Scope | Article Types | Submission & Review Process | Publishing Ethics | Policy on Prior Publication | Detailed Manuscript Preparation Instructions | Manuscript Format | References | Figures | Tables | Supplementary Materials | AuthorAID | Author Hub | Artificial Intelligence Policy

Submission

PHN uses ScholarOne Manuscripts for online submission and peer review. You can find out more on the 'Submitting your materials' page here. Queries can be directed to the PHN Editorial Office at: PHN.edoffice@cambridge.org

Advice on preparing your paper for submission can be found below.

As part of the online submission process, authors are asked to affirm that the submission represents original work that has not been published previously; that it is not currently being considered by another journal; and that each author has seen and approved the contents of the submitted manuscript.

Scope

The journal publishes original research, reviews with and without meta-analysis, commentaries encouraging debate, policy related papers and letters to the editor.

The scope of Public Health Nutrition includes manuscripts from low-, middle- and high-income countries reporting on nutritional epidemiology (note cross-sectional studies are rarely accepted), behavioural nutrition relating to healthy, affordable and sustainable diets, food environments and food systems, and evaluation of nutrition interventions including evaluation of nutrition policies. PHN also publishes manuscripts on topics interacting with nutrition and health such as food and planetary health and nutrition communication. We welcome papers that:

• Identify and analyse behavioural, sociocultural, environmental, economic and political determinants of nutrition-related public health
• Describe the design, implementation, and evaluation of nutrition interventions and programmes including nutrition policies to address nutrition-related problems
• Develop methodology and address monitoring and surveillance of nutritional status and nutritional environments in vulnerable populations
• Inform, frame and discuss metrics of effectiveness of food and nutrition policies
• Relate diet and nutrition to environmental sustainability and food systems 
• Inform efforts to improve communication of nutrition-related information

We prefer papers that are innovative (do not repeat research already undertaken elsewhere) and relevant to an international readership. Articles included as part of a special supplementary collection can be accepted even if descriptive or country-focused, if the contribution of the article to a supplement is clear and if the supplement, as a whole, fits the scope of the journal.

We typically do not accept papers that describe only methodology/protocol unless the authors are able to make the case for novel methods that are of relevance to an international readership. We don’t accept articles where there is no assessment of food or nutrient intake, dietary patterns or food environment. We only accept measurement of an index in place of diet, for example the Dietary Inflammatory index, if there is evidence that the index is related to biomarkers (for example, of inflammation). Measurements of dietary patterns should be validated. We will also accept some related measures of dietary behaviour such as food literacy scores if a validated tool is used. PHN focusses on prevention and therefore research that recruits clinically ill participants with, for example, cancers or cardiovascular disease are rarely accepted. Manuscripts that do not fall within the scope as described above may be directed to more appropriate journals, such as British Journal of Nutrition or Journal of Nutritional Science. Contact the editorial office if you have any queries related to scope of the journal at phn.edoffice@cambridge.org. 

Article Types

PHN publishes Research Articles, Short Communications, Review Articles, with and without meta-analysis, Commentaries, Letters to the Editor and Editorials. Please contact the Editorial Office on phn.edoffice@cambridge.org with any queries on type of submission.

1. A Research Article should be no more than 5000 words; not including the abstract, references, tables, figures and acknowledgements; and with a maximum of 50 references.
2. A Short Communication should consist of no more than 2000 words and have a maximum of 3 tables OR figures and 50 references.
3. A Systematic Review Article, with or without meta-analysis, should be no more than 5000 words; not including the abstract, references, tables, figures and acknowledgements; and with a maximum of 100 references. 
4. A Scoping Review which synthesises evidence and assesses the scope of literature, should be no more than 5000 words; not including the abstract, references, tables, figures and acknowledgements; and with a maximum of 100 references.
5. A Commentary should consist of no more than 2000 words and provide a perspective on a topic of current relevance or controversy; or a policy framework.
6. A Letter to the Editor should be no more than 600 words and should discuss, criticise or develop themes put forward in a (usually recent) paper published in PHN in the last 2 months; they should not be used as a means of publishing new work. The maximum number of references permitted is 10. Acceptance will be at the discretion of the Editorial Board, and editorial changes may be required. The authors of the original article will be offered the right to reply.

Additional requirements

For randomised controlled trials, authors should consult the CONSORT guidelines and include the CONSORT checklist for reporting results of randomised controlled trials. 

For systematic reviews, the journal endorses the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement (see current PRISMA statement at https://www.prisma-statement.org/). Such submissions should follow the PRISMA guidelines and authors should include the PRISMA checklist with their submission (see instructions below).

