The International Board of Examiners (IBE) of the International College of Applied Kinesiology (ICAK) requires adherence to norms and guidelines for the structure and quality of articles submitted for the Diplomate examination.
The candidate must obtain a review of each articles by the literature committee of his local chapter, who will forward approved articles to the Corresponding Secretary of the IBE at least 90 days before the examination. It is the candidate’s responsibility to ensure deadlines are met.
Articles must be in English.
Articles must be a minimum of 1500 words in length, excluding references.
Acronyms used within the text are spelled out at the first location of usage and used as the acronym thereafter. For example, 'The location of a central trigger point (CTrP) is central to a taut fiber. The CTrP is palpated by......'
Promotion of self, seminars or products in articles is inappropriate. Reference to a particular product as it applies to the discussion, particularly where valid research of the product or comparison of products is concerned, may be included as long as a non-promotional manner is used.
Do not use 'he', 'his', etc. where the gender of the person is unknown; say 'the patient', etc. Avoid inelegant alternatives such as 'he/she'. Avoid sexist language. Avoid the use of first person ('I' statements) and second person ('you' statements). Third person, objective reporting is appropriate. In the case of reporting an opinion statement or one that cannot be referenced, the rare use of 'In the author's opinion' or 'In the author's experience.' might be appropriate.
1. Title Page
This contains the full names of all authors with academic degrees and titles as well as their academic institutions, address, tel., fax, e-mail. Name the author for contacts.
A paper for the Diplomate exam should have a single author unless it is an academic, published paper or in press with a peer-reviewed journal, in which case multiple authors are allowed. Only one candidate may use such a multiple-author paper for his/her paper defense for the IBE Exam.
Each time a candidate retakes the practical exam, a different paper should be defended. A previously defended paper is allowed only if significant revisions have been made addressing deficiencies identified in the prior defense of the paper. These rules apply from June 19, 2014
2. Abstract – no more than 250 words.
For original research, reviews and meta-analysis, a structured abstract is required:
Background (objectives), methods (design, setting and patients or subjects, interventions, main outcome measures), results, conclusions.
3. Key words
Use three to ten key words, such as MeSH headings, appropriate for search in international data banks like Pub Med, Medline and Index Medicus.
A short description of the objectives and the published research up to present. No data and results of the research presented in the actual article.
Describe the study design, the applied trial- and research methods as well as the choice of patients or subjects. New methods ought to be described in a sufficiently detailed manner so that others may reproduce the procedure.. In reviews and meta analysis it should be described how the presented data were found and by which criteria they were selected and compared.
Describe statistical methods used and significance level required to reject the null hypothesis.
Describe results in form of text and/or graphs including the results of statistical measures.
Present the new and important results of your study and give theoretical explanations and comparative considerations. Include weaknesses of the study as well as strengths.
Brief statement of the results of the study and their implications and limitations regarding clinical practice. What do the results of the study mean for future research?
Appropriate acknowledgements to all the persons who supported the study.
Citations of studies, books, articles, etc. in the text must be referenced following uniform requirements (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/uniform_requirements.html) Mark the reference in the text with a number, which refers to the reference list in order of occurrence at the end of the text.
1. Davidoff F for the CSE Task Force on Authorship. Who's the Author? Problems with Biomedical Authorship, and Some Possible Solutions. Science Editor. July-August 2000: Volume 23 - Number 4: 111-119.
2. Yank V, Rennie D. Disclosure of researcher contributions: a study of original research articles in The Lancet. Ann Intern Med. 1999 Apr 20;130(8):661-70.
3. Flanagin A, Fontanarosa PB, DeAngelis CD. Authorship for research groups. JAMA. 2002;288:3166-68.
4. Peer Review in Health Sciences. F Godlee, T Jefferson. London: BMJ Books, 1999.
5. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2000 Dec 20;284(23):3043-5.
6. Pitkin RM, Branagan MA, Burmeister LF. Accuracy of data in abstracts of published research articles. JAMA. 1999 Mar 24-31;281(12):1110-1.
The fourth and more names may be substituted by et al.
Personal communications are to be placed at the specific location in the text, mentioning if it was in oral or written form. State that the communicating person authorized the quote.
7.10 Tables and Figures/Photos
Submit tables and figures integrated in the text with sequential number.
For all tables and figures used from other publications the author must supply documentation of permission to use the figure or table from original author.
B. Case reports
They should be written in the following format:
The author describes the health problem and its individual and social relevance. What literature there is regarding the topic. Relevance of the case study for health care. Purpose of the case study.
Method (Case study)
History and examination (positive and negative findings), differential diagnosis,
Clear description of the therapeutic techniques including literature on the technique.
Treatment results documented with objective measurable data (ex.: range of motion, lab) and subjective data (visual analogous scale), short term and long term effects.
Interpretation of the results, model of the mechanisms of the treatment results, description of unclear effects, failures, differential therapy, limitation of the treatment method, relevance for similar cases.
Was the thesis (null hypothesis) confirmed or not? Proposals for future studies.
References (see above for format requirements)