how to write a letter for a research paper

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

How to Write a Cover Letter for Your Manuscript? Here are the Tips and Examples

• 3 minute read

Table of Contents

A cover letter is often the first thing an editor reads when reviewing your submission. As your first pitch to the editor, the cover letter helps them gauge the suitability of your manuscript for publication in their journal. Imagine your work shaping the future of your field, gathering citations, and sparking discussions. A powerful cover letter is thus the first step to making that vision into a reality.   

In this article, we will guide you through the process of writing an effective cover letter and explain how you can get it right every time with examples. First, let us get started with the basics!  

Getting the Basics Right  

When writing a cover letter, it is crucial to address the editor by their correct and complete name¹ . If there are multiple co-editors, you can address your letter to the right person, based on their specialization or designated responsibilities. If unsure, it is okay to go with a more general salutation, such as “Dear Editors”¹ .   

Presenting your Research  

Provide a clear and concise title for your submission and specify whether it is an article, communication, review, perspective, or a manuscript belonging to some other category. If the journal guideline recommends, consider including a list of all authors in the manuscript.   

After covering the preliminary information, briefly explain your paper’s central theme or focus to give the editor an idea of its contents. Ensure this stays a brief outline, without going into too much detail.   

Conveying the Importance of Your Work  

How you communicate the impact of your work can make or break your cover letter. To make a strong impression on the editor, articulate the significance of your research clearly, emphasizing its relevance to the field. Additionally, show how your work aligns with the journal’s scope and mission.  

Including a Formal Declaration  

Some journals require a set of declarations from you to ensure that your manuscript adheres to its ethical code and the larger ethical standards of scientific publishing. Here are the required declarations in a cover letter:  

• Originality of work:  
• Confirm that your work is original and has not been published elsewhere. This tells the editor your research is unique.  
• Conflict of interest statement:  
• Be clear about any potential conflicts of interest. This includes any personal, financial, or professional connections that might affect your research.  
• Funding source (if applicable):  
• Tell where your research funding came from, if any. This includes any support or grants from organizations.   

Including Personal Suggestions for Reviewers on a Separate Page (optional)  

If there is no part of the submission process that collects researcher suggestions for reviewers, and there are special requests from the researcher for reviewers (e.g., recommending the inclusion or suggesting the exclusion of a specific reviewer, etc.), you may also make a note about this in the cover letter.  

Combining these five points, here is a good example of a cover letter for researchers’ reference:  

(This image is intended to demonstrate the norms of formatting and tone of expression in a cover letter, it is to be used only by the researcher as a reference in writing² .)  

Conclusion  

A strong cover letter can go a long way in ensuring success for researchers looking to publish their manuscripts! Your cover letter is the opening act, setting the stage for how editors perceive your manuscript. So, look at it not as just another formality but as a crucial opportunity to make a strong impression.   

Understanding what to include, what is optional, and what is best left unsaid can be tricky. That is where our team of experts at Elsevier Language Services can step in. We will provide personalized recommendations and expert guidance to help you craft a cover letter that perfectly complements your manuscript. Reach out to us today to make a great first impression and embark on a successful academic journey!  

Reference  

• Nicholas, D. (2019). How to choose a journal and write a cover letter. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 13(5), 35. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.sja_691_18  
• Loyola University Chicago. (n.d.). JCSHESA Sample Cover Letter. https://ecommons.luc.edu/jcshesa/cover_letter_template.pdf  

Page-Turner Articles are More Than Just Good Arguments: Be Mindful of Tone and Structure!

You may also like.

Publishing Biomedical Research: What Rules Should You Follow?

Writing an Effective Cover Letter for Manuscript Resubmission

Journal Acceptance Rates: Everything You Need to Know

Research Data Storage and Retention

How to Find and Select Reviewers for Journal Articles

How to Request the Addition of an Extra Author Before Publication

Paper Rejection: Common Reasons

How to Write a Journal Article from a Thesis

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

How to write a cover letter for journal submission

Download our cover letter template.

When you submit your article to a journal, you often need to include a cover letter. This is a great opportunity to highlight to the journal editor what makes your research new and important. The cover letter should explain why your work is perfect for their journal and why it will be of interest to the journal’s readers.

When writing for publication, a well-written cover letter can help your paper reach the next stage of the manuscript submission process – being sent out for  peer review . So it’s worth spending time thinking about how to write a cover letter to the journal editor, to make sure it’s going to be effective.

To help you, we’ve put together a guide to explain how to write a cover letter for journal article submission. You will receive cover letter instructions of what you should include and what you shouldn’t, and a word template cover letter.

Ready to submit?

Taylor & Francis Editing services has a high quality premium editing package to make you feel confident to submit.

Customized cover letter

Feedback on original writing

Complete language check

Extensive revisions.

What should my cover letter include?

Before you start to write, please check the  instructions for authors  (IFAs) of your chosen journal, as not all journals will require one. You should also check the IFAs for any journal specific information on what to include. This may include a list of relevant articles written by you or your co-authors that have been or are currently being considered for publication in other journals.

Key points to include in your letter to the editor:

Editor’s name (you can usually find this on the journal page on  Taylor & Francis Online ).

Your manuscript’s title.

Name of the journal you are submitting to.

Statement that your paper has not been previously published and is not currently under consideration by another journal.

Brief description of the research you are reporting in your paper, why it is important, and why you think the readers of the journal would be interested in it.

Contact information for you and any  co-authors .

Confirmation that you have no  competing interests  to disclose.

Things to avoid:

Don’t copy your abstract into your cover letter, instead explain in your own words the significance of the work, the problem that is being addressed, and why the manuscript belongs in the journal.

Don’t use too much jargon or too many acronyms, keep language straightforward and easy to read.

Avoid too much detail – keep your cover letter to a maximum of one page, as an introduction and brief overview.

Avoid any spelling and grammar errors and ensure your letter is thoroughly proofed before submitting.

Click to enlarge your PDF on key information to include in your cover letter .

Cover letter template

If you need further help to write a cover letter for a journal, you can download and use our sample template as a guide.

You might find that the submission system for your chosen journal requires your cover letter to be submitted into a text box rather than as a separate document, but it is still a good idea to write a draft first to make sure you have included everything.

Always make sure to check the journal’s  instructions for authors  for any specific additional information to include.

Submission ready

Use our submission checklist  to make sure you’ve included everything you need to.

If you need more guidance, take a look at our other  information and resources to help you make your submission .

Rapid constructive feedback

Consider the Taylor & Francis Rapid Technical Review service to help you meet your deadline, through peer-review-like comments on your manuscript.

Related resources

Journal submission support

Guide to improve your submission experience

Article submission checklist

Publishing tips, direct to your inbox

Expert tips and guidance on getting published and maximizing the impact of your research. Register now for weekly insights direct to your inbox.

English Editing Research Services

Writing a Successful Journal Cover Letter (Free Templates)

Even great manuscripts often stand out based on the title or its contents alone. They need great cover letters.

Cover letters for journal submission are an underrated part of the submission process. Don’t overlook them. They’re a valuable step to getting your research noticed, published, and all the good things that come after that.

The truth is, most journal editors just don’t have the time to thoroughly read every submitted article in full to decide if it’s suitable for their journal. They use cover letters to help them filter out the most interesting and appropriate submissions first.

Cover letters also help identify articles completely out of the journal’s scope and that would be better off getting a quick letter of rejection.

If your manuscript doesn’t have a cover letter and the 12 other articles on the editor’s desk do, it’s likely that your paper will be looked at last. Putting in that extra effort, just like on a job application, lets you sell your research, avoid quick rejections, and more likely make it to peer review.

We also have some journal cover letter templates and examples for you, so you don’t have to start from zero. Read on.

What do you put in a journal cover letter?

Your cover letter needs certain basic elements. Generally they are:

• Editor and target journal
• Salutation (Dear Dr. …)
• Indication you’re submitting your manuscript, along with its title, and the category of manuscript you’re submitting (Original Report, Review , Case Study, etc.) based on what the journal accepts
• Background information regarding your work – what is already known about the subject matter?
• What your study was
• Why you performed the study (rationale)
• Briefly, what methods you used and what your key findings were
• Why your manuscript is a great fit for this journal
• (optional, depending on the journal and on if you want to do this) Recommended reviewers
• (optional, depending on the journal) Funding information
• Closing line (Sincerely, etc.) and the name and contact details for the manuscript’s corresponding author

Those are the key elements. It’s how you express them and the quality of your message that mean the different between a dry overview and an attractive promotion of your work.

Many journals don’t have a prescribed format for the cover letter. On the other end of the spectrum are PLOS ONE’s guidelines , which give specifics on what to include, including selecting Academic Editors from its directory.

Always check the guidelines first to be sure you give the journal what it wants. Those are basics. With a grasp of those, there are many ways to polish your cover letter into a valuable sales tool for your work.

What to do and what to avoid in your journal cover letter

Most “problems with journal cover letters relate to simply not spending enough time and care on it. Or even not doing it at all. These are easily fixed if you’re a skilled English writer. If not, they’re still easily fixed with a little help.

All of the following are critical. Make sure you DO:

• Check the name of your target journal.
• Address the cover letter to the relevant person. It is not enough to simply say “Dear Editor” or “To whom it may concern.” Include the name, title and position of the editor you are addressing.
• Avoid superlatives – about the journal, yourself and your own work. It’s pretty unlikely your work is “groundbreaking” or “trailblazing,” though it may by the “first time ever” that a certain approach was taken with a certain population.
• Check the formatting. This varies by journal. It includes US vs. UK vs. Oxford English spelling, correct page numbering, use of templates, and much more.
• Get a colleague to read your cover letter before you send it.

“ A typical cover letter just repeats the abstract. That’s a huge missed opportunity. You need to think of what the journal wants. Try to tailor your manuscript’s novel and interesting points specifically to the your target journal’s aims and scope. It may mean an extra half-hour of work for you, but if it helps get you published, isn’t it worth that small investment of time? “ — Geraldine Echue , PhD, CMPP Edanz Managing Editor

But don’t do this…

The following may not be critical, but they’re common areas that authors mess up. Sometimes they don’t know they’re doing it or they’re just trying their best. So be aware

Make sure you DON’T :

• Take shortcuts. Your cover letter is very important for getting your manuscript to peer review; give it time and attention.
• Cut and paste your abstract, or sections of it, into the cover letter. That’s low-effort and low-readability. Reword it to make it pop.
• Over-praise the editor or target journal – it’s not necessary to use such phrases as “your esteemed journal.” A manuscript will be sent for peer review based on the quality of the cover letter and study, not because you say nice things about the journal.
• Forget to use the Word (or other software’s) spellcheck and, ideally, use a tool like Grammarly and/or Hemingway to help grammar and readability. These are no substitute for a professional edit, though.
• Be overly proud about your English skills. Just like you go to the dentist to get your teeth fixed, you can hire a professional editor and subject matter expert to get your English fixed.

Not that a lot of these also reply to resubmission letters and responses to peer review . The underlying themes are care, courtesy, and excellent English suitable for your audience.

And two more big DOs

• DO get a professional edit or proofread if you’re not a native speaker of English or just not that great at writing.

DO have a professional write your cover letter for you if you want to save some time and make sure you got everything just as the journal wants it. The Edanz Cover Letter Development service can handle this for you.

Set phrases and common expressions

The journal letter maintains a formal tone, so there are certain stock phrases you can use and in some cases must use. As a result, there are a number of phrases which are common to cover letters.

These include:

• To our knowledge, this is the first report showing…
• We believe our findings will appeal to the readership of [target journal name].
• Please address all correspondence to:
• We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

“I’ve found about 60% of authors don’t submit a cover letter at all. It seems they just expect something magical to happen with their manuscript. Journal editors struggle with this: they’re not necessarily subject-area specialists. They wonder, ‘Why is the paper important?'” — Gareth Dyke , PhD Edanz Author Education Manager

Commonly required statements

Many journals and publishers require that all cover letters should contain the following sentences:

• We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal.
• All authors have read and approved the final manuscript and agree with its submission to [target journal name].

Competing interests

If all authors have no competing interests, you should include a statement indicating as such:

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

If an author does have competing interests, it’s a good idea to include details of these in your cover letter. You might also include funding information:

This study was supported by a grant from the [funding body].

Other required statements

Some other potentially required information:

• Clinical trial registration database and number
• Has this manuscript been published in another language? If so, has that journal editor given permission for this submission?
• What other publications related to the same study have been published? (especially for clinical trial related manuscripts)
• Has the data in your study been presented or been published in any other format? For studies involving human subjects, was informed consent obtained? Was permission obtained from an ethics committee? Was the study carried in accordance with Declaration of Helsinki guidelines?
• Was permission obtained for the reproduction or modification of previously published figures and tables (especially for review articles).

The journal’s guidelines will typically give specific directions on which of these to include, if any. And if you have any questions, get in touch with them directly.

Journal submission tips and hacks from the experts

Most of these are plain common sense, but if you’re in a hurry, you might overlook them. Some are less commonly known.

Be personal, use the editor’s name

Do your homework. Look up the name of the Editor-in-Chief or the specific Section Editor for the journal you’re submitting to and address the letter to them directly.

Use Dear Dr. (or Professor) + their Last name . If you’re not sure of their title, Google them to see if they have a LinkedIn page, ResearchGate page, or works published in the last couple of years. If you still can’t confirm their title, use Dear Full name as shown on the journal’s webpage .

It’s like a cover letter for a job; you need to personalize your cover letter to demonstrate your interest in that particular journal, and not make it look like you’d just be happy to get your paper accepted anywhere.

You should also explain why your study will be of specific interest to the readers of the journal.

Check the Aims & Scope on the journal website to see who their target audience is and tailor your reasoning to them.

Tell them what you want to publish

This may seem obvious, but sometimes authors submit cover letters without including the title of their manuscript and what type of article it is.

This should appear in the very first paragraph of your letter and will help the editor see immediately if the topic is of interest and judge whether they have space for the article type you’re submitting for the current issue.

