The review process assumes a high standard of English at submission (American spelling).

Authors submitting a paper do so on the understanding that the work has not been published before in any language, is not being considered for publication elsewhere, and has been read and approved by all authors.

We encourage disclosure of correspondence with other journals if previously rejected, knowledge of earlier criticism and your response facilitates our evaluation.

Previous or parallel publications on the same subject by the author(s) should be stated with the manuscript. This is necessary for 2 reasons: to avoid double publications, and to provide the reviewers with essential information.

Although reviewer selection is ultimately the decision of the Editor, authors are encouraged to provide the names and email addresses of potential reviewers.

All documents with original data of relevance to the submitted manuscript should be stored and be retrievable on request for a minimum of 10 years. Authors are encouraged to include a copy of raw data in electronic form and/or make these data available via the internet.

Acta does not publish studies that only assess completeness, coverage, accuracy, and validity of data in registers. Such studies are considered part of normal register administration, and the results should be presented in the register's annual report.

Acta does not publish studies reporting merely the existence or organization of a new register. Furthermore, to qualify for publication an epidemiologic/register study must include a question assessed by use of the register data, for example : outcome related to different treatments, treatment changes over time, or incidence changes over time.

Acta does not publish studies on validation of translated scoring systems; such studies are best presented on the respective scoring systems websites.

Preprint publication If you have uploaded your original manuscript to a non-commercial preprint server, you can subsequently submit the manuscript to Acta Orthopaedica. We do not consider posting on a preprint server to be duplicate publication and this will not jeopardize consideration for publication in Acta. Allowing submission does not, of course, guarantee that an article will be sent out for review and perhaps be accepted; it simply reflects that availability on a preprint server should not be a disqualifier for submission.

If accepted in Acta, we ask you to acknowledge that the article has been accepted for publication as follows: “This article has been accepted for publication in Acta Orthopaedica. After publication update your preprint, adding the following text to encourage others to read and cite the final published version of your article (the “Version of Record”): “This is the original manuscript of an article published by Acta Orthopaedica on [date of publication], available online:[Article DOI].”

Registered reports Acta welcomes registered reports, i.e., the methods and proposed analyses of planned studies to be published as a journal article after peer-review has confirmed a meaningful study applying appropriate methods. Once the study is completed – and adheres to the initially approved proposal – publication in Acta is guaranteed irrespective of the study outcome.
Benefits of this 2-stage approach are:
Avoidance of a completed study being refused because of poor design disclosed only after the study is completed.
Peer-review of the research proposal which may improve the study design.
Reduction of publication bias; negative results will not prevent publication.

Study protocols Acta will consider publishing study protocols that reports started, but not completed studies. Protocols that have formal ethical approval and funding from a recognized, major research-funding body will be published without peer review (but possible editorial revision). The finished study will in principle be accepted for publication if completed according to protocol and conclusions are based on results.

Video Acta encourages the submission of videos (via a link to youtube) to summarize, supplement or enhance articles. All videos will undergo peer review. Please include the link in the manuscript.

Submission of manuscripts

Manuscripts should be submitted online ( Submit a double line spaced and line numbered Word file including tables and figures at the end of the manuscript. Authors are encouraged to provide the names, addresses, and e-mail of potential reviewers.

Note the following points:
a. A manuscript's total word count should not exceed 3,300 (including Abstract (max. 250 words) and Introduction which typically does not exceed 300 words) but excluding title page, figure and table legends, and references). The word count (total, Abstract, Introduction) should be added on the title page. American spelling is preferred.

b. Authors submitting a paper do so on the understanding that it has not been published and is not being considered for publication elsewhere. The authors should provide a statement about previous publications that are similar to the submitted study. Copies of such studies should be submitted with the paper.

c. Interventional studies, i.e. clinical trials (defined by human participants being prospectively assigned to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate the effects on health outcomes) should be registered in a public trials register before the enrolment of the first participant. A data sharing plan (applies to clinical trials that begin enrolling participants from 1 January 2019) should be included, see recommendations by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, The registration ID and the data sharing plan should be presented under the subtitle ‘Ethics, registration, data sharing plan, funding, and potential conflicts of interest’ (after subtitle 'Statistics').

d. Manuscripts presenting randomized trials should comply with the CONSORT statement ( The study protocol, approved by the appropriate ethics committee, a completed CONSORT checklist and flowchart should be submitted together with the manuscript. Animal in vivo experiments should comply with ARRIVE guidelines and a completed checklist ( and a copy of the study protocol should be submitted together with the manuscript.

Systematic reviews and metaanalyses of interventional studies should comply with the PRISMA statement ( For systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies the MOOSE checklist and flowchart ( should be used. Metaanalyses should preferably be based on a reasonable number of randomized clinical studies. Observational studies are most often not suited for metaanalyses because of their heterogeneity and greater risk of bias, precluding definition of validity.

The structure of Registered reports and Study reports should follow CONSORT guidelines.

Manuscripts presenting results on diagnostic accuracy should comply with the STARD-statement/guidelines (

Reports of observational studies should comply with the STROBE-statement (

Reports of prediction studies should comply with the TRIPOD-statement (

Checklists and flowcharts should be appended to the manuscript.

e. Extensive tables, complementary figures, and other explanatory material should be given as Supplementary data which will be available in the online version of the article.

Copyright (C) 2018