British Journal of Nutrition

Hi, could someone commend on the referencing style used by the British Journal of Nutrition. The guidelines are pretty vague (attached below). Would Harvard style fulfil those requirements?

Form of Papers Submitted for Publication.
The onus of preparing a paper in a form suitable for sending to press lies with the author. Authors are advised to consult a current issue in order to make themselves familiar with the practice of the Nutrition Research Reviews as to typographical and other conventions, layout of tables and so on. Papers will not be accepted as part of a numbered series; instead there should be a short common title separated by a colon from a subtitle more specific to the paper. Sufficient information should be given to permit repetition of the published work by any competent reader of the Journal. Authors are invited to nominate up to two potential referees who may then be asked by the Editorial Board to help review the work.
Papers should be in double-spaced typescript on paper with wide margins (2 cm or more). At the ends of lines, words should not be hyphenated unless hyphens are to be printed. A space of 50mm should be left at the top of the first sheet. Line-numbered paper is encouraged.
Spelling should generally be that of the Concise Oxford Dictionary (1995), 9th ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Papers should be divided to include the following parts:
(a) Abstract: each paper must open with an abstract of not more than 250 words. The abstract should be a single paragraph of continuous text outlining the aims of the work, the experimental approach taken, the principal results, and the conclusions and their relevance to nutritional science.
(b) Introduction: it is not necessary to introduce a paper with a full account of the relevant literature, but the introduction paragraph should indicate briefly the nature of the question asked and the reasons for asking it.
(c) Discussion: while it is generally desirable that the presentation of the results and the discussion of their significance should be presented separately, there may be occasions when combining these sections may be beneficial. Authors may also find that additional or alternative sections such as 'conclusions' may be useful.
(d) Acknowledgments: these should be given in a single paragraph after the discussion and be as brief as possible.
(e) References: these should be given in the text thus: Sebrell & Harris (1967) showed that ..., or ... has been shown (Wallace & West, 1982); where a paper to be cited has more than two authors, citations should appear thus: (Peto et al. 1981). Where more than one paper has appeared in one year for which the first name in a group of three or more authors is the same, the reference should be given as follows: Adams et al. (1962a,b,c) ..., or ... (Adams et al. 1962a,b,c). In the text, references grouped together should be given in chronological order thus: ... (Wallace & West, 1982; Lau, 1988). At the end of the paper, on a page(s) separate from the text, references should be listed in alphabetical order according to the name of the first author of the publication quoted and should include the author's initials and the title of the paper. Names and initials of authors of unpublished work should be given in the text and not included in the References. Titles of journals should appear in full. References to books and monographs should include the Publisher's name, the town of publication and the number of the edition to which reference is made. Thus: Ablett JG & McCance RA (1971) Energy expenditure of children with kwashiorkor. Lancet ii, 517–519. Adams RL, Andrews FN, Gardiner EE, Fontaine WE & Carrick CW (1962a) The effects of environmental temperature on the growth
and nutritional requirements of the chick. Poultry Science 41, 588–594. Adams RL, Andrews FN, Rogler JC & Carrick CW (1962b) The protein requirement of 4-week-old chicks as affected by
temperature. Journal of Nutrition 77, 121–126.
Adams RL, Andrews FN, Rogler JC & Carrick CW (1962c) The sulfur amino acid requirement of the chick from 4 to 8 weeks as affected by temperature. Poultry Science 41, 1801–1806.
Agricultural Research Council (1981) The Nutrient Requirements of Pigs. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux. Edmundson W (1980) Adaptation to undernutrition: how much food does man need? Social Science Medicine 14 D, 19–126. European Communities (1971) Determination of Crude Oils and Fats, Process A. Part 18, Animal Feeding-stuffs, pp. 15–19.
London: H. M. Stationery Office. Hegsted DM (1963) Variation in requirements of nutrients – amino acids. Federation Proceedings 22, 1424–1430. Heneghan JB (1979) Enterocyte kinetics, mucosal surface area and mucus in gnotobiotes. In Clinical and Experimental Gnotobiotics.
Proceedings of the VIth International Symposium on Gnotobiology, pp. 19–27 [TM Fliedner, H Heit, D Niethammer and H
Pflieger, editors]. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag. Hill DC (1977) Physiological and biochemical responses of rats given potassium cyanide or linamarin. In Cassava as an Animal
Feed. Proceedings of a Workshop held at University of Guelph, 1977. International Development Research Centre Monograph
095e, pp. 33–42 [B Nestel and M Graham, editors]. Ottawa, Ont., Canada: International Development Research Centre. Lau EMC (1988) Osteoporosis in elderly Chinese (letter). British Medical Journal 296, 1263. Louis-Sylvestre J (1987) Adaptation de l'ingestion alimentaire aux dépenses energétiques (Adaptation of food intake to energy
expenditure). Reproduction Nutrition Développement 27, 171–188. Martens H & Rayssiguier Y (1980) Magnesium metabolism and hypomagnesaemia. In Digestive Physiology and Metabolism in
Ruminants, pp. 447–466 [Y Ruckebusch and P Thivend, editors]. Lancaster: MTP Press Ltd. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1977) Energy Allowances and Feeding Systems for Ruminants. Technical Bulletin no.
33. London: H.M. Stationery Office. Peto R, Doll R, Buckly JD & Sporn MB (1981) Can dietary beta-carotene materially reduce human cancer rates? Nature 290, 201–
208. Sebrell WH Jr & Harris RS (1967) The Vitamins, 2nd ed., vol. 1. London: Academic Press. Technicon Instruments Co. Ltd (1967) Technicon Methodology Sheet N-36. Basingstoke: Technicon Instrument Co. Ltd. Van Dokkum W, Wesstra A & Schippers F (1982) Physiological effects of fibre-rich types of bread. 1. The effect of dietary fibre
from bread on the mineral balance of young men. British Journal of Nutrition 47, 451–460. Wallace RJ & West AA (1982) Adenosine 5' triphosphate and adenylate energy charge in sheep digesta. Journal of Agricultural
Sciences (Cambridge) 98, 523–528. Wilson J (1965) Leber's disease. PhD Thesis, University of London. World Health Organization (1965) Physiology of Lactation. Technical Report Series no. 305. Geneva: WHO. References to material available on websites should include the full Internet address, and the date of the version cited. Thus: Department of Health (1997) Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food Consumer Products and the Environment. Statement on
vitamin B6 (pyridoxine) toxicity. http://www.open.gov.uk/doh/hef/B6.htm