For scoping reviews that use rigorous methodology to find relevant papers and to generate evidence for the need for further research in important areas of nutrition; a synthesis of the available literature should be provided. Authors should follow the extension guidance provided by PRISMA for scoping reviews and include a completed checklist available from the PRISMA website. 

In the case of research articles submitted as part of a special supplement, every article should contribute to innovation, either independently or as part of the supplement. Articles submitted as part of a special supplement that are purely descriptive can only be published if:

1. the descriptive results reported are vital to meeting the aim(s) of the supplement, such as a comparative approach
2. the aim(s) of the supplement fits the scope of PHN as outlined under SCOPE
3. the text of the introduction, methods and discussion includes justification of the importance of the (descriptive) results in relation to the supplement aim(s)
4. the authors directly compare their descriptive results to other results from the supplement or in the submission letter the authors state that the comparison between their results and others will be made in another article in the same supplement and specify which one. 

Graphical abstracts

Submission of a graphical abstract to PHN is not mandatory but we encourage authors to submit one alongside their paper to boost understanding and sharing of their research. A Graphical Abstract is a single image that summarises the main findings of a paper, allowing readers to quickly gain an overview and understanding of your work. Graphical abstracts are an important way to publicise your research, attracting readers, and helping to disseminate your work to a wider audience by supporting sharing on a wide range of media channels. Graphical abstracts are displayed at article level, and on the article landing page online. 

The graphical abstract should be submitted separately from the main paper using the ‘Graphical Abstract’ file designation on ScholarOne at revised submission stage. Graphical abstracts should be clear and easy for the viewer to read; and should illustrate one or two main points only. Images within the graphical abstract should be free to use or, if necessary, permission sought to reuse the image before submitting the graphical abstract. Acceptable formats include TIFF, EPS or PDF. For further information about how to prepare your graphical abstract, including sizing and resolution requirements, please see our artwork guide. The image will be scaled to fit the appropriate space on Cambridge Core, so please ensure that any font used is clear to read, and that any text is included as part of the image. There is no need to include the title ‘Graphical Abstract’ in your image.

Publishing Ethics

PHN considers all manuscripts on the strict condition that:

• The manuscript is your own original work, and does not duplicate any previously published work;
• The manuscript has been submitted only to the journal - it is not under consideration or peer review or accepted for publication or in press or published elsewhere;
• All listed authors know of and agree to the manuscript being submitted to the journal; and
• The manuscript contains nothing abusive, defamatory, fraudulent, illegal, libellous, or obscene.

PHN adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on research and publications ethics. Text taken directly or closely paraphrased from earlier published work that has not been acknowledged or referenced will be considered plagiarism. Submitted manuscripts in which such text is identified will be withdrawn from the editorial process. Any concerns raised about possible plagiarism or other violations of ethical guidelines in an article submitted to or published in PHN will be investigated fully and dealt with in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

The Nutrition Society, as the owner of PHN, endorses the Publication Ethics outlined by Cambridge University Press.

PHN recommends that authors consult the Reappraised Research Integrity Checklist by Grey et al. (Nature (2020)) before submitting their paper.

Policy on Prior Publication

A ‘preprint’ is an early version of an article prior to the version accepted for publication in a journal. We encourage authors to include details of preprint posting, including DOI or other persistent identifier, when submitting to PHN. 

Please note however that the journal operates a double-blind peer review process and therefore your paper may not be fully blinded as a result.

For full details, please see our preprint policy here.

Detailed Manuscript Preparation Instructions

Language

Papers submitted for publication must be written in English and should be as concise as possible. We recommend that authors have their manuscript checked by an English language native speaker before submission, to ensure that submissions are judged at peer review exclusively on academic merit.

We list a number of third-party services specialising in language editing and / or translation, and suggest that authors contact as appropriate. Use of any of these services is voluntary, and at the author's own expense. Use of these services does not guarantee that the manuscript will be accepted for publication, nor does it restrict the author to submitting to a Cambridge-published journal. 

Spelling should generally be that of the Concise Oxford Dictionary (1995), 9th ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Authors are advised to consult a current article in order to make themselves familiar with PHN as to typographical and other conventions, layout of tables etc.

Authorship

The Journal conforms to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) definition of authorship. Authorship credit should be based on:

1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; and
2. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and
3. Final approval of the version to be published; and
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

In the process of submitting an article to PHN, the corresponding author is prompted to provide further details about contributions to the article using the CRediT taxonomy. People who have contributed to the article but do not meet the full criteria for authorship should be recognised in the acknowledgements section; their contribution can also be described in terms of the CRediT taxonomy.