Even more, it will show that you thoroughly read the guidelines. If you say you’re submitting “Original Research” when the journal calls it “Research Articles”, you’re not making a very good first impression.

Summarize the highlights of your work

It’s not enough to simply include the title of your manuscript in the cover letter and hope that alone will attract the editor.

Try to keep the cover letter to one page, but always include a brief summary of your study outlining the reasons why you conducted the work, your aims, and the major results you observed. If that makes you go a bit longer, it’s not a big deal.

Don’t include statistics or a lot of data; a compelling summary of the study is sufficient. If the editor is interested, they’ll look into your manuscript more deeply for further details.

Sell yourself

Cover letters are your chance to talk directly with the journal editor and convince them that your paper is more interesting than the next one sitting on their desk. Talk about any real-world implications of your findings or the significance of your results for the field. Don’t be too speculative or over-exaggerate your findings, but do take this important opportunity to feature the importance of your work.

Don’t forget your “must have” statements

Editors want to know that your manuscript has not been submitted elsewhere or is under consideration at another journal.

They want to know any relevant conflict of interest information and any roles the funding body played in the study.

The author instructions may or may not have explicit information on what they want you to write, but it’s good practice to state this information upfront. This way, the editor doesn’t have to dig through the manuscript to know if you’ve met the basic ethical requirements for publication.

See it in action: Edanz video on writing cover letters

We laid out the basics of a cover letter in this video.

And if you don’t want to start with a blank document…

Get a cover letter template

It’s all easier said than done, right?

Download a template to plug-and-play your text.

Download the above short-form or long-form cover letter from the Edanz Learning Lab template collection .

“When I became a journal editor, I really learned how important cover letters are. We need them to learn more about submissions and to make more informed decisions on whether to send manuscripts out for peer review. As a journal editor, I greatly appreciate a carefully written cover letter; it saves me time and it shows me the authors really care. It also helps with reviewer selections … something I rarely have time to do.” — Gareth Dyke , PhD Editor-in-Chief of Taylor & Francis journal ‘Historical Biology’

By the way, not all cover letters are the same, though most are. PLOS ONE cover letters are a notable exception and have certain requirements for what you need to tell them, such as which of their Academic Editors you want to review your submission. See their guidelines here .

So, all set to do your cover letter? Now go find a forever home for your manuscript and tell them why they’re the perfect fit for you.

Want to dig deeper into the publication process, soup to nuts, ideas to publication? Take simple, expert-designed courses to walk you through it all, at the Edanz My Learning Lab .

Research Paper Cover Letter

Cover letter maker.

A research paper cover letter is more than just an introductory note; it’s a vital aspect of your submission to academic journals. This document provides the initial impression and encapsulates the essence of your research. In this article, we will delve into what a research paper cover letter is, provide an illustrative example, and share valuable tips for crafting one that resonates with the editors.

What is a Research Paper Cover Letter?

A research paper cover letter is a formal letter accompanying the submission of a research paper to a journal or academic conference. It’s your opportunity to introduce the paper, briefly summarize the findings, highlight the significance, and persuade the editor or review panel about the paper’s importance. It’s a critical aspect of the submission process, reflecting the paper’s quality and your professionalism, so it must be thoughtfully composed.

What is an Example of a Research Paper Cover Letter?

Here is a comprehensive example of a research paper cover letter:

[Your Name] [Your Address] [City, State ZIP Code] [Email Address] [Phone Number] [Date]

[Editor’s Name] [Title] [Journal Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code]

Subject: Submission of Manuscript – “Exploring the Impact of AI on Environmental Sustainability”

Dear [Editor’s Name],

I am honored to submit my manuscript entitled “Exploring the Impact of AI on Environmental Sustainability” for consideration for publication in [Journal Name]. This research offers groundbreaking insights into how artificial intelligence can be harnessed for sustainable development.

The methodology includes comprehensive analysis and experimentation, and the results reveal promising opportunities in utilizing AI for ecological balance. The findings contribute to the broader understanding of technology’s role in environmental stewardship, filling a significant gap in existing literature.

I confirm that this work is original, has not been published elsewhere, and complies with all ethical guidelines. Enclosed are the manuscript, diagrams, tables, and supplementary materials as per your submission criteria.

I appreciate your consideration of this submission and eagerly await the opportunity to contribute to [Journal Name]. Please feel free to contact me for any further information.

[Your Signature]

[Your Typed Name] [Your Affiliation]

This great cover letter example articulates the crucial elements that make up an effective research paper cover letter. It introduces the topic, succinctly outlines the key points, and concludes with a respectful closure. Customizing such a letter according to the specific journal or conference’s guidelines is essential for a successful submission.

Size: 28 KB

Research Paper Cover Letter Format

Navigate the nuances of academic presentation with our Research Paper Cover Letter Format, designed to make your scholarly work stand out with professionalism and clarity.

[Your Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code] [Email Address] [Date]

[Editor’s Name] [Title] [Journal Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code]

Subject: Submission of Manuscript: “[Title of the Research Paper]”

I am pleased to submit my manuscript entitled “[Title of the Research Paper]” for potential publication in [Journal Name]. The research embodied in this paper investigates [provide a brief but comprehensive overview of the research topic, methodology, and significance].

This manuscript has not been published elsewhere and has not been submitted simultaneously for publication elsewhere. I believe that the insights and evidence presented in this paper provide a valuable contribution to the existing body of work in [specify the field or subject area].

Thank you for considering my submission. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Title] [Your Phone Number] [Your Affiliation]

Size: 27 KB

Sample Research Paper Cover Letter Example

Access our comprehensive Sample Research Paper Cover Letter to guide your submissions, ensuring they align with academic expectations and standards.

[Your Full Name] [Your Address] [City, State, ZIP Code] [Phone Number] [Email Address] [Date]

[Professor’s Full Name] [Title] [Department] [University Name] [Address] [City, State, ZIP Code]

Subject: Submission of Research Paper on [Title]

Dear Professor [Last Name],

I am honored to submit my research paper titled “[Title of the Research Paper]” for evaluation. This paper, a key part of my [Degree Name], provides an in-depth analysis of [briefly explain the subject matter, highlighting the key themes, questions, and methodology].

Under your guidance and supervision, I have meticulously crafted this paper to reflect the highest standards of academic rigor. I am grateful for the insights and feedback you have provided throughout this process.

I look forward to your review and comments, and I am available for a meeting to discuss the paper at your convenience.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best Regards, [Your Full Name] [Your Student ID]

APA Style Research Paper Cover Letter Example

Master the intricacies of the APA format with our specialized cover letter, crafted to showcase your research while adhering to this authoritative style guide.

[Author’s Full Name] [Author’s Affiliation] [City, State] [Phone Number] [Email Address] [Date]

[Editor’s Name] [Title] [Journal’s Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code]

Subject: Submission of APA Style Research Paper: “[Title of the Paper]”

I am writing to submit my research paper for consideration in the [Journal’s Name]. The paper, titled “[Title of the Paper],” strictly adheres to the APA citation style and presents a methodological approach to [explain the central theme of the paper].

The enclosed manuscript highlights the [mention key findings, implications, or innovations]. I believe it will resonate well with the readers of [Journal’s Name] and contribute to the ongoing scholarly discourse in the field of [Field of Study].

Please find attached the manuscript along with all supplementary materials. I appreciate your consideration and await your feedback.

Sincerely, [Author’s Full Name] [Author’s Title] [Author’s Affiliation]

Size: 26 KB

Cover Letter for Research Project Example

Elevate your project proposals with our tailored cover letter, emphasizing the significance, methodology, and expected outcomes of your academic research.

[Your Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code] [Email Address] [Phone Number] [Date]

[Project Coordinator’s Name] [Title] [Organization Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code]

Subject: Application for [Project Title] Research Project

Dear [Project Coordinator’s Name],

I am writing to express my keen interest in the [Project Title] research project at [Organization Name]. With a strong background in [Your Field], I believe that my skills and experiences align perfectly with the project’s objectives.

I have attached my research proposal, CV, and other relevant documents for your review. My proposal outlines my approach to [briefly summarize the main focus of the research project].

Thank you for considering my application. I am eager to contribute my expertise to this exciting project and look forward to the opportunity to discuss my proposal further.

Yours sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Title] [Your Affiliation]

Research Paper Cover Letter for Student Example

Enhance your academic submissions with our student-focused cover letter, designed to highlight your research diligence, hypotheses, and learning objectives.

[Student’s Full Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code] [Email Address] [Date]

[Professor’s Full Name] [Title] [Department] [University Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code]

Subject: Submission of Research Paper on [Topic]

I am thrilled to submit my research paper on [Topic] as part of the requirements for [Course Name]. Through rigorous analysis, innovative methodologies, and critical thinking, I have explored [briefly summarize the subject matter of the paper].

I value the insights and guidance you provided during my research and writing process. The knowledge I gained from this experience has greatly enhanced my understanding of [Field of Study].

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your feedback.

Sincerely, [Student’s Full Name] [Student ID] [Course Name]

Research Paper Cover Letter for Thesis Example

Add finesse to your thesis presentation with our dedicated cover letter, underlining the depth, originality, and significance of your pivotal research.

[Your Full Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code] [Phone Number] [Email Address] [Date]

[Thesis Advisor’s Full Name] [Title] [Department] [University Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code]

Subject: Submission of Thesis Research Paper on [Topic]

Dear Dr. [Last Name],

It is with great anticipation that I submit my thesis research paper on [Topic]. This comprehensive study, guided by your expert mentorship, has been both challenging and rewarding.

I have delved deeply into [explain the central theme, methodology, and findings], aiming to contribute valuable insights to the field of [Field of Study].

Enclosed are my thesis, along with all supporting documents. I appreciate your attention to this work, and I am eager to discuss it further at your convenience.

Thank you for your time, support, and guidance.

Best Regards, [Your Full Name] [Your Student ID] [Degree Program]

Cover Letter for Journal Submission Example

Ensure your scholarly work is compellingly presented with our Journal Submission Cover Letter, tailored to captivate editors and facilitate publication.

[Your Full Name] [Title] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code] [Email Address] [Phone Number] [Date]

[Editor’s Full Name] [Title] [Journal Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code]

Subject: Manuscript Submission for [Journal Name]: “[Title of Research Paper]”

Dear Dr. [Editor’s Last Name],

I am pleased to submit my manuscript, titled “[Title of Research Paper],” for potential publication in [Journal Name]. This original research contributes to the field of [Field of Study] by [provide a concise overview of the paper’s central theme, methodology, and key findings].

I have followed all the guidelines provided by [Journal Name] and have included all necessary supplementary materials.

Thank you for considering my submission. I believe this research fits well with the focus of your esteemed journal, and I look forward to your response.

Sincerely, [Your Full Name] [Your Title] [Your Affiliation]

Simple Research Paper Cover Letter Example

Go for a minimalist yet impactful approach with our Simple Research Paper Cover Letter, designed to present your findings clearly and concisely.

[Recipient’s Full Name] [Title] [Organization Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code]

Subject: Submission of Research Paper: “[Title]”

Dear [Recipient’s First Name],

I am delighted to submit my research paper on [Title]. This paper, written as part of my [Degree/Course], provides a comprehensive analysis of [briefly summarize the research topic and methodology].

I have enclosed the paper and all necessary supporting documents. Your review and feedback will be greatly appreciated.

Best Regards, [Your Full Name] [Your Title] [Your Affiliation]

Basic Research Paper Cover Letter Example

Use our Basic Research Paper Cover Letter as a foundational guide, offering a straightforward presentation of your academic research and its implications.

[Your Full Name] [Address] [City, State ZIP Code] [Email Address] [Date]

Subject: Manuscript Submission: “[Title]”

I am submitting my manuscript titled “[Title]” for your review. This research paper delves into [briefly describe the research topic, key questions, methodology, and significance].

Enclosed are the manuscript and all necessary supporting documents. I look forward to your feedback and hope for a positive consideration.

Thank you for your time.

Professional Research Paper Cover Letter Example

Elevate your academic submissions with a touch of professionalism using our expertly crafted cover letter, emphasizing your research’s significance, methodology, and scholarly contribution.

Subject: Professional Submission of Research Paper: “[Research Paper Title]”

I am pleased to submit my research paper, titled “[Research Paper Title],” for professional review and potential publication in [Journal Name]. This work represents a rigorous investigation into [provide a detailed overview of the research subject, methodology, key findings, and implications].

I believe this research paper meets the high standards of your esteemed journal and will engage and inform your readership.

Please find attached the manuscript, along with all necessary supporting documents. I look forward to your review and response.

Yours Professionally, [Your Full Name] [Your Title] [Your Affiliation] [Your Phone Number]

What do you write in a Research Paper Cover Letter?

A Research Paper Cover Letter serves as a formal introduction of your research to the editor, professor, or other relevant authority. It highlights key aspects of your research and reflects your professionalism. Here’s what you typically include:

1. Introduction: Introduce yourself, the title of the paper, and the purpose of the cover letter. 2. Subject of Research: Briefly explain the research topic, methodology, and main findings. 3. Relevance: Discuss the significance of your research and why it is suitable for the intended audience or journal. 4. Compliance with Guidelines: Mention adherence to the submission guidelines or specific style, like APA. 5. Exclusivity: If submitting to a journal, state that the work has not been published elsewhere. 6. Attachments: List the documents you are attaching, including the manuscript and supplementary materials. 7. Gratitude and Closing: Thank the recipient for their consideration and provide your contact information.

How Do You Write a Cover Letter for a Research Paper?

Writing a cover letter for a research paper requires care and precision. Here’s a step-by-step guide:

1. Address the Recipient Formally: Use the proper title and full name if known. If not, use a general salutation. 2. Introduce Yourself and Your Paper: Start with a concise introduction to your research and its relevance. 3. Provide a Brief Overview: Summarize the key points, methodology, and findings of your research. 4. Highlight the Significance: Explain why the paper is important and how it contributes to the field. 5. Follow Guidelines: If submitting to a journal or specific conference, adhere to their guidelines and mention your compliance. 6. Use Professional Tone and Language: Keep the language formal, clear, and error-free. 7. Include Contact Information: Provide your email, phone number, and other relevant contact details. 8. Sign Off Formally: Close with a polite and professional sign-off, such as “Sincerely,” followed by your name.