As in that PDF: http://www.nutritionsociety.org/documents/20050818NRRFullDir.pdf
  • Harvard 1 is close but there are still significant differences. While people will help you turn this into a citation style, identifying those differences with the help of the guidelines and published articles is something you will have to do (if you want a style, that is).
    http://www.zotero.org/support/requesting_styles
  • Cool, thanks for the reply. The most strinking differences I see is the edition of book given in italics "ii" instead of "second", also journal volume is typed in bold. The issue of journal is not given. Rest appears to be like Harvard. They don't give an example for websites.
  • edited February 12, 2010
    I was going to help you make a start, but I think you're mistaken in your observation of the differences between the two styles. This is from the linked pdf and it seems editions of books are not given in Roman numerals:

    Sebrell WH Jr & Harris RS (1967) The Vitamins, 2nd ed., vol. 1. London: Academic Press.

    The only example using Roman numerals is for the Lancet, which is presumably because the Lancet uses this format for numbering its volumes.

    Ablett JG & McCance RA (1971) Energy expenditure of children with kwashiorkor. Lancet ii, 517–519.

    I can quickly see other differences too: the bibliography doesn't use full-stops to make the initials of first names and editors are put in square brackets, there is a comma between surnames and year in citations etc.

    And there is an example of web addresses on the pdf:

    Department of Health (1997) Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food Consumer Products and the Environment. Statement on vitamin B6 (pyridoxine) toxicity. http://www.open.gov.uk/doh/hef/B6.htm

    You need to take the time to go through the style systematically and clearly state the differences from the closest existing style. Then someone may well be willing to help out.
  • "Public Health Nutrition" is a citation style compatible with "British Journal of Nutrition". This style is distributed by the Zotero repository.
Sign In or Register to comment.