Experiments involving human subjects

All submissions must abide by the guidelines in the World Medical Association (2000) Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, with notes of clarification of 2002 and 2004 (https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/), the Guidelines on the Practice of Ethics Committees Involved in Medical Research Involving Human Subjects (3rd ed., 1996; London: The Royal College of Physicians) and the Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct of Medical Research Involving Children, revised in 2000 by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health: Ethics Advisory Committee (Arch Dis Child (2000) 82, 177–182).

Required checklists

Systematic reviews: PRISMA Checklist

For systematic reviews, with or without meta-analyses, PHN requires completion of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist (www.prisma-statement.org/). This policy includes all systematic reviews, including those for observational studies. A completed copy of the checklist should be submitted along with the manuscript, with page numbers noted as required. When a given item has not been addressed, authors must provide an explanation. Scoping reviews require completion of the checklist adapted for scoping review (link).

Randomised controlled trials: CONSORT Checklist

For randomised controlled trials (RCTs), PHN requires completion of the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) checklist, a 30-item checklist of essential items to be included in manuscripts reporting on the results of randomized trials. A diagram for documenting the flow of participants through a trial is also required. For cluster RCTs a diagram of the flow of clusters as well as individuals is required. The CONSORT statement was updated in 2025 and the new updated CONSORT statement should be used (link). Also note that a checklist specifically for nutrition trials, CONSORT-nut, is being developed and this version will be encouraged when available.

Observational studies in nutritional epidemiology: STROBE-Nut

For papers reporting observational studies in nutritional epidemiology, PHN requires completion of the STROBE-Nut checklist. The STROBE-Nut checklist can be found here. The appropriate checklist for the study design used, for example, cohort study, should be completed. Note that cross-sectional epidemiological studies will rarely be accepted unless there are very few published studies in that area.

Note that editors and reviewers will not evaluate manuscripts based on the number of items checked off in the checklist. The purpose of the PRISMA, CONSORT and STROBE guidelines is to recommend a critical set of items that should typically be reported in a manuscript. The guidelines are meant to improve transparency by helping authors improve the quality of their reporting. More clarity in reporting will facilitate review of your manuscript and increase its value to readers.

Vitamin D

The editorial by Sempos and Binkley (Public Health Nutr (2020) 23(7): 1153-1164) in PHN's recent Special Issue on Vitamin D explains clearly the need for standardization of vitamin D assays if we are to provide evidence to underpin updated vitamin D guidelines.  This editorial also recommends that journals only publish manuscripts where vitamin D values have been retrospectively or prospectively standardized.

To ensure that Public Health Nutrition only publishes vitamin D studies that can contribute to the evidence base, it is required that future submissions standardize vitamin D measures. This requirement will not apply to submissions already in the system, and during the transition, authors will be given the opportunity to explain why it is not feasible for their study. Reviewers will be advised to assess any studies including vitamin D data for assay standardization. This will require that assays are fit for purpose, that is work in the population group being studied, and are either prospectively standardized for new work (J AOAC Int (2017) 100(5):1230-1233, Br J Cl Pharm (2018) 84(10):2194-2207), or retrospectively standardized for exiting data. Practical details of retrospective standardization can be found in Durazo-Arvizu et al (J AOAC Int (2017) 100: 1234-1243) and Sempos et al (Osteoporos Int (2017) 28:1503-1505).

Use of the Dietary Inflammatory Index (DII®)

If you are using the DII in your paper, please make sure that you have followed the relevant instructions outlined here.

Research Integrity

PHN recommends that authors consult the Reappraised Research Integrity Checklist by Grey et al. (Nature (2020)) before submitting their paper.

Manuscript Format

The requirements of PHN are in accordance with the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals produced by the ICMJE, and authors are encouraged to consult the latest guidelines, which contain useful, general information about preparing scientific papers. 

Authors should check whether they need to include a required checklist.

For detailed instructions regarding mathematical modelling, statistical analysis and nomenclature requirements, please refer to the Appendix to these instructions.

Typescripts should be prepared with 1.5 line spacing and wide margins (2 cm), the preferred font being Times New Roman size 12. Submissions should be in Word. At the ends of lines, words should not be hyphenated unless hyphens are to be printed.

Continuous line and page numbering is required from the beginning of the abstract.