Tips for Writing a Research Paper Cover Letter

1. Understand Your Audience: Tailor the cover letter to the recipient, whether it’s a journal editor, professor, or other authority. 2. Be Concise: Keep it brief while including all necessary details. 3. Highlight Key Points: Focus on the most critical and unique aspects of your research. 4. Follow a Structure: Use a clear and organized format with distinct sections. 5. Proofread: Ensure that your cover letter is free of grammatical errors and typos. 6. Maintain Professionalism: Use a respectful tone and formal language throughout. 7. Align with the Journal or Institution’s Tone: If applicable, match the style and tone of the journal or institution to which you are submitting.

Research Paper Cover Letters play a crucial role in making a positive impression and conveying the significance of your work. By adhering to formalities and focusing on the essentials of your research, you can create an effective and professional cover letter.

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

Write a cover letter for a college student applying for an internship at an educational technology company

Form a cover letter for a high school student seeking a part-time job at a local bookstore.

Cover Letters

The cover letter is a formal way to communicate with journal editors and editorial staff during the manuscript submission process. Most often, a cover letter is needed when authors initially submit their manuscript to a journal and when responding to reviewers during an invitation to revise and resubmit the manuscript. For more information on the peer review process and possible manuscript decisions, see Section 12.7 of the Publication Manual .

Because cover letters are separate documents from the manuscript file, all correspondence during the publication process must include the complete manuscript title, the authors’ names, and the manuscript number (assigned by the journal when the manuscript is first received). Although any author may correspond with the journal editor or editorial staff, most correspondence is handled by the corresponding author , who serves as the main point of contact and responds to questions about the published article. All authors should decide prior to submission who will serve as the corresponding author.

Cover letters are covered in the seventh edition APA Style Publication Manual in Section 12.11

Cover letter for manuscript submission to a journal

Authors usually must include a cover letter when they first submit their manuscript to a journal for publication . The cover letter is typically uploaded as a separate file into the online submission portal for the journal (for more information on using an online submission portal, see Section 12.10 of the Publication Manual ).

The cover letter should be addressed to the journal editor; any interim correspondence is addressed to the editor or associate editor with whom you have been in communication.

In your submission cover letter, include the following information:

• manuscript title
• manuscript authors
• assurances that all authors agree with the content of the manuscript and with the order of authorship (for more information, see Sections 1.21–1.22 of the Publication Manual )
• assurances that the corresponding author will take responsibility for informing coauthors of editorial decisions, reviews received, and any changes or revisions made
• information about the existence of any closely related manuscripts that have been submitted for simultaneous consideration to the same or to another journal
• notice of any conflicts of interest or activities that might be seen as influencing the research (for more information, see Section 1.20 of the Publication Manual )
• a request for masked review, if that is an option for the journal and desired (for more information, see Section 12.7 of the Publication Manual )
• verification that the treatment of human participants or nonhuman animal subjects was in accordance with established ethical standards (for more information, see Sections 1.18 and 12.13 of the Publication Manual )
• a copy of any permissions to reproduce copyrighted material or a notice that permissions are pending (for more information, see Sections 12.14–12.18 of the Publication Manual )
• the telephone number, email address, and mailing address of the corresponding author

Check the journal’s website for the current editor’s name and for any other journal-specific information to include in your cover letter.

Cover letter for a revised and resubmitted manuscript

Also include a cover letter with manuscripts being resubmitted to a journal after receiving an invitation to revise and resubmit. Ensure the cover letter contains the complete manuscript title, the authors’ names, and the manuscript number (assigned by the journal when the manuscript was first received). In the cover letter for the resubmission, thank the editors and reviewers for their feedback and outline the changes you made (or did not make) to the manuscript to address the feedback.

The cover letter for a revised and resubmitted manuscript summarizes the changes to the manuscript. Along with the cover letter and revised manuscript, authors should also provide a response to reviewers , which is a detailed document explaining how they responded to each comment.

Sample cover letters

These sample cover letters demonstrate how authors can communicate with the journal editor at the initial manuscript submission and following an invitation to revise and resubmit a manuscript for publication.

• Sample Cover Letter for Manuscript Submission (PDF, 73KB)
• Sample Cover Letter for a Revised and Resubmitted Manuscript (PDF, 91KB)

Write A Cover Letter For Research Paper Example: For Journal Submission

Trying to get your article submitted to a journal can be daunting, but a well-constructed cover letter is key to making a strong first impression. This guide is designed to help you craft an effective cover letter for your research paper, ensuring it stands out to journal editors.

From articulating the essence of your work to adhering to specific submission guidelines, we’ll walk you through the essential components and insider tips to elevate your manuscript’s chance for review and publication.

What Is A Cover Letter?

A cover letter for journal submission is a critical document that accompanies your research manuscript when you submit it to a scholarly journal.

It serves as your first point of contact with the journal editor and provides a brief introduction to your study.

The cover letter highlights:

• the significance of your research,
• its relevance to the journal’s scope, and
• why it would interest the journal’s readers.

It also asserts that your manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by any other publication, ensuring the originality of your work.

The cover letter should include a concise overview of your research question, methodology, major findings, and the potential impact of your study within the field. It’s also the place to suggest potential peer reviewers for your manuscript and disclose any conflicts of interest. 

Why Write A Cover Letter For Research Paper Submission?

Writing a cover letter for your research paper submission is more than a formality; it’s a strategic tool that can boost your manuscript’s chances of being published. Here’s why it’s crucial:

Introduces Your Work To The Editor

A cover letter introduces your work to the journal editor. It’s your chance to “sell” your research, explaining why it’s a good fit for the journal.

By highlighting the key findings and their relevance to the journal’s readers, you draw attention to the value your research brings.

This brief overview helps editors quickly grasp the significance of your work, even before delving into the manuscript.

You Can Suggest Potential Reviewers

This letter allows you to suggest potential reviewers who are familiar with your research area. This insider tip can be invaluable.

By recommending experts who understand the nuances of your work, you increase the likelihood of a fair and informed peer review process.

Remember, a well-conducted review is pivotal for your manuscript’s acceptance.

Clarify Authenticity And Exclusivity

Lastly, the cover letter is where you clarify that your manuscript has not been previously published and is not under consideration by another journal.

This statement upholds ethical standards and reassures the editor about the originality of your work.

It’s also the place to mention any conflicts of interest, ensuring transparency and integrity in the publication process.

In essence, a well-crafted cover letter is your first step towards engaging the editor and peer reviewers, making it a critical component of your submission package.

How To Write A Good Cover Letter For Research Article Submission?

Writing a good cover letter for your research article submission is akin to laying a strong foundation before building a house.

It sets the stage for your manuscript’s review and potential publication. Here’s how to craft one that catches the eye of the journal editor.

• Get The Basics Right:  Use the journal’s letterhead if available, or include your contact information at the top. Address the letter to the editor by name if possible, ensuring a personal touch right from the start.
• Go Straight To The Point: The opening line should clearly state the title of your manuscript and your intention to submit it for review.
• Give An Brief Overview: In the heart of the cover letter, provide a brief overview of your research. Here, you’re not just repeating the abstract. Instead, you’re framing your study within the larger conversation of your field.
• Show Novelty: Highlight the novel aspects of your research, its relevance to the target journal’s scope, and why it would interest the journal’s readership. This section is your chance to “sell” your manuscript, so make every word count.
• Suggest Potential Reviewers: Don’t shy away from suggesting potential reviewers. This shows you’re engaged with the community and understand the field’s landscape. Be sure to exclude anyone with a potential conflict of interest.
• Confirm Ethical Standards:  Assure the editor that your research adheres to standards and that all co-authors have consented to the submission. If your manuscript builds on previous work, this is the place to reference it and explain how your study advances their work.
• Be Clear About Exclusivity: A statement confirming that your manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal is crucial. This transparency fosters trust with the editorial team.
• Thank The Editor: Conclude with a respectful note thanking the editor for considering your work, perhaps mentioning that you’re happy to provide additional materials or information if needed. This shows your willingness to collaborate and ensures a positive tone.

Keep your cover letter concise, ideally to a maximum of one page. Every sentence should serve a purpose, whether it’s establishing the significance of your research, demonstrating its fit with the journal, or ensuring ethical compliance.

Remember, a well-written cover letter can make a significant difference in how your manuscript is perceived. It’s worth investing the time to get it right.

Research Paper Cover Letter Template For A Journal Submission

Sometimes, combining every tips into a letter can be difficult. In this case, you may find a template useful. Here’s one for you to consider:

[Your Name]  [Your Institutional Affiliation] [Your Department] [Your University/Institute Address] [Your Email Address] [Today’s Date]

[Editor’s Name] [Title] [Journal Name] [Journal Address] 

Dear [Editor’s Name],

I am writing to submit our manuscript entitled “[Your Manuscript Title]” for consideration as a [Research Article/Case Study/Review Article, etc.] in [Journal Name]. This manuscript has not been published and is not under review elsewhere.

Our research examines [briefly describe your research question or thesis and the gap in the literature your work addresses]. We have found [describe your major findings briefly, and why they are significant].

Given the scope of [Journal Name], we believe our findings will be of interest to your readership as they [explain how your findings add value to the field and align with the journal’s themes].

We suggest the following experts as potential reviewers for our manuscript due to their expertise in [briefly outline the areas of expertise]: [Reviewer 1 Name, Affiliation], [Reviewer 2 Name, Affiliation], and [Reviewer 3 Name, Affiliation].

We have ensured that there are no conflicts of interest with these suggestions.

All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to [Journal Name]. We confirm that this work is original and has been conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of [your field/your institution].

Additionally, any supporting data or materials required for the review process are available upon request.

Thank you for considering our manuscript for publication in [Journal Name]. We look forward to the opportunity to contribute to your journal.

[Your Full Name] [Your Job Title/Position, if applicable] [Your Institutional Affiliation]

[Co-Author Name(s) and Affiliation(s), if applicable]

Cover Letter For A Journal Editor: Keep It Simple

A well-crafted cover letter is your first opportunity to engage journal editors and advocate for your research paper’s publication. 

By succinctly summarising your study’s significance, ensuring compliance with journal requirements, and maintaining ethical standards, your cover letter can significantly influence the editorial process.

Remember, a compelling cover letter not only showcases your research but also demonstrates your professionalism and attention to detail, enhancing your manuscript’s chance of a favourable review.

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

How to Write an Effective Cover Letter for Journal Submission

Craft your cover letter for journal submission the right way with our expert tips! Learn how to grab editors’ attention and stand it out.

When it comes to submitting a manuscript for publication in a journal, many authors focus solely on the quality of their research and the clarity of their writing. While these are important factors, it’s easy to overlook the role that a well-crafted cover letter can play in the submission process. A cover letter can be the key to getting your manuscript noticed by the editor and ultimately accepted for publication. In this article, we’ll explore the importance of a cover letter for journal submissions and provide tips for crafting an effective one.

What is a Cover Letter for Journal Submission?

A cover letter for journal submission is a document that accompanies a manuscript when it is submitted for publication in an academic or scientific journal. The purpose of the cover letter is to introduce the author and their work to the editor of the journal and to provide any additional information that may be relevant to the manuscript or the submission process. Furthermore, its purpose is to introduce the manuscript to the editor and provide additional information about the research and its significance. The cover letter should be concise and focused, typically no more than one page.

What Should be Included in the Cover Letter?

A cover letter should include several key elements to effectively introduce your manuscript. It’s important to personalize the letter for the specific journal, use a professional tone, and proofread carefully for errors. To make sure your cover letter is effective, there are several key elements that you should include:

Addressee’s Information and Date of Submission

Your cover letter should start with the date of submission, followed by the name and address of the editor or editorial staff who will be reviewing your manuscript. This information should be current and accurate to ensure your submission is directed to the right person.

Opening Salutation

The opening salutation of your cover letter should be professional and courteous, addressing the editor or editorial staff by name, starting with “Dear…”. Don´t forget to include the title and position of the editor you are addressing.

Purpose Statement and Administrative Information

Your cover letter should have a clear statement of the purpose of your research and the journal to which you are submitting your manuscript. You should also include any administrative information required by the journal, such as the type of manuscript (e.g. original research, review article, case report) and the number of words or pages.

Summary of Main Research Findings and Implications

One of the most important elements of your cover letter is a summary of the main findings and implications of your research. This summary should be concise and focused, highlighting the most important aspects of your research and why it is significant to the field.

Statements or Information Required by the Journal

Many journals require specific statements or information to be included in the cover letter. This may include a statement that the manuscript has not been previously published or is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, or a list of potential conflicts of interest or funding sources that may have influenced the research.

Previous Contact with the Journal

If you have had previous contact with the journal, such as submitting a previous manuscript or attending a conference sponsored by the journal, it is important to mention this in your cover letter. This information can help establish a connection between you and the editor, which may increase the chances of your manuscript being accepted.

Conflict of Interests and Financial Disclosures

It is important to disclose any potential conflicts of interest or financial disclosures that may have influenced the research. This information can help ensure transparency and maintain the integrity of the research.

Your cover letter should include a statement indicating that all authors have read and approved the manuscript and that the work is original and not plagiarized. This information can help establish the credibility of the research and the integrity of the authorship.

Suggested Reviewers

Suggested Reviewers are generally considered a best practice and are often recommended by journals. Providing a list of suggested reviewers can help to ensure that the manuscript is reviewed by individuals who have the appropriate expertise and background to evaluate the work, and can help to speed up the review process by reducing the time needed for the editor to identify potential reviewers. This can help expedite the review process and increase the likelihood of your manuscript being accepted.

