level of this journal in accordance with the Sherpa Romeo Archiving Policy for Orthopedic Reviews. The table below indicates the level of access a journal has as per Sherpa Romeo's archiving policy.

RoMEO Colour Archiving policy
Green Can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher's version/PDF
Blue Can archive post-print (ie final draft post-refereeing) or publisher's version/PDF
Yellow Can archive pre-print (ie pre-refereeing)
White Archiving not formally supported
FYI:
  1. Pre-prints as being the version of the paper before peer review and
  2. Post-prints as being the version of the paper after peer-review, with revisions having been made.

14. What are the most common citation types In Orthopedic Reviews?

The 5 most common citation types in order of usage for Orthopedic Reviews are:.

S. No. Citation Style Type
1. Author Year
2. Numbered
3. Numbered (Superscripted)
4. Author Year (Cited Pages)
5. Footnote

15. How do I submit my article to the Orthopedic Reviews?

It is possible to find the Word template for any journal on Google. However, why use a template when you can write your entire manuscript on SciSpace , auto format it as per Orthopedic Reviews's guidelines and download the same in Word, PDF and LaTeX formats? Give us a try!.

16. Can I download Orthopedic Reviews in Endnote format?

Yes, SciSpace provides this functionality. After signing up, you would need to import your existing references from Word or Bib file to SciSpace. Then SciSpace would allow you to download your references in Orthopedic Reviews Endnote style according to Elsevier guidelines.

Fast and reliable,
built for complaince.

Instant formatting to 100% publisher guidelines on - SciSpace.

Available only on desktops 🖥

No word template required

Typset automatically formats your research paper to Orthopedic Reviews formatting guidelines and citation style.

Verifed journal formats

One editor, 100K journal formats.
With the largest collection of verified journal formats, what you need is already there.

Trusted by academicians

I spent hours with MS word for reformatting. It was frustrating - plain and simple. With SciSpace, I can draft my manuscripts and once it is finished I can just submit. In case, I have to submit to another journal it is really just a button click instead of an afternoon of reformatting.

Andreas Frutiger
Researcher & Ex MS Word user
Use this template