Manuscripts should be organised as follows:

Cover Letter

Authors are invited to submit a cover letter addressed to the EiC that includes a short explanation (typically 200 to 300 words) of how the article is within scope, how it advances the field of public health nutrition in terms of research, practice, or policy; and of its relevance to an international readership. The text for the cover letter should be entered in the appropriate box as part of the online submission process.

Authors that are part of a funded supplement should make reference to this fact in the cover letter, identifying clearly which supplement their article is intended to be part of.

Title Page

Authors must submit a title page online as a separate file to their manuscript, to enable double-anonymous reviewing. For the same reason, the information on the title page should not be included in the manuscript itself. For a template title page, please click here; the title page should include:

1. The title of the article (please make sure that there are no brand names in the title);
2. Authors' names, given without titles or degrees, for example Charlotte E.L. Evans;
3. Name and address of department(s) and institution(s) to which the work should be attributed for each author, with each author's institution(s) identified by a superscript number (e.g. A.B. Smith1);
4. Name, mailing address, and email address of the author responsible for correspondence about the manuscript;
5. A shortened version of the title, not exceeding 45 characters (including letters and spaces) in length;
6. Disclosure statements, as outlined below. These must be included on the title page and not in the manuscript file, to enable double-anonymous reviewing; if the paper is accepted, they will be inserted into the manuscript during production. They must also be captured under individual headings. 

Acknowledgements

Here you may acknowledge individuals or organisations that provided advice and/or support (non-financial). Formal financial support and funding should be listed in the following section.

Financial support

Please provide details of the sources of financial support for all authors, including grant numbers. For example, "This work was supported by the Medical research Council (grant number XXXXXXX)". Multiple grant numbers should be separated by a comma and space, and where research was funded by more than one agency the different agencies should be separated by a semi-colon, with "and" before the final funder. Grants held by different authors should be identified as belonging to individual authors by the authors' initials. For example, "This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust (A.B., grant numbers XXXX, YYYY), (C.D., grant number ZZZZ); the Natural Environment Research Council (E.F., grant number FFFF); and the National Institutes of Health (A.B., grant number GGGG), (E.F., grant number HHHH)".

This disclosure is particularly important in the case of research supported by industry, including not only direct financial support for the study but also support in kind such as provision of medications, equipment, kits or reagents without charge or at reduced cost and provision of services such as statistical analysis. All such support, financial and in kind, should be disclosed here.

Where no specific funding has been provided for research, please provide the following statement: "This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors."

In addition to the source of financial support, please state whether the funder contributed to the study design, conduct of the study, analysis of samples or data, interpretation of findings or the preparation of the manuscript. If the funder made no such contribution, please provide the following statement: "[Funder's name] had no role in the design, analysis or writing of this article."

Declaration of interest

The Journal adheres to the definition of conflicts of interest given by the ICMJE guidelines. A conflict of interest exists when an author has interests that might inappropriately influence his or her judgement, even if that judgement is not influenced. Financial relationships such as employment, consultancies, or honoraria, are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest. However, non-financial conflicts can also exist as a result of personal relationships, academic competition, and personal or intellectual beliefs.

Having a declaration of interest is not in itself wrong, and not all relationships may lead to an actual conflict of interest. However, PHN requires full disclosure about any relevant relationships, even if the author or reviewer does not believe it affects their judgment. These disclosures can then be used as a basis for editorial decisions. One question that provides some guidance in deciding which relationships merit declaration as potential conflicts of interest is this: if a relationship is not disclosed, would a reasonable reader feel misled? When in doubt, full transparency is the best course of action. Perceived conflicts of interest are as important as actual conflicts of interest, and undeclared conflicts (perceived as well as actual) can undermine the credibility of both the journal and the authors.

So that others can make judgements about potential conflicts, please provide details of all known financial and non-financial (professional and personal) relationships with the potential to bias the work. Where no known conflicts of interest exist, please include the following statement: "None."

Authorship

Please provide a very brief description of the contribution of each author to the research. Their roles in formulating the research question(s), designing the study, carrying it out, analysing the data and writing the article should be made plain. We recommend the use of CRediT’s 14 contributor roles.

Ethical standards disclosure

Manuscripts describing research involving human participants must include the following statement: "This study was conducted according to the guidelines laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki and all procedures involving research study participants were approved by the [name of the ethics committee]. Written [or Verbal] informed consent was obtained from all subjects/patients." Where verbal consent was obtained, this must be followed by a statement such as: "Verbal consent was witnessed and formally recorded."