Concurrent/Duplicate Submissions

An important consideration when submitting a manuscript for publication is concurrent or duplicate submissions. Concurrent submissions occur when a manuscript is submitted to more than one journal at the same time. Duplicate submissions occur when a manuscript is submitted to the same journal more than once.

In the cover letter, you should clearly state whether the manuscript has been submitted elsewhere or whether it has been previously published. If the manuscript is under consideration elsewhere, you should provide the name of the journal and the date of submission. If the manuscript has been previously published, you should provide the citation for the publication.

Closing Salutation

When closing a cover letter for journal submission, it’s important to maintain a professional and courteous tone. A common closing salutation is “Sincerely,” followed by your name. However, some alternatives that are also appropriate include “Best regards,” “Thank you for your time and consideration,” or “Respectfully.” Whichever salutation you choose, make sure it matches the tone of your letter and conveys your appreciation for the editor’s consideration.

Request to Exclude Reviewers

A request to exclude reviewers is a common feature of a cover letter for journal submission, particularly in cases where the author has concerns about potential conflicts of interest or bias that could affect the review process.

When making a request to exclude reviewers, the author should provide a clear and concise explanation of the reasons for the request and should provide specific details about any potential conflicts of interest or concerns that they may have. It is also important to note that some journals may have specific guidelines or policies regarding requests to exclude reviewers, and authors should familiarize themselves with these guidelines before making a request.

In general, it is recommended that authors provide a minimum of three to five potential reviewers who are not affiliated with the author or their institution, in order to provide a broad range of expertise and perspectives. When making a request to exclude reviewers, it is also important to provide alternative suggestions for potential reviewers who could be considered in their place.

Tips for Writing a Journal Submission Cover Letter

A well-crafted cover letter can help your manuscript stand out and increase your chances of being accepted for publication. Here are some tips for writing an effective journal submission cover letter.

One of the most important tips for writing a journal submission cover letter is to proofread it carefully. Typos, spelling errors, and grammatical mistakes can detract from the professional image you want to project. Make sure to read the letter multiple times and have someone else read it over as well to catch any errors you may have missed.

Keep the Cover Letter Brief

Another important tip is to keep the cover letter brief and to the point. The cover letter should provide a brief introduction of the manuscript and the key findings, as well as any other information that is necessary for the editor to understand the importance and relevance of the manuscript. The letter should be no more than one page in length.

Review Examples of Cover Letters

It can be helpful to review examples of cover letters for journal submissions to get an idea of the style, tone, and content that is appropriate. You can search for examples online or ask colleagues who have submitted manuscripts for publication for their advice. When reviewing examples, pay attention to the language used, the level of detail provided, and the overall organization and structure of the letter. This can help you craft a cover letter that is professional, informative, and effective.

Cover Letter Template for a Journal Article Submission

A cover letter is an important component of manuscript submission for publication in a journal. Using a template can help ensure that your cover letter includes all the necessary information and follows the proper format. Here is a guide to creating a cover letter template for a journal article submission.

The header should include your contact information, including your name, affiliation, and contact details (address, phone number, and email address), the date of submission, and the name and address of the journal.

Opening Paragraph

The opening paragraph should provide a brief introduction to the manuscript and its key findings. This paragraph should also mention the purpose of the manuscript and why it is relevant to the journal’s readership. You may also want to mention any previous correspondence or contact with the journal.

Body Paragraphs

The body of the cover letter should include several paragraphs that provide more detail about the manuscript. This may include a summary of the methods used, key results and findings, and implications for future research. You may also want to mention any notable limitations or challenges encountered during the research process.

It is also important to address any specific requirements or requests from the journal, such as a particular format for tables or figures, or specific information to be included in the manuscript. You should also mention any funding sources or conflicts of interest that may be relevant.

Closing Paragraph

The closing paragraph should reiterate the significance of the manuscript and its contribution to the field. You may also want to mention any potential reviewers for the manuscript or suggest reviewers who would be appropriate. Finally, you should include a polite and professional closing, such as “Sincerely” or “Best regards”, followed by your name and signature.

Common Expressions for Cover Letters

When writing a cover letter for journal submission, it’s important to use appropriate and professional language. Here are some common expressions that can be used in cover letters:

“We are pleased to submit our manuscript…”

“The research reported in this manuscript addresses a significant gap in the literature…”

“We believe this manuscript will be of interest to your readership because…”

“Our findings have important implications for future research in this field.”

“We would like to thank the reviewers and editors for their time and consideration.”

“We look forward to hearing from you regarding the status of our manuscript.”

“Thank you for your time and consideration.”

These expressions can be used to convey important information in a professional and concise manner. When using these expressions, it’s important to tailor them to the specific journal and to make sure they are appropriate for the content of your cover letter.

Journal Submission Tips and Hacks from the Experts

Submitting a journal article can be a challenging and sometimes frustrating process. However, by following some tips and hacks from the experts, you can increase your chances of success. Here are some tips and hacks to help you submit your article to a journal:

Choose the Right Journal

Before submitting your article, make sure you choose the right journal. Consider factors such as the journal’s scope, readership, and impact factor. Make sure your article fits with the journal’s focus and aims.

Read the Guidelines

Read the journal’s submission guidelines carefully and follow them closely. Pay attention to formatting, length, and other requirements. Failure to follow the guidelines could result in your article being rejected without review.

Get Feedback

Before submitting your article, get feedback from colleagues or mentors. Ask them to read your manuscript and provide constructive criticism. This can help you identify potential weaknesses and improve the quality of your article.

Write a Strong Abstract

Your abstract is often the first thing that editors and reviewers will read. Make sure it is clear, concise, and provides a compelling summary of your article. Highlight the key findings and implications of your research.

Use Clear and Concise Language

Use clear and concise language when writing your article. Avoid jargon, technical terms, and complex language that could be difficult for readers to understand. Write in a way that is accessible to a broad audience.

Address Reviewer Comments

If your article is rejected or requires revisions, make sure you carefully address all reviewer comments. Be thorough and professional in your responses. This can increase your chances of acceptance in future rounds of review.

Keep Records

Keep records of all correspondence with the journal, including submission dates, reviewer comments, and decisions. This can help you stay organized and keep track of the progress of your article.

High Impact And Greater Visibility For Your Work

Mind the Graph is an innovative platform designed to help scientists create high-impact visuals and increase the visibility of their work. With its user-friendly interface, customizable templates, and vast library of scientific illustrations. Mind the Graph provides scientists with a powerful tool to help them communicate their research more effectively.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Content tags

• SpringerLink shop

Cover letters

A good cover letter can help to “sell” your manuscript to the journal editor. As well as introducing your work to the editor you can also take this opportunity to explain why the manuscript will be of interest to a journal's readers, something which is always as the forefront editors’ mind. As such it is worth spending time writing a coherent and persuasive cover letter.

The following is an example of a poor cover letter:

Dear Editor-in-Chief, I am sending you our manuscript entitled “Large Scale Analysis of Cell Cycle Regulators in bladder cancer” by Researcher et al. We would like to have the manuscript considered for publication in Pathobiology. Please let me know of your decision at your earliest convenience. With my best regards, Sincerely yours, A Researcher, PhD

Instead, check to see whether the journal’s Instructions for Authors have any cover letter requirements (e.g. disclosures, statements, potential reviewers). Then, write a letter that explains why the editor would want to publish your manuscript. The following structure covers all the necessary points that need to be included.

• If known, address the editor who will be assessing your manuscript by their name. Include the date of submission and the journal you are submitting to.
• First paragraph: include the title of your manuscript and the type of manuscript it is (e.g. review, research, case study). Then briefly explain the background to your study, the question you sought out to answer and why.
• Second paragraph: you should concisely explain what was done, the main findings and why they are significant.
• Third paragraph: here you should indicate why the readers of the journal would be interested in the work. Take your cues from the journal’s aims and scope. For example if the journal requires that all work published has broad implications explain how your study fulfils this. It is also a good idea to include a sentence on the importance of the results to the field.
• To conclude state the corresponding author and any journal specific requirements that need to be complied with (e.g. ethical standards).

TIP: All cover letters should contain these sentences:

• We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal.
• All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to [insert the name of the target journal].

Submission checklist

Before submitting your manuscript, thoroughly check its quality one more time. Evaluate it critically—could anything be done better?

Be sure that:

• The manuscript follows the Instructions for Authors
• All files are in the correct file format and of the appropriate resolution or size
• The spelling and grammar are correct
• You have contact information for all authors
• You have written a persuasive cover letter

Back │ Next

Author Resources

Reader resources, scholarly community, news and events.

free, unlimited access

advanced features

easy commenting

Javascript is currently disabled in your browser. Several features of this site will not function whilst javascript is disabled.

• Why Publish With Us?
• Editorial Policies
• Author Guidelines
• Peer Review Guidelines
• Open Outlook
• Submit New Manuscript

• Sustainability
• Press Center
• Testimonials
• Favored Author Program
• Permissions
• Pre-Submission

open access to scientific and medical research

• Authors are invited to browse Collections that are currently open for submissions Read more

Back to Blog

Why Dove Medical Press?

• Why publish with Dove Medical Press
• Selecting peer reviewers
• Open Archives Initiative (OAI)
• Commercial use of papers published under the Open Access model (CC-BY-NC)
• Permanency of articles
• Business Model
• Conflict of Interest Policies
• Professional memberships
• Competing interests
• Research ethics and consent
• Peer review
• Data deposition and data sharing
• Standards of reporting
• Images and figures
• Corrections, expressions of concern and retractions
• Appeals and complaints
• Copyright and licenses
• Text and data mining
• Commercial use and reprints
• Designation of territories
• New article widget
• Publications page
• Financial tracking

How to Write a Cover Letter When Submitting Your Research Paper

Albert chan on july 3, 2018 at 12:00 am.

• Blog Listings

• Write the cover letter with your institution’s letterhead to demonstrate professionalism and reliability.
• Personalise the cover letter by addressing the journal’s editor by their name.
• State the article type of your manuscript at the beginning of your cover letter (original research article, methodology, case report, etc.)
• Provide the full details of all the authors, including email address and phone number, in your cover letter.
• Explain briefly the research goals and results in one or two sentences.
• Explain the importance of your study: what will the paper’s contribution to the literature be? What impact will the paper have in the research field?
• Tell the editor why you think the study is best suited for the journal, and why the journal’s readers will be interested in the study.
• Declare that the manuscript (in whole or in part) has not been submitted or published in other journals, all authors have read and agreed to the content of the manuscript, you have complied with all ethical and reporting guidelines and have received ethical approval from the relevant committee(s).
• Disclose all potential conflicts of interest (if any).
• Thank the editor for taking the time to read your cover letter and consider your paper for submission.
• Keep the content of the cover letter brief, concise and courteous.

Don’t

• Mention any published literature without citation.
• Provide any personal information which is unrelated to the submission.
• Mention any previous publication records unless it is related to this research.
• Mention any potential professional benefits you may gain from the publication of this work.
• Provide research information that can be found in the paper.
• Copy and paste the abstract and paper content in the cover letter.
• Use complex sentence structures.
• Glorify your past research papers or any of your academic prestige in the cover letter.

Categories: General

Disqus Comments

Contact Us   •   Privacy Policy   •   Associations & Partners   •   Testimonials   •   Terms & Conditions   •   Recommend this site •   Cookies •   Top

Contact Us   •   Privacy Policy

Writing a persuasive cover letter for your manuscript

Anthony Newman

Lora Heisler

About this video

Submitting your manuscript without a cover letter or an incomplete one can impact the outcome of your submission. Strong cover letters efficiently introduce your work to the editor, but also communicates why your paper is of interest to the journal audience and contributory to overall science. 

In this Researcher Academy module, experts Anthony Newman and Lora Heisler give you important insights about writing strong and persuasive cover letters. This webinar will give an exhaustive check list on writing an effective cover letter which brings attention to your paper and helps it get published.

You will come away with the knowledge of what cover letters are, how they support your manuscript and how you can write an airtight cover letter, covering your research scope, objectives and goals. 

About the presenters

Senior Publisher, Life Sciences, Elsevier

Anthony Newman is a Senior Publisher with Elsevier and is based in Amsterdam. Each year he presents numerous Author Workshops and other similar trainings worldwide. He is currently responsible for fifteen biochemistry and laboratory medicine journals, he joined Elsevier over thirty years ago and has been Publisher for more than twenty of those years. Before then he was the marketing communications manager for the biochemistry journals of Elsevier.  By training he is a polymer chemist and was active in the surface coating industry before leaving London and moving to Amsterdam in 1987 to join Elsevier.

Chair in Human Nutrition, The Rowett Institute, The Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Aberdeen.

Lora Heisler, Ph.D. is Chair in Human Nutrition at the Rowett Institute, University of Aberdeen, Scotland, where she is Head of the Obesity and Food Choice research theme.  Professor Heisler has enjoyed being an active member of various journal editorial boards for more than a decade.  She was appointed as Deputy Editor of Elsevier’s journal Molecular Metabolism in 2018. Professor Heisler received her B.A. from Boston University, M.Sc. from London School of Economics and Political Sciences and Ph.D. from Tufts University.  She undertook postdoctoral fellowships at the University of California at San Francisco and Beth Israel Deaconess/Harvard Medical School.  Professor Heisler began her independent research group at Harvard Medical School and then relocated to the University of Cambridge in the UK. Her active research group moved to the Rowett Institute, University of Aberdeen in 2013 where they investigate the neurobiology of obesity and type 2 diabetes.

What should be included in a cover letter?

Researcher Academy on Twitter

• Extremes and Natural Hazards
• Adaptation Science
• Earth Data Across Scales
• Earth Data Science Education
• Earth Analytics
• Landscape Dynamics
• Partnerships
• Earth Analytics Professional Certificate
• Environmental Data Science Seminar Series
• Post Docs and Graduate Students
• Earth Data Science Corps
• How to Engage
• Learning Portal

How to Write a Good Cover Letter for a Research Position

Writing a cover letter can be intimidating, but it doesn’t have to be!

