Skip to main content

70th AAEP Convention
Orlando, Florida
December 7-11, 2024

ALL papers must be submitted online at
by March 15, 2024, 3:00 p.m. ET.

Please make sure you have reviewed the General Guidelines.

Review papers are presented for the purpose of updating the membership on a new subject or for gathering information that may be conflicting. The aim of the paper is to help the membership put the information in perspective, and to make judgments on conflicting information. A review paper will not principally present original data; the goal is to clarify existing knowledge on a subject and help the membership better use the information in their day-to-day practice.  

Review papers should be formatted as described in the General Guidelines and should be no fewer than 600 words, with no upper word limit. The content of review articles should be organized with headings and subheadings that provide a logical flow to the material presented. 


1. Paper Title
2. Take Home Message
3. Introduction
4. Review of Topic/ Information
5. Discussion
6. Acknowledgments
         i.  Declaration of Ethics
         ii. Conflicts of Interest
         iii. Funding/Material/Technical Support
7. References

The paper should be titled "Review of Some Subject" and should clearly identify the topic that will be presented.
Example: Review of Upper Respiratory Dysfunction in Horses During High-Speed Exercise

A “Take Home Message” should be provided that summarizes the practical application of the information for the practitioner. This should be a concise summary of the main conclusion and should be no longer than two or three sentences (approximately 50 words)

Example: There are many upper respiratory conditions that can impact a horse’s performance during high-speed exercise. Differentiating between these conditions allows for the most appropriate treatment and optimizes outcome.  

The Introduction should define the subject matter and put it in context, explaining why the review is necessary. The purpose of the review paper should be clearly stated in the Introduction. Clinical significance should also be included, as well as a clear statement of the objective or purpose of the submission. The statement of objectives is usually found in the last sentence of the Introduction.

Review of significant published information should be included here. Agreement and disagreement within the subject matter should be identified along with the strengths and limitations of the information sources. Subheadings can be used within this section to break down the material, as appropriate. Reference should be made to the authors who generally support the opinions stated. 

In the Discussion section, the author can give his/her personal views or commentary of the reviewed topic/ information. The author’s perspective, including his/her own interpretation of the information if it is different from previously published opinions, should be included. The end of the discussion should contain a summary and the conclusion that the author has drawn for the audience, based upon the reviewed data. 

       i.  Declaration of Ethics
       ii. Conflicts of Interest
       iii. Funding/Material/Technical Support


An appropriately complete reference list should be included.

References should conform to JAVMA’s guidelines.

References to published works should be limited to what is relevant and necessary. Number references in the text with superscript numbers consecutively in the order in which they are first cited. Under references, list all authors when there are three or fewer; list only the first three and add “et al.” when there are four or more. The author is responsible for the formatting and accuracy of all reference citations. Since readers frequently depend upon the reference citations to guide them in further reading, it is imperative that the citations are correct so that libraries can locate the papers a reader may wish to obtain.