Where any individual is the subject of and/or named in the article (excluding citations), we expect authors to evidence consent for this and/or otherwise justify the rationale for inclusion of named individuals.

Abstract

Each original research paper must open with a structured abstract of not more than 250 words. The abstract should consist of the following headings: Objective, Design, Setting, Participants, Results, Conclusions. All the headings should be used, and there should be a separate paragraph for each one. The abstract should be intelligible without reference to text or figures. Other manuscript types may have an unstructured abstract of up to 150 words.

Keywords

Authors should list at least four keywords or phrases (each containing up to three words).

Introduction

It is not necessary to introduce a paper with a full account of the relevant literature, but the introduction should indicate briefly the nature of the question asked and the reasons for asking it. It should be no longer than two manuscript pages.

Methods

For manuscripts describing experiments involving human subjects, the required ethical standards disclosure statement must be included on the title page only as described above. It will then be inserted into this section of the manuscript during production.

The methods should include a subsection with a detailed description of all the statistical analyses used in the study.

Results

These should be given as concisely as possible, using figures or tables as appropriate. Data should not be duplicated in tables and figures. Effect sizes and associated confidence intervals should be presented if appropriate as well as p values. P-values larger than 0.01 should be reported to two decimal places and those between 0.01 and 0.001 to three decimal places; P-values smaller than 0.001 should be reported as P<0.001.  Leading zeros should be included in P-values and full P-values should always be quoted (not P<0.05 for example).

Discussion

The results and the discussion should be presented separately and the discussion should be no longer than 5 pages. The discussion typically includes the following sections: a summary of the main findings, interpretation of the results with comparison of existing literature, strengths and limitations of the study and potential impact of the limitations on the results, implications for future research with suggestions for next research steps and conclusions. Some manuscripts may benefit from a section on policy implications as well as research implications.

References

As per PHN's new policy on format-neutral submission for original submissions, please note that the below applies to revised papers only. 

References should be numbered consecutively in the order in which they first appear in the text using superscript Arabic numerals in parentheses, e.g. 'The conceptual difficulty of this approach has recently been highlighted^(1,2)'. If a reference is cited more than once, the same number should be used each time. References cited only in tables and figure legends should be numbered in sequence from the last number used in the text and in the order of mention of the individual tables and figures in the text.

Names and initials of authors of unpublished work should be given in the text as 'unpublished results' and not included in the References. References that have been published online only but not yet in an issue should include the online publication date and the Digital Object Identifier (doi) reference, as per the example below.

At the end of the paper, on a page(s) separate from the text, references should be listed in numerical order using the Vancouver system. When an article has more than three authors only the names of the first three authors should be given followed by 'et al.' The issue number should be omitted if there is continuous pagination throughout a volume. Titles of journals should appear in their abbreviated form using the NCBI LinkOut page. References to books and monographs should include the town of publication and the number of the edition to which reference is made. References to material available on websites should follow a similar style, with the full URL included at the end of the reference, as well as the date of the version cited and the date of access.

Examples of correct forms of references are given below.

Journal articles

• Rebello SA, Koh H, Chen C et al. (2014) Amount, type, and sources of carbohydrates in relation to ischemic heart disease mortality in a Chinese population: a prospective cohort study. Am J Clin Nutr 100, 53-64.
• Villar J, Ismail LC, Victora CG et al. (2014) International standards for newborn weight, length, and head circumference by gestational age and sex: the Newborn Cross-Sectional Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project.Lancet 384, 857-868.
• Alonso VR & Guarner F (2013) Linking the gut microbiota to human health. Br J Nutr 109, Suppl. 2, S21–S26.
• Bauserman M, Lokangaka A, Gado J et al. A cluster-randomized trial determining the efficacy of caterpillar cereal as a locally available and sustainable complementary food to prevent stunting and anaemia. Public Health Nutr. Published online: 29 January 2015. doi: 10.1017/S1368980014003334.

Books and monographs

• Bradbury J (2002) Dietary intervention in edentulous patients. PhD Thesis, University of Newcastle.
• Ailhaud G & Hauner H (2004) Development of white adipose tissue. In Handbook of Obesity. Etiology and Pathophysiology, 2nd ed., pp. 481–514 [GA Bray and C Bouchard, editors]. New York: Marcel Dekker.
• Bruinsma J (editor) (2003) World Agriculture towards 2015/2030: An FAO Perspective. London: Earthscan Publications.
• World Health Organization (2003) Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases. Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation. WHO Technical Report Series no. 916. Geneva: WHO.
• Keiding L (1997) Astma, Allergi og Anden Overfølsomhed i Danmark – Og Udviklingen 1987–199I (Asthma, Allergy and Other Hypersensitivities in Denmark, 1987–1991). Copenhagen, Denmark: Dansk Institut for Klinisk Epidemiologi.