Some people believe cover letters are a science. Others seem to think they are more akin to black magic. Regardless of how you feel about cover letters, they are one of the most important parts of the job application process. Your resume or CV may get you an interview, but a good cover letter is what ensures that the hiring manager reads your resume in the first place.

Writing a cover letter for any job is important, but the art of writing a good cover letter for a research position can make or break your application. While writing a cover letter for a research position, you have to walk a fine line of proving your expertise and passion while limiting jargon and dense language.

In this post, we will explain cover letter writing basics, and then dive into how to write a research specific cover letter with examples of both good and bad practices.

What Is A Cover Letter and Why Do Cover Letters Matter?

A cover letter is your opportunity to tell a story and connect the dots of your resume. Resumes and curriculum vitae (CVs) are often cold and static—they don’t show any sort of character that will give companies a hint about if you will fit in with their culture. 

Your cover letter gives you the chance to demonstrate that you are an interesting, qualified, and intelligent person. Without proving that you are worth the time to interview, a company or research organization will set your application in the rejection pile without giving it a second look. 

So, what is a cover letter, exactly? It is an explanation (written out in paragraph form) of what you can bring to the company that goes beyond the information in your resume. Cover letters give a company a glimpse into the qualities that will make you the ideal candidate for their opening. 

Note that a cover letter is not the same as a letter of intent. A cover letter is written for a specific job opening. For example, if I got an email saying that the University of Colorado was looking for a tenure track faculty member to teach GEO 1001, and I chose to apply, I would write a cover letter. 

A letter of intent, however, is written regardless of the job opening. It is intended to express an interest in working at a particular company or with a particular group. The goal of a letter of intent is to demonstrate your interest in the company (or whatever type of group you are appealing to) and illustrate that you are willing to work with them in whatever capacity they feel is best. 

For example, if I loved the clothing company, Patagonia and wanted to work there, I could write a letter of intent. They may have an opening for a sales floor associate, but after reading my application and letter of intent, decide I would be better suited to a design position. Or, they may not have any positions open at all, but choose to keep my resume on hand for the next time they do. 

Most organizations want a cover letter, not a letter of intent, so it is important to make sure your cover letter caters to the specifics of the job posting. A cover letter should also demonstrate why you want to work at the company, but it should be primarily focused on why you can do the job better than any of the other applicants.

How to Write a Good Cover Letter: The Basics 

Writing a cover letter isn’t hard. Writing a good cover letter, a cover letter that will encourage a hiring manager to look at your application and schedule an interview, is more difficult (but certainly not impossible). Below, we will go over each of the important parts of a cover letter: the salutation, introduction, body, and conclusion, as well as some other best practices.

How to Write a Good Cover Letter Salutation

Don’t start with “Dear Sir/Ma’am” (or any iteration of a vague greeting, including “to whom it may concern”). Avoiding vague greetings is the oldest trick in the book, but it still holds a lot of weight. Starting a cover letter with the above phrase is pretty much stamping “I didn’t bother to research this company at all because I am sending out a million generic cover letters” across your application. It doesn’t look good. 

The best practice is to do your research and use your connections to find a name. “Dear Joe McGlinchy” means a lot more than “Dear Hiring Manager.” LinkedIn is a great tool for this—you can look up the company, then look through the employees until you find someone that seems like they hire for the relevant department. 

The most important thing about the salutation is to address a real human. By selecting someone in the company, you’ve demonstrated that you’ve done some research and are actually interested in this company specifically. Generic greetings aren’t eye-catching and don’t do well.

How to Write a Good Cover Letter Introduction

Once you’ve addressed your cover letter to a real human being, you need a powerful introduction to prove that this cover letter is worth the time it will take to read. This means that you need a hook. 

Your first sentence needs to be a strong starter, something to encourage the hiring manager not only to continue reading the cover letter, but to look at your application as well. If you have a contact in the company, you should mention them in the first sentence. Something along the lines of “my friend, Amanda Rice (UX/UI manager), suggested I apply for the natural language processing expert position after we worked together on a highly successful independent project.” 

The example above uses a few techniques. The name drop is good, but that only works if you actually have a connection in the company. Beyond that, this example has two strengths. First, it states the name of the position. This is important because hiring managers can be hiring for several different positions at a time, and by immediately clarifying which position you are applying for, you make their job a little bit easier.  Next, this sentence introduces concrete skills that apply to the job. That is a good way to start because it begins leading into the body, where you will go into depth about how exactly your experience and skills make you perfect for the job. 

Another technique for a strong lead-in to a cover letter is to begin with an applicable personal experience or anecdote. This attracts more attention than stereotypical intros (like the example above), but you have to be careful to get to the point quickly. Give yourself one or two sentences to tell the story and prove your point before you dive into your skills and the main body of the cover letter.

A more standard technique for introductions is simply expressing excitement. No matter how you choose to start, you want to demonstrate that you are eager about the position, and there is no easier way to do that than just saying it. This could take the form of “When I saw the description for X job on LinkedIn, I was thrilled: it is the perfect job for my Y skills and Z experience.” This option is simple and to-the-point, which can be refreshing for time-crunched hiring managers. 

Since we’ve provided a few good examples, we will offer a bad example, so you can compare and contrast. Don’t write anything along the line of: “My name is John Doe, and I am writing to express my interest in the open position at your company.” 

There are a few issues here. First, they can probably figure out your name. You don’t need that to be in the first sentence (or any of the sentences—the closing is an obvious enough spot). Next, “the open position” and “your company” are too generic. That sounds like the same cover letter you sent to every single employer in a hundred mile radius. Give the specifics! Finally, try to start with a little more spice. Add in some personality, something to keep the hiring manager reading. If you bore them to death in the first line, they aren’t going to look over your resume and application with the attention they deserve. 

How to Write a Good Cover Letter Body

So, you’ve addressed a real human being, and you’ve snagged their attention with a killer opening line. What next? Well, you have to hold on to that attention by writing an engaging and informative cover letter body. 

The body of a cover letter is the core of the important information you want to transmit. The introduction’s job was to snag the attention of the hiring manager. The body’s job is to sell them on your skills.  There are a few formatting things to be aware of before we start talking about what content belongs in the body of the cover letter. First, keep the company culture and standards in mind when picking a format. For example, if I want to work for a tech startup that is known for its wit and company culture, I can probably get away with using a bulleted list or another informal format. However, if I am applying to a respected research institution, using a standard five paragraph format is best. 

In addition, the cover letter should not be longer than a page. Hiring managers are busy people. They may have hundreds of resumes to read, so they don’t need a three page essay per person. A full page is plenty, and many hiring managers report finding three hundred words or less to be the idea length. Just to put that into context, the text from here to the “How to Write a Good Cover Letter Body” header below is about perfect, length-wise. 

Now, on to the more important part: the content. A cover letter should work in tandem with a resume. If you have a list of job experiences on your resume, don’t list them again in the cover letter. Use the valuable space in the cover letter to give examples about how you have applied your skills and experience. 

For example, if I have worked as a barista, I wouldn’t just say “I have worked as a barista at Generic Cafe.” The hiring manager could learn that from my resume. Instead, I could say “Working as a barista at Generic Cafe taught me to operate under pressure without feeling flustered. Once…” I would go on to recount a short story that illustrated my ability to work well under pressure. It is important that the stories and details you choose to include are directly related to the specific job. Don’t ramble or add anything that isn’t obviously connected. Use the job description as a tool—if it mentions a certain skill a few times, make sure to include it!

If you can match the voice and tone of your cover letter to the voice of the company, that usually earns you extra points. If, in their communications, they use wit, feel free to include it in your letter as well. If they are dry, to the point, and serious, cracking jokes is not the best technique.

A Few Don’ts of Writing a Cover Letter Body   

There are a few simple “don’ts” in cover letter writing. Do not: 

• Bad: I am smart, dedicated, determined, and funny.
• Better: When I was working at Tech Company, I designed and created an entirely new workflow that cut the product delivery time in half. 
• Bad: When I was seven, I really loved the monkeys at the zoo. This demonstrates my fun-loving nature. 
• Better: While working for This Company, I realized I was far more productive if I was light-hearted. I became known as the person to turn to in my unit when my coworkers needed a boost, and as my team adopted my ideology, we exceeded our sales goals by 200%. 
• Bad: I would love this job because it would propel me to the next stage of my career.
• Better: With my decade of industry experience communicating with engineers and clients, I am the right person to manage X team. 
• Bad: I know I’m not the most qualified candidate for this job, but…
• Better: I can apply my years of experience as an X to this position, using my skills in Y and Z to… 
• Bad: I am a thirty year old white woman from Denver…
• Better: I have extensive experience managing diverse international teams, as illustrated by the time I…  

The most important part of the cover letter is the body. Sell your skills by telling stories, but walk the razor’s edge between saying too much and not enough. When in doubt, lean towards not enough—it is better for the hiring manager to call you in for an interview to learn more than to bore them.

How to Write a Good Cover Letter Conclusion

 The last lines of a cover letter are extremely important. Until you can meet in-person for an interview, the conclusion of your cover letter will greatly affect the impression the hiring manager has of you. A good technique for concluding your cover letter is to summarize, in a sentence, what value you can bring to the company and why you are perfect for the position. Sum up the most important points from your cover letter in a short, concise manner. 

Write with confidence, but not arrogance. This can be a delicate balance. While some people have gotten away (and sometimes gotten a job) with remarks like, “I’ll be expecting the job offer soon,” most do not. Closing with a courteous statement that showcases your capability and skills is far more effective than arrogance. Try to avoid trite or generic statements in the closing sentence as well. This includes the template, “I am very excited to work for XYZ Company.” Give the hiring manager something to remember and close with what you can offer the company. 

The final step in any cover letter is to edit. Re-read your cover letter. Then, set it aside for a few hours (or days, time permitting) and read it again. Give it to a friend to read. Read it aloud. This may seem excessive, but there is nothing more off-putting than a spelling or grammar error in the first few lines of a cover letter. The hiring manager may power through and ignore it, but it will certainly taint their impression. 

Once the cover letter is as flawless and compelling as it can be, send it out! If you are super stuck on how to get started, working within a template may help. Microsoft Word has many free templates that are aesthetically appealing and can give you a hint to the length and content. A few good online options live here (free options are at the bottom—there is no reason to pay for a resume template).

How to Write a Cover Letter for a Research Position

Writing a cover letter for a research position is the same as writing any other cover letter. There are, however, a few considerations and additions that are worth pointing out. A job description may not directly ask for a cover letter, but it is good practice to send one unless they specifically say not to. This means that even if a cover letter isn’t mentioned, you should send one—it is best practice and gives you an opportunity to expand on your skills and research in a valuable way.

Format and Writing Style for a Research Position Cover Letter

Research and academics tend to appreciate formality more than start-ups or tech companies, so using the traditional five paragraph format is typically a good idea. The five paragraph format usually includes an introduction, three short examples of skills, and a concluding paragraph. This isn’t set in stone—if you’d rather write two paragraphs about the skills and experience you bring to the company, that is fine. 

Keep in mind that concise and to-the-point writing is extremely valuable in research. Anyone who has ever written a project proposal under 300 words knows that every term needs to add value. Proving that you are a skilled writer, starting in your cover letter, will earn you a lot of points. This means that cover letters in research and academia, though you may have more to say, should actually be shorter than others. Think of the hiring manager—they are plowing through a massive stack of verbose, technical, and complex cover letters and CVs. It is refreshing to find an easy to read, short cover letter. 

On the “easy to read” point, remember that the hiring manager may not be an expert in your field. Even if they are, you cannot assume that they have the exact same linguistic and educational background as you. For example, if you have dedicated the last five years of your life to studying a certain species of bacteria that lives on Red-Eyed Tree Frogs, all of those technical terms you have learned (and maybe even coined) have no place in your cover letter. Keep jargon to an absolute minimum. Consider using a tool like the Hemingway Editor to identify and eliminate jargon. While you want to reduce jargon, it is still important to prove that you’ve researched their research. Passion about the research topic is one of the most valuable attributes that a new hire can offer. 

Use your cover letter to prove that you have done your homework, know exactly what the institution or group is doing, and want to join them. If you have questions about the research or want to learn more, it isn’t a bad idea to get in touch with one of the researchers. You can often use LinkedIn or the group’s staff site to learn who is working on the project and reach out.

What Research Information Should be Included in a Cover Letter

A research position cover letter is not the place for your academic history, dissertation, or publications. While it may be tempting to go into detail about the amazing research you did for your thesis, that belongs in your CV. Details like this will make your cover letter too long. While these are valuable accomplishments, don’t include them unless there is something  that pertains to the group’s research, and your CV doesn’t cover it in depth. 

If you do choose to write about your research, write about concrete details and skills that aren’t in your CV. For example, if you have spent the last few years working on identifying the effects of a certain gene sequence in bird migration, include information about the lab techniques you used. Also, try to put emphasis on the aspects of your resume and CV that make you stand out from other candidates. It is likely that you will be competing with many similarly qualified candidates, so if you have a unique skill or experience, make sure it doesn’t get lost in the chaos—a cover letter is the perfect place to highlight these sorts of skills. 

Industry experience is a great differentiator. If you have relevant industry experience, make sure to include it in your cover letter because it will almost certainly set you apart. Another valuable differentiator is a deep and established research network. If you have been working on research teams for years and have deep connections with other scientists, don’t be afraid to include this information. This makes you a very valuable acquisition for the company because you come with an extensive network

Include Soft Skills in Your Cover Letter

Scientific skills aren’t the only consideration for hiring managers. Experience working with and leading teams is incredibly valuable in the research industry. Even if the job description doesn’t mention teamwork, add a story or description of a time you worked with (or, even better, lead) a successful team. Soft skills like management, customer service, writing, and clear communication are important in research positions. Highlight these abilities and experiences in your cover letter in addition to the hard skills and research-based information. 

If you are struggling to edit and polish your letter, give it to both someone within your field and someone who is completely unfamiliar with your research (or, at least, the technical side of it). Once both of those people say that the letter makes sense and is compelling, you should feel confident submitting it.

Cover letters are intended to give hiring managers information beyond what your resume and CV are able to display. Write with a natural but appropriately formal voice, do your research on the position, and cater to the job description. A good cover letter can go a long way to getting you an interview, and with these tips, your cover letters will certainly stand out of the pile.

Related Articles

Student attitudes towards open education resources.

Ally Faller

Lauren Herwehe

Nathan A. Quarderer

Earth Data Science And The Open Education Movement

From research to reddit: earth lab's fire outreach.

Elizabeth Woolner

Chelsea Nagy

Certificate Form

How To Write a Cover Letter for a Research Paper

How To Write a Cover Letter for a Research Paper The cover letter written to accompany a research paper when it is submitted for publication in a scientific or academic journal offers an unparalleled opportunity to persuade a busy editor that the manuscript merits serious consideration, fits the journal’s publishing agenda and is worthy of peer review. Accordingly, cover letters are notoriously difficult to write well, and many concerns and priorities must be juggled to achieve a professional and effective letter. It is always wise to begin by consulting the journal’s guidelines for authors. Any instructions relevant to cover letters and their content should be followed with precision. You may be asked to state that the research is original, that it complies with the journal’s ethical standards, that all authors have approved the manuscript, that there are no conflicts of interest and that every trace of authorial identity has been removed from the manuscript in preparation for blind review. It is also common to confirm that the paper has not been submitted or published elsewhere. If part of the research has already been presented or published, explain this carefully, highlighting what is new in the manuscript you are submitting. Even if information of this kind is not requested in a cover letter, it is usually helpful to provide it. PhD Thesis Editing Services Information about potential reviewers for your paper can be a little trickier. If your field of study is extremely small or highly specialised, such a list might prove particularly helpful for the editor, but it is generally best to mention experts by name only if the journal requests this either in its guidelines or via personal contact. If you are providing a list of possible reviewers, be sure to make your decisions on ethical intellectual grounds and not to include anyone for whom there may be a conflict of interest –a co-author, for instance, or close colleague would be inappropriate. Avoiding specific names while describing with precision the type of knowledge and expertise required to assess your research adequately can be a diplomatic alternative. Your cover letter should certainly describe your manuscript and publishing intentions clearly. Open with the fact that you are submitting your research paper for publication in the journal, and be sure to provide the titles of both your paper and the journal. Then you can briefly describe your topic and its background, your research questions and methods, and your findings and conclusions as well as the gaps they fill in current knowledge or the practices they may affect. The primary goal is to convince the editor that your research is necessary, your findings important and your paper of interest to readers of the journal who will ultimately cite your work. Since a cover letter should be fairly short (a single traditional page is ideal), you will need to be selective as well as concise and choose information that successfully highlights the unique strengths and significance of your research. A sincere and objective assessment of your work and its meaning will be more effective than unsubstantiated exaggeration and grandiose claims. Thinking from the perspective of the journal editor can be most helpful. Widen your view beyond imagining what publication in the journal will mean to you and your career by recognising that the relationship between author and publisher is a symbiotic one. Try to focus on how your paper fits the journal’s aims and scope. Why did you decide to send your writing to that particular journal? How does your work relate to articles it has already published, especially in recent months and years? Why would your research be of interest to the journal’s readers? How might they make use of your methods, results and conclusions? Familiarising yourself with the journal, its publications, its aims and its scope will help you prioritise and phrase key descriptions of your work. PhD Thesis Editing Services Ensure that you write your cover letter with extreme care and then proofread, edit and revise your prose until it is polished to perfection. It is essential that you communicate with the utmost clarity and that your letter promises the editor an equally well-written paper, so errors in language, awkward wording and logical ambiguities must be avoided at all cost. Jargon should also be avoided, and elements such as discipline-specific terminology and unusual abbreviations and acronyms are best if used sparingly and carefully defined, keeping in mind that the journal editor may not share your specialisation. The format of a traditional business letter will enable a tidy presentation of the current date, your name, title and contact information as well as the name, title and contact information of the editor. Be sure to use a proper salutation such as ‘Dear Dr Smith,’ to maintain a polite professionalism throughout your letter and to express gratitude for the editor’s consideration before formally signing off.

Why Our Editing and Proofreading Services? At Proof-Reading-Service.com we offer the highest quality journal article editing , phd thesis editing and proofreading services via our large and extremely dedicated team of academic and scientific professionals. All of our proofreaders are native speakers of English who have earned their own postgraduate degrees, and their areas of specialisation cover such a wide range of disciplines that we are able to help our international clientele with research editing to improve and perfect all kinds of academic manuscripts for successful publication. Many of the carefully trained members of our expert editing and proofreading team work predominantly on articles intended for publication in scholarly journals, applying painstaking journal editing standards to ensure that the references and formatting used in each paper are in conformity with the journal’s instructions for authors and to correct any grammar, spelling, punctuation or simple typing errors. In this way, we enable our clients to report their research in the clear and accurate ways required to impress acquisitions proofreaders and achieve publication.

Our scientific proofreading services for the authors of a wide variety of scientific journal papers are especially popular, but we also offer manuscript proofreading services and have the experience and expertise to proofread and edit manuscripts in all scholarly disciplines, as well as beyond them. We have team members who specialise in medical proofreading services , and some of our experts dedicate their time exclusively to PhD proofreading and master’s proofreading , offering research students the opportunity to improve their use of formatting and language through the most exacting PhD thesis editing and dissertation proofreading practices. Whether you are preparing a conference paper for presentation, polishing a progress report to share with colleagues, or facing the daunting task of editing and perfecting any kind of scholarly document for publication, a qualified member of our professional team can provide invaluable assistance and give you greater confidence in your written work.

If you are in the process of preparing an article for an academic or scientific journal, or planning one for the near future, you may well be interested in a new book, Guide to Journal Publication , which is available on our Tips and Advice on Publishing Research in Journals website.

Guide to Academic and Scientific Publication

How to get your writing published in scholarly journals.

It provides practical advice on planning, preparing and submitting articles for publication in scholarly journals.

PhD Success

How to write a doctoral thesis.

If you are in the process of preparing a PhD thesis for submission, or planning one for the near future, you may well be interested in the book, How to Write a Doctoral Thesis , which is available on our thesis proofreading website.

PhD Success: How to Write a Doctoral Thesis provides guidance for students familiar with English and the procedures of English universities, but it also acknowledges that many theses in the English language are now written by candidates whose first language is not English, so it carefully explains the scholarly styles, conventions and standards expected of a successful doctoral thesis in the English language.

Why Is Proofreading Important?

To improve the quality of papers.

Effective proofreading is absolutely vital to the production of high-quality scholarly and professional documents. When done carefully, correctly and thoroughly, proofreading can make the difference between writing that communicates successfully with its intended readers and writing that does not. No author creates a perfect text without reviewing, reflecting on and revising what he or she has written, and proofreading is an extremely important part of this process.

Peer Recognized

Make a name in academia

How to Write a Research Paper: the LEAP approach (+cheat sheet)

In this article I will show you how to write a research paper using the four LEAP writing steps. The LEAP academic writing approach is a step-by-step method for turning research results into a published paper .

The LEAP writing approach has been the cornerstone of the 70 + research papers that I have authored and the 3700+ citations these paper have accumulated within 9 years since the completion of my PhD. I hope the LEAP approach will help you just as much as it has helped me to make an real, tangible impact with my research.

What is the LEAP research paper writing approach?

I designed the LEAP writing approach not only for merely writing the papers. My goal with the writing system was to show young scientists how to first think about research results and then how to efficiently write each section of the research paper.

In other words, you will see how to write a research paper by first analyzing the results and then building a logical, persuasive arguments. In this way, instead of being afraid of writing research paper, you will be able to rely on the paper writing process to help you with what is the most demanding task in getting published – thinking.

The four research paper writing steps according to the LEAP approach:

I will show each of these steps in detail. And you will be able to download the LEAP cheat sheet for using with every paper you write.

But before I tell you how to efficiently write a research paper, I want to show you what is the problem with the way scientists typically write a research paper and why the LEAP approach is more efficient.

How scientists typically write a research paper (and why it isn’t efficient)

Writing a research paper can be tough, especially for a young scientist. Your reasoning needs to be persuasive and thorough enough to convince readers of your arguments. The description has to be derived from research evidence, from prior art, and from your own judgment. This is a tough feat to accomplish.

The figure below shows the sequence of the different parts of a typical research paper. Depending on the scientific journal, some sections might be merged or nonexistent, but the general outline of a research paper will remain very similar.

Here is the problem: Most people make the mistake of writing in this same sequence.

While the structure of scientific articles is designed to help the reader follow the research, it does little to help the scientist write the paper. This is because the layout of research articles starts with the broad (introduction) and narrows down to the specifics (results). See in the figure below how the research paper is structured in terms of the breath of information that each section entails.

How to write a research paper according to the LEAP approach

For a scientist, it is much easier to start writing a research paper with laying out the facts in the narrow sections (i.e. results), step back to describe them (i.e. write the discussion), and step back again to explain the broader picture in the introduction.

For example, it might feel intimidating to start writing a research paper by explaining your research’s global significance in the introduction, while it is easy to plot the figures in the results. When plotting the results, there is not much room for wiggle: the results are what they are.

Starting to write a research papers from the results is also more fun because you finally get to see and understand the complete picture of the research that you have worked on.

Most importantly, following the LEAP approach will help you first make sense of the results yourself and then clearly communicate them to the readers. That is because the sequence of writing allows you to slowly understand the meaning of the results and then develop arguments for presenting to your readers.

I have personally been able to write and submit a research article in three short days using this method.

Step 1: Lay Out the Facts

You have worked long hours on a research project that has produced results and are no doubt curious to determine what they exactly mean. There is no better way to do this than by preparing figures, graphics and tables. This is what the first LEAP step is focused on – diving into the results.

How to p repare charts and tables for a research paper

Your first task is to try out different ways of visually demonstrating the research results. In many fields, the central items of a journal paper will be charts that are based on the data generated during research. In other fields, these might be conceptual diagrams, microscopy images, schematics and a number of other types of scientific graphics which should visually communicate the research study and its results to the readers. If you have reasonably small number of data points, data tables might be useful as well.

Tips for preparing charts and tables

• Try multiple chart types but in the finished paper only use the one that best conveys the message you want to present to the readers
• Follow the eight chart design progressions for selecting and refining a data chart for your paper: https://peerrecognized.com/chart-progressions
• Prepare scientific graphics and visualizations for your paper using the scientific graphic design cheat sheet: https://peerrecognized.com/tools-for-creating-scientific-illustrations/

How to describe the results of your research

Now that you have your data charts, graphics and tables laid out in front of you – describe what you see in them. Seek to answer the question: What have I found?  Your statements should progress in a logical sequence and be backed by the visual information. Since, at this point, you are simply explaining what everyone should be able to see for themselves, you can use a declarative tone: The figure X demonstrates that…

Tips for describing the research results :

• Answer the question: “ What have I found? “
• Use declarative tone since you are simply describing observations

Step 2: Explain the results

The core aspect of your research paper is not actually the results; it is the explanation of their meaning. In the second LEAP step, you will do some heavy lifting by guiding the readers through the results using logic backed by previous scientific research.

How to define the Message of a research paper

To define the central message of your research paper, imagine how you would explain your research to a colleague in 20 seconds . If you succeed in effectively communicating your paper’s message, a reader should be able to recount your findings in a similarly concise way even a year after reading it. This clarity will increase the chances that someone uses the knowledge you generated, which in turn raises the likelihood of citations to your research paper. 

Tips for defining the paper’s central message :

• Write the paper’s core message in a single sentence or two bullet points
• Write the core message in the header of the research paper manuscript

How to write the Discussion section of a research paper

In the discussion section you have to demonstrate why your research paper is worthy of publishing. In other words, you must now answer the all-important So what? question . How well you do so will ultimately define the success of your research paper.

Here are three steps to get started with writing the discussion section:

• Write bullet points of the things that convey the central message of the research article (these may evolve into subheadings later on).
• Make a list with the arguments or observations that support each idea.
• Finally, expand on each point to make full sentences and paragraphs.

Tips for writing the discussion section:

• What is the meaning of the results?
• Was the hypothesis confirmed?
• Write bullet points that support the core message
• List logical arguments for each bullet point, group them into sections
• Instead of repeating research timeline, use a presentation sequence that best supports your logic
• Convert arguments to full paragraphs; be confident but do not overhype
• Refer to both supportive and contradicting research papers for maximum credibility

How to write the Conclusions of a research paper

Since some readers might just skim through your research paper and turn directly to the conclusions, it is a good idea to make conclusion a standalone piece. In the first few sentences of the conclusions, briefly summarize the methodology and try to avoid using abbreviations (if you do, explain what they mean).

After this introduction, summarize the findings from the discussion section. Either paragraph style or bullet-point style conclusions can be used. I prefer the bullet-point style because it clearly separates the different conclusions and provides an easy-to-digest overview for the casual browser. It also forces me to be more succinct.

Tips for writing the conclusion section :

• Summarize the key findings, starting with the most important one
• Make conclusions standalone (short summary, avoid abbreviations)
• Add an optional take-home message and suggest future research in the last paragraph

How to refine the Objective of a research paper

The objective is a short, clear statement defining the paper’s research goals. It can be included either in the final paragraph of the introduction, or as a separate subsection after the introduction. Avoid writing long paragraphs with in-depth reasoning, references, and explanation of methodology since these belong in other sections. The paper’s objective can often be written in a single crisp sentence.

Tips for writing the objective section :

• The objective should ask the question that is answered by the central message of the research paper
• The research objective should be clear long before writing a paper. At this point, you are simply refining it to make sure it is addressed in the body of the paper.