Sources from the internet

• Nationmaster (2005) HIV AIDS – Adult prevalence rate. http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Health/HIV-AIDS/Adult-prevalence-rate (accessed June 2013).

For authors that use Endnote, you can find the style guide for PHN here. 

Figures

Figures should be supplied as separate electronic files. Figure legends should be grouped in a section at the end of the manuscript text. Each figure should be clearly marked with its number and separate panels within figures should be clearly marked (a), (b), (c) etc. so that they are easily identifiable when the article and figure files are merged for review. Each figure, with its legend, should be comprehensible without reference to the text and should include definitions of abbreviations.

We recommend that only TIFF, EPS or PDF formats are used for electronic artwork. For further information about how to prepare your figures, including sizing and resolution requirements, please see our artwork guide.

In curves presenting experimental results the determined points should be clearly shown, the symbols used being, in order of preference, ○, ●, ∆, ▲, □, ■, ×, +. Curves and symbols should not extend beyond the experimental points. Scale-marks on the axes should be on the inner side of each axis and should extend beyond the last experimental point. Ensure that lines and symbols used in graphs and shading used in histograms are large enough to be easily identified when the figure size is reduced to fit the page.

Tables

Tables should be placed in the main manuscript file at the end of the document, not within the main text. Be sure that each table is cited in the text. Tables should carry headings describing their content and should be comprehensible without reference to the text. 

The dimensions of the values, e.g. mg/kg, should be given at the top of each column. Separate columns should be used for measures of variance (SD, SE etc.), the ± sign should not be used. The number of decimal places used should be standardized; for whole numbers 1.0, 2.0 etc. should be used. Shortened forms of the words weight (wt) and height (ht) may be used to save space in tables.

Footnotes are given in the following order: (1) abbreviations, (2) superscript letters, (3) symbols. Abbreviations are given in the format: RS, resistant starch. Abbreviations in tables must be defined in footnotes in the order that they appear in the table (reading from left to right across the table, then down each column). Symbols for footnotes should be used in the sequence: *†‡§||¶, then ** etc. (omit * or †, or both, from the sequence if they are used to indicate levels of significance).

For indicating statistical significance, superscript letters or symbols may be used. Superscript letters are useful where comparisons are within a row or column and the level of significance is uniform, e.g. '^a,b,c 

Mean values within a column with unlike superscript letters were significantly different (P<0•05)'. Symbols are useful for indicating significant differences between rows or columns, especially where different levels of significance are found, e.g. 'Mean values were significantly different from those of the control group: *P<0•05, **P<0•01, ***P<0•001'. The symbols used for P values in the tables must be consistent.

Supplementary material

Material that is not essential to understanding or supporting a manuscript, but which may nonetheless be relevant or interesting to readers, may be submitted as supplementary material. Supplementary material will be published online alongside your article, but will not be published in the pages of the journal. Types of supplementary material may include, but are not limited to, appendices, additional tables or figures, datasets, videos, and sound files.

Although Supplementary Material is peer reviewed, it is not checked, copyedited or typeset after acceptance and it is loaded onto the journal's website exactly as supplied. Please see our general guidance on supplementary materials for further information.

Where relevant we encourage authors to publish additional qualitative or quantitative research outputs in an appropriate repository, and cite these in manuscripts.

AuthorAID

AuthorAID is a global network that provides free support, mentoring, resources and training to help researchers in low- and middle-income countries to write, publish and otherwise communicate their work.

Key features of AuthorAID are:

• A community space for discussion and questions where researchers can benefit from advice and insights from members across the globe
• Access to a range of documents and presentations on best practice in writing and publication
• World-wide training workshops and MOOCs on scientific writing
• A chance to network with other researchers. Personal mentoring by highly published researchers and professional editors

For any authors new to publishing research articles, we encourage you to make use of the AuthorAID resources before submitting your paper to PHN. Through the AuthorAID network, guidance can be found to help researchers through the process of writing and submitting scientific papers, advice about responding to reviewer comments, as well as research design and grant applications.

Please note that seeking support through AuthorAID will not guarantee acceptance for publication in PHN, or affect the editorial process in any way.

APPENDIX: MATHEMATICAL MODELLING, STATISTICS AND NOMENCLATURE