How to write the Methodology section of your research paper

When writing the methodology section, aim for a depth of explanation that will allow readers to reproduce the study . This means that if you are using a novel method, you will have to describe it thoroughly. If, on the other hand, you applied a standardized method, or used an approach from another paper, it will be enough to briefly describe it with reference to the detailed original source.

Remember to also detail the research population, mention how you ensured representative sampling, and elaborate on what statistical methods you used to analyze the results.

Tips for writing the methodology section :

• Include enough detail to allow reproducing the research
• Provide references if the methods are known
• Create a methodology flow chart to add clarity
• Describe the research population, sampling methodology, statistical methods for result analysis
• Describe what methodology, test methods, materials, and sample groups were used in the research.

Step 3: Advertize the research

Step 3 of the LEAP writing approach is designed to entice the casual browser into reading your research paper. This advertising can be done with an informative title, an intriguing abstract, as well as a thorough explanation of the underlying need for doing the research within the introduction.

How to write the Introduction of a research paper

The introduction section should leave no doubt in the mind of the reader that what you are doing is important and that this work could push scientific knowledge forward. To do this convincingly, you will need to have a good knowledge of what is state-of-the-art in your field. You also need be able to see the bigger picture in order to demonstrate the potential impacts of your research work.

Think of the introduction as a funnel, going from wide to narrow, as shown in the figure below:

• Start with a brief context to explain what do we already know,
• Follow with the motivation for the research study and explain why should we care about it,
• Explain the research gap you are going to bridge within this research paper,
• Describe the approach you will take to solve the problem.

Tips for writing the introduction section :

• Follow the Context – Motivation – Research gap – Approach funnel for writing the introduction
• Explain how others tried and how you plan to solve the research problem
• Do a thorough literature review before writing the introduction
• Start writing the introduction by using your own words, then add references from the literature

How to prepare the Abstract of a research paper

The abstract acts as your paper’s elevator pitch and is therefore best written only after the main text is finished. In this one short paragraph you must convince someone to take on the time-consuming task of reading your whole research article. So, make the paper easy to read, intriguing, and self-explanatory; avoid jargon and abbreviations.

How to structure the abstract of a research paper:

• The abstract is a single paragraph that follows this structure:
• Problem: why did we research this
• Methodology: typically starts with the words “Here we…” that signal the start of own contribution.
• Results: what we found from the research.
• Conclusions: show why are the findings important

How to compose a research paper Title

The title is the ultimate summary of a research paper. It must therefore entice someone looking for information to click on a link to it and continue reading the article. A title is also used for indexing purposes in scientific databases, so a representative and optimized title will play large role in determining if your research paper appears in search results at all.

Tips for coming up with a research paper title:

• Capture curiosity of potential readers using a clear and descriptive title
• Include broad terms that are often searched
• Add details that uniquely identify the researched subject of your research paper
• Avoid jargon and abbreviations
• Use keywords as title extension (instead of duplicating the words) to increase the chance of appearing in search results

How to prepare Highlights and Graphical Abstract

Highlights are three to five short bullet-point style statements that convey the core findings of the research paper. Notice that the focus is on the findings, not on the process of getting there.

A graphical abstract placed next to the textual abstract visually summarizes the entire research paper in a single, easy-to-follow figure. I show how to create a graphical abstract in my book Research Data Visualization and Scientific Graphics.

Tips for preparing highlights and graphical abstract:

• In highlights show core findings of the research paper (instead of what you did in the study).
• In graphical abstract show take-home message or methodology of the research paper. Learn more about creating a graphical abstract in this article.

Step 4: Prepare for submission

Sometimes it seems that nuclear fusion will stop on the star closest to us (read: the sun will stop to shine) before a submitted manuscript is published in a scientific journal. The publication process routinely takes a long time, and after submitting the manuscript you have very little control over what happens. To increase the chances of a quick publication, you must do your homework before submitting the manuscript. In the fourth LEAP step, you make sure that your research paper is published in the most appropriate journal as quickly and painlessly as possible.

How to select a scientific Journal for your research paper

The best way to find a journal for your research paper is it to review which journals you used while preparing your manuscript. This source listing should provide some assurance that your own research paper, once published, will be among similar articles and, thus, among your field’s trusted sources.

After this initial selection of hand-full of scientific journals, consider the following six parameters for selecting the most appropriate journal for your research paper (read this article to review each step in detail):

• Scope and publishing history
• Ranking and Recognition
• Publishing time
• Acceptance rate
• Content requirements
• Access and Fees

How to select a journal for your research paper:

• Use the six parameters to select the most appropriate scientific journal for your research paper
• Use the following tools for journal selection: https://peerrecognized.com/journals
• Follow the journal’s “Authors guide” formatting requirements

How to Edit you manuscript

No one can write a finished research paper on their first attempt. Before submitting, make sure to take a break from your work for a couple of days, or even weeks. Try not to think about the manuscript during this time. Once it has faded from your memory, it is time to return and edit. The pause will allow you to read the manuscript from a fresh perspective and make edits as necessary.

I have summarized the most useful research paper editing tools in this article.

Tips for editing a research paper:

• Take time away from the research paper to forget about it; then returning to edit,
• Start by editing the content: structure, headings, paragraphs, logic, figures
• Continue by editing the grammar and language; perform a thorough language check using academic writing tools
• Read the entire paper out loud and correct what sounds weird

How to write a compelling Cover Letter for your paper

Begin the cover letter by stating the paper’s title and the type of paper you are submitting (review paper, research paper, short communication). Next, concisely explain why your study was performed, what was done, and what the key findings are. State why the results are important and what impact they might have in the field. Make sure you mention how your approach and findings relate to the scope of the journal in order to show why the article would be of interest to the journal’s readers.

I wrote a separate article that explains what to include in a cover letter here. You can also download a cover letter template from the article.

Tips for writing a cover letter:

• Explain how the findings of your research relate to journal’s scope
• Tell what impact the research results will have
• Show why the research paper will interest the journal’s audience
• Add any legal statements as required in journal’s guide for authors

How to Answer the Reviewers

Reviewers will often ask for new experiments, extended discussion, additional details on the experimental setup, and so forth. In principle, your primary winning tactic will be to agree with the reviewers and follow their suggestions whenever possible. After all, you must earn their blessing in order to get your paper published.

Be sure to answer each review query and stick to the point. In the response to the reviewers document write exactly where in the paper you have made any changes. In the paper itself, highlight the changes using a different color. This way the reviewers are less likely to re-read the entire article and suggest new edits.

In cases when you don’t agree with the reviewers, it makes sense to answer more thoroughly. Reviewers are scientifically minded people and so, with enough logical and supported argument, they will eventually be willing to see things your way.

Tips for answering the reviewers:

• Agree with most review comments, but if you don’t, thoroughly explain why
• Highlight changes in the manuscript
• Do not take the comments personally and cool down before answering

The LEAP research paper writing cheat sheet

Imagine that you are back in grad school and preparing to take an exam on the topic: “How to write a research paper”. As an exemplary student, you would, most naturally, create a cheat sheet summarizing the subject… Well, I did it for you.

This one-page summary of the LEAP research paper writing technique will remind you of the key research paper writing steps. Print it out and stick it to a wall in your office so that you can review it whenever you are writing a new research paper.

Now that we have gone through the four LEAP research paper writing steps, I hope you have a good idea of how to write a research paper. It can be an enjoyable process and once you get the hang of it, the four LEAP writing steps should even help you think about and interpret the research results. This process should enable you to write a well-structured, concise, and compelling research paper.

Have fund with writing your next research paper. I hope it will turn out great!

Learn writing papers that get cited

The LEAP writing approach is a blueprint for writing research papers. But to be efficient and write papers that get cited, you need more than that.

My name is Martins Zaumanis and in my interactive course Research Paper Writing Masterclass I will show you how to  visualize  your research results,  frame a message  that convinces your readers, and write  each section  of the paper. Step-by-step.

And of course – you will learn to respond the infamous  Reviewer No.2.

Hey! My name is Martins Zaumanis and I am a materials scientist in Switzerland ( Google Scholar ). As the first person in my family with a PhD, I have first-hand experience of the challenges starting scientists face in academia. With this blog, I want to help young researchers succeed in academia. I call the blog “Peer Recognized”, because peer recognition is what lifts academic careers and pushes science forward.

Besides this blog, I have written the Peer Recognized book series and created the Peer Recognized Academy offering interactive online courses.

Related articles:

One comment

• Pingback: Research Paper Outline with Key Sentence Skeleton (+Paper Template)

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I want to join the Peer Recognized newsletter!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Privacy Overview

Copyright © 2024 Martins Zaumanis

Contacts:  [email protected]  

Privacy Policy 

Letter Templates

letter of intent example for research paper

If you’re applying for a research paper, you might be asked to submit a letter of intent. This document is a brief introduction that outlines your research interests, goals, and objectives. It’s an opportunity to showcase your knowledge and expertise while also demonstrating your commitment to the research. In this article, we’ll provide seven letter of intent examples for research paper to help you get started.

Example 1: Theoretical Research

Dear [Name of Professor/Program Director],

I am writing this letter to express my interest in [Name of Program or Project] at [Name of Institution]. My research interests lie in the field of [Name of Field or Topic], particularly in the area of [Name of Specific Area or Focus].

I am excited about the opportunity to work alongside renowned researchers and contribute to the field through my research. I believe my background in [Name of Relevant Experience or Education] has prepared me to undertake this project and make a meaningful contribution to the field.

Thank you for considering my application. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

[Your Name]

Example 2: Empirical Research

I am writing to express my interest in the [Name of Program or Project] at [Name of Institution]. My research interests are in the field of [Name of Field or Topic], particularly in the area of [Name of Specific Area or Focus].

I am excited about the opportunity to conduct empirical research on this topic and contribute to the field. I have [Name of Relevant Experience or Education] and believe that my skills and knowledge would be an asset to the project.

Thank you for considering my application. I look forward to hearing from you.

Example 3: Qualitative Research

I am writing to express my interest in the [Name of Program or Project] at [Name of Institution]. My research interests lie in the field of [Name of Field or Topic], particularly in the area of [Name of Specific Area or Focus].

I am excited about the opportunity to conduct qualitative research on this topic and contribute to the field. I have [Name of Relevant Experience or Education], which I believe will enable me to conduct rigorous research and produce valuable insights.

Example 4: Survey Research

I am writing to express my interest in the [Name of Program or Project] at [Name of Institution]. My research interests are in the field of [Name of Field or Topic], with a focus on survey research.

I am excited about the opportunity to conduct a survey on [Name of Specific Area or Focus] and contribute to the field. I have [Name of Relevant Experience or Education], which I believe will enable me to conduct high-quality research and produce valuable insights.

Example 5: Literature Review

I am writing to express my interest in the [Name of Program or Project] at [Name of Institution]. My research interests lie in the field of [Name of Field or Topic], with a focus on conducting a comprehensive literature review.

I am excited about the opportunity to contribute to the field through my research. I have [Name of Relevant Experience or Education], which I believe will enable me to conduct a thorough and insightful literature review.

Example 6: Case Study

I am writing to express my interest in the [Name of Program or Project] at [Name of Institution]. My research interests lie in the field of [Name of Field or Topic], with a focus on conducting a case study.

I am excited about the opportunity to contribute to the field through my research. I have [Name of Relevant Experience or Education], which I believe will enable me to conduct a rigorous and insightful case study.

Example 7: Mixed Methods Research

I am writing to express my interest in the [Name of Program or Project] at [Name of Institution]. My research interests lie in the field of [Name of Field or Topic], with a focus on mixed methods research.

I am excited about the opportunity to contribute to the field through my research. I have [Name of Relevant Experience or Education], which I believe will enable me to conduct a comprehensive and insightful study.

Tips for Writing a Letter of Intent for Research Paper

Writing a letter of intent for research paper can seem daunting, but with the right approach, it can be an effective tool for communicating your research interests and goals. Here are some tips to help you get started:

1. Keep it concise

A letter of intent should be brief and to the point. Keep your sentences short and use clear, concise language to convey your message.

2. Be specific

Make sure to include specific details about your research interests and goals. Use concrete examples to demonstrate your expertise and knowledge in the field.

3. Tailor your letter

Customize your letter to the program or project you’re applying for. Research the institution and the project to show that you have a genuine interest in the opportunity.

4. Edit and proofread

Before submitting your letter, make sure to edit and proofread it carefully. Check for spelling and grammar errors, and make sure your letter is well-organized and easy to read.

5. Ask for feedback

Consider asking a mentor or colleague to review your letter before you submit it. They may be able to provide helpful feedback and suggestions for improvement.

6. Follow instructions

Make sure to follow any instructions or guidelines provided by the institution or program. Pay attention to the format and length requirements, and make sure to submit your letter on time.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a letter of intent for research paper.

A letter of intent for research paper is a brief document that outlines your research interests, goals, and objectives. It’s typically submitted as part of an application for a research program or project.

How long should a letter of intent be?

A letter of intent for research paper should be concise and to the point. Aim for one page or less, and keep your sentences short and focused.

What should I include in a letter of intent?

You should include your research interests, goals, and objectives, as well as specific details about your relevant experience and education. You should also customize your letter to the program or project you’re applying for.

How should I address my letter of intent?

Address your letter of intent to the program director or professor who will be reviewing your application. Use a formal greeting such as “Dear [Name]”.

Can I use a template for my letter of intent?

Yes, you can find templates for letter of intent online. However, make sure to customize the template to fit your specific research interests and goals. Avoid using generic or boilerplate language.

When should I submit my letter of intent?

Make sure to submit your letter of intent according to the instructions provided by the program or institution. Some programs may have specific deadlines or submission guidelines.

Writing a letter of intent for research paper can be a great way to showcase your expertise and commitment to the field. Use the examples and tips provided in this article to help you get started and create a compelling letter that will impress program directors and professors.

• sample letter of intent for research paper
• letter of intent sample for graduate school admission
• letter of intent sample for research
• sample letter of intent for doctoral program
• letter of intent sample for student
• sample letter of intent for graduate school criminal justice

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

How should I write a letter to ask the author of a research paper some questions?

Can I write:

Hi Prof. xxx, I am xxx, PhD student from xx University. Recently I am studying your paper titled “xxx” in xxx. Could you please help me understand why xxx? I assume that there may be two reasons: 1)xxx 2) xxx. Thank you so much for your time. Sincerely, xxx xx University

• publications
• communication

• 25 Standard salutation would be "Dear Prof. xxx, ..." instead of "Hi". I would only use "Hi" with someone I am on a first-name basis with. –  spin Commented Apr 4, 2022 at 13:34
• 10 Just as a side note, not all authors of papers (not even the first authors) will be professors, but much more often PhD students just like you. –  Sursula Commented Apr 4, 2022 at 14:54
• 1 What is the reason to write the letter? Do you want to make contact with them, or do you not understand xxx? If the latter, would steps did you do to understand xxx? –  lalala Commented Apr 5, 2022 at 8:04
• 9 Your email template is already better than 50% of the ones I receive.... –  Ander Biguri Commented Apr 5, 2022 at 14:13
• 1 As an alternative to writing a formal email you could try finding the author, preferably first or last author, on a social platform like ResearchGate or LinkedIn and then reaching out there. –  Cam Commented Apr 6, 2022 at 0:03

5 Answers 5

When I was a student I liked to also mention my advisor and my area of research, and maybe a few words about how the author's paper related to my research. Of course, this only makes sense if you already have an advisor and a project, but the more the author understands about who you are and how they are helping you, the better.

I also agree with the others that it's better to start with "Dear Prof. xxxx" (if the author is in fact a professor).

It sounds not very professional. I would suggest writing "Dear Prof. .." Here is an edited version of your letter:

Dear Prof. xxx, I am a PhD student from xx University. Recently, I came across your paper titled “xxx” in xxx. Could you please help me to understand why xxx? I assume that there may be two reasons: 1)xxx 2) xxx. I would greatly appreciate your response. Best regards, xxx, xx University

Yes, you could write that and you might get a reply. It is possible that you won't, but it seems polite enough that the chances are good.

It might take a while for a reply (weeks), however, since people are busy and it might take some time to reflect on the proper response. And the reply might just be a pointer to somewhere you can get additional background.

As user spin notes in a comment, a more formal salutation would be better, however. Some places can be quite formal.

• I assume that in principle authors are happy that people read their work and are curious about it. Would it help in your opinion to make the author curious about the work of the OP that leads him to write the letter, for example by outlining one's work, providing a link to a paper, or giving some other detail? Also, I'd (naively) write something like "I am particularly intrigued by your innovative [insert field specific thing here, like strategy to compensate for measurement errors ] which leads me to the following questions: ..." Would such a rationale be a good idea? –  Peter - Reinstate Monica Commented Apr 5, 2022 at 16:41
• 1 @Peter-ReinstateMonica, generally, for a first contact a short message is better than a long one. It can open a conversation. If the receiver is overwhelmed by the size/complexity of a first (blind) email it is easy to just delete it. –  Buffy Commented Apr 5, 2022 at 16:46
• Yes, I suppose that's the dilemma. –  Peter - Reinstate Monica Commented Apr 5, 2022 at 16:46
• "I am particularly intrigued by your innovative..." I would avoid that, reactions to flattery are not always positive (it may come across as insincere). I suspect most authors would regard evidence that someone had actually read the paper and had questions to be more than sufficient as a complement ;o) I'd definitely prefer a short to the point email. –  Dikran Marsupial Commented Apr 5, 2022 at 20:24

Yes you can ask. But your current version has some issues.

Hi Prof. xxx,

Use a more formal way to address him in the first e-mail. There is a chance that he will answer less formal, but you don't know in advance, so be more formal for the first e-mail.

I am xxx, PhD student from xx University. Recently I am studying your paper titled “xxx” in xxx. Could you please help me understand why xxx?

This sounds like "I need a teacher that helps me understand my assignments". The professor will see it as not being his duty to help students to do their work.

First, really try to do your own research. What don't you understand, do some of the references in the paper explain it? Can you find other material or textbooks that help? Ask another student or staff from your faculty.

Then, of course, the paper can be hard to read and a question is still justified. Try to explain in a concise way what you don't understand and ask a question as concrete as possible.

I assume that there may be two reasons: 1)xxx 2) xxx.

That's a good way to approach the issue. Tell (without too much text) what you didn't understand and what you think what may be meant but doesn't quite sum up for you. Don't go into too much detail, as you obviously did not understand it and explaining your wrong version doesn't help the author. But write enough that he is able to see what you didn't understand.

Thank you so much for your time.

Personally I would not exaggerate here. A simple "Thank you for your time" is appropriate, but the "so much" may be a bit over the top. They may be a professor and you're "just" a student, but in the end you're both just persons and you can ask questions like any other person. So I'd be polite, but don't exaggerate.

• 2 Yes, demonstrated effort is always good. –  Peter Mortensen Commented Apr 5, 2022 at 14:07

As an author, I appreciate it when someone shows interest in my work. I have no issue with responding to specific questions or engaging in a discussion.

That said, when you reach out to an author you should show competence in the area and ask relevant questions. The template you posted looks fine.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for browse other questions tagged publications etiquette communication ..

• Featured on Meta
• We spent a sprint addressing your requests — here’s how it went
• Upcoming initiatives on Stack Overflow and across the Stack Exchange network...

Hot Network Questions

• Using 50 Ω coax cable instead of passive probe
• Any alternative to lockdown browser?
• Why is there not a test for diagonalizability of a matrix
• Why did Drax say, "Every single time"?
• D compiler download / installation
• Is there a way to change a cantrip spell type to Necromancy in order to fulfil the requirement of the Death Domain Reaper ability for Clerics?
• Are there any video/audio recordings of the launch of sputnik 1?
• Everything has a tiny nuclear reactor in it. How much of a concern are illegal nuclear bombs?
• Ephesians 6:12, can palé mean to sway?
• Simple deform modifier making object thicker
• Attaching foam to the bottom of a PCB
• Question about NMAP HTTP Verb Tampering
• Rolling median of all K-length ranges
• Plastic plugs used to fasten cover over radiator
• Why are responses to an attack in a cycling race immediate?
• Transhumans, posthumans, and AI attacked by baseline humans
• Who is the woman who speaks when the Ravagers stop the Benatar?
• Weather on a Flat, Infinite Sea
• How much does a factory reset help in hiding a device's identification details?
• Decorate equations with arrows using TikZ
• Were there any stone vessels (including mortars) made in Paleolithic?
• How does a country without exit immigration check know you have overstayed?
• Would it be moral for Danish resitance in WW2 to kill collaborators?
• firefox returns odd results for file:/// or file:///tmp

Instructions for Authors

Contact Monica Mungle for help if edits are needed to the top section.

Original Investigation

Caring for the critically ill patient, brief report, research letter, systematic review (without meta-analysis), narrative review, special communication, clinical challenge, diagnostic test interpretation, a piece of my mind, letter to the editor, letter in reply.

• Randomized Clinical Trial
• Parallel-Design Double-blind Trial
• Crossover Trial
• Equivalence and Noninferiority Trial
• Cluster Trial
• Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

Meta-analysis

• Cohort Study
• Case-Control Study
• Cross-sectional Study
• Case Series
• Economic Evaluation
• Decision Analytical Model
• Comparative Effectiveness Research
• Genetic Association Study
• Diagnostic/Prognostic Study
• Quality Improvement Study
• Survey Study
• Qualitative Study

Manuscript Submission

Copies of previous editorial and reviewer comments, cover letter, manuscript style, manuscript components, recommended file sizes, manuscript file formats, abbreviations, units of measure, names of drugs, devices, and other products, gene names, symbols, and accession numbers, reproduced and re-created material, online-only supplements and multimedia.

What to Expect

Editorial and Peer Review

The jama network advantage.

• JAMA-Express

Authorship Form and Publishing Agreement

Publication.

• Postpublication Online Commenting

Reprints/e-Prints

Corrections, previous publication, related manuscripts and reports, and preprints, previous or planned meeting presentation or release of information, embargo policy, research article public access, depositing in repositories, and discoverability.

Editorial Policies for Authors

Authorship and Disclosures

Authorship criteria and contributions, role of the corresponding author, changes in authorship, name change policy, group authorship, conflicts of interest and financial disclosures, funding/support and role of funder/sponsor, data access, responsibility, and analysis, acknowledgment section, equator reporting guidelines, use of causal language, timeliness of data, statistical methods and data presentation, reporting demographic information for study participants, ethical approval of studies and informed consent, patient identification, use of ai in publication and research, personal communications and unpublished data, manuscripts that pose security risks.

Journal Policies, Forms, Resources

Decisions and Management of Editorial Conflicts of Interest

Publishing agreement, unauthorized use.

• Patient Permission Form
• AMA Manual of Style
• EQUATOR Network
• About This Journal

Contact Information

JAMA , Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, PhD, MD, MAS, Editor in Chief, 330 N Wabash Ave, Chicago, IL 60611-5885; telephone: (312) 464-4444; fax: (312) 464-5824; email: [email protected] . Manuscripts should be submitted online at http://manuscripts.jama.com .

Determine My Article Type

Categories of articles.

Original Investigation full info

Clinical trial Meta-analysis Intervention study Cohort study Case-control study Epidemiologic assessment Survey with high response rate Cost-effectiveness analysis Decision analysis Study of screening and diagnostic tests Other observational study

• ≤5 tables and/or figures
• Structured abstract

Data Sharing Statement

Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines

Caring for the Critically Ill Patient full info

Original research reports, preferably clinical trials or systematic reviews that address virtually any aspect of critical illness, from prevention and triage, through resuscitation and acute treatment, to rehabilitation and palliative care.

• See also requirements for Clinical Trial , Meta-analysis , and Systematic Review

Brief Report full info

Short reports of original studies or evaluations or unique, first-time reports of clinical case series.

It is very rare for this journal to publish case reports.

• 15 references
• ≤3 tables and/or figures

Research Letter full info

Concise, focused reports of original research. Can include any of the study types listed under Original Investigation.

• ≤6 references
• ≤2 small tables and/or figures
• No Abstract or Key Points

Back to top

Clinical Review and Education

Systematic Review (without meta-analysis) full info

This article type requires a presubmission inquiry. See the "full info" below for requirements and contact information.

Critical assessments of the literature and data sources pertaining to clinical topics, emphasizing factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention.

Systematic Reviews without meta-analysis are published as Reviews; those with meta-analysis are published as Original Investigations (see Meta-analysis ).

• 50-75 references
• A PRISMA-style flow diagram should be included as an online supplement
• Include a table with ratings of the quality of the studies/evidence
• Subtitle should be "A Systematic Review"

Narrative Review full info

Up-to-date review for clinicians on a topic of general common interest from the perspective of internationally recognized experts in these disciplines.

The focus should be an update on current understanding of the physiology of the disease or condition, diagnostic consideration, and treatment.

These reviews should address a specific question or issue that is relevant for clinical practice.

• 2000-3500 words
• 3-part structured abstract
• No Key Points
• Subtitle should be "A Review"

Special Communication full info

This journal publishes very few of these types of articles.

These manuscripts describe an important issue in clinical medicine, public health, health policy, or medical research in a scholarly, thorough, well-referenced, systematic, and evidence-based manner.

• 50 references
• ≤4 tables and/or figures
• Requires a presubmission inquiry

Clinical Challenge full info

Presents an actual patient case with a specific disease or condition with an accompanying clinical image.

• "What Would You Do Next?" with 4 single-phrase plausible treatment options describing possible courses of action with 1 being preferred
• Case presentation: 250 words
• Discussion: 500-600 words
• ≤10 references
• 1-2 small figures
• Patient permission required

Diagnostic Test Interpretation full info

This article requires a presubmission inquiry.

Presentation of the results of a diagnostic test from a single patient with exploration of the clinical application of the test result; intended to help clinicians understand the underlying rationale in ordering tests, interpreting test results, and acting on the diagnostic test findings.

• How Do You Interpret These Test Results? (or What Would You Do Next?) with 4 plausible responses
• Case presentation: 200 words
• Discussion: 650 words

Viewpoint full info

May address virtually any important topic in medicine, public health, research, discovery, prevention, ethics, health policy, or health law and generally are not linked to a specific article.

• 1200 words (or 1000 words with 1 small table or figure)
• ≤7 references at submission
• ≤3 authors, with no more than 2 affiliations per author

A Piece of My Mind full info

Personal vignettes (eg, exploring the dynamics of the patient-physician relationship) taken from wide-ranging experiences in medicine; occasional pieces express views and opinions on the myriad issues that affect the profession.

• ≤1600 words
• Patient permission may be needed

Poetry full info

Original poems related to the medical experience, whether from the point of view of a health care worker or patient, or simply an observer.

• No longer than 44 lines

Correspondence

Letter to the Editor full info

Letters discussing a recent article in this journal should be submitted within 4 weeks of the article's publication in print.

• ≤5 references (1 of which should be to the recent article)

Letter in Reply full info

Replies by authors of original articles to letters from readers.

Determine My Study Type

Randomized Clinical Trial full info

A trial that prospectively assigns participants to intervention or comparison groups to study the cause-and-effect relationship between an intervention and a health outcome. Interventions include but are not limited to drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioral treatments, educational programs, dietary interventions, quality improvement interventions, process-of-care changes, and the like.

• ≤5 tables and/or figures, including CONSORT flow diagram
• Subtitle should be "A Randomized Clinical Trial"
• Trial registration and ID
• Trial protocol
• CONSORT checklist
• Follow CONSORT Reporting Guidelines

Parallel-Design Double-blind Trial full info

A randomized trial that prospectively assigns participants to 2 or more groups to receive different interventions. Participants and those administering the interventions are unaware of which intervention individual participants are receiving.

Crossover Trial full info

A trial in which participants receive more than 1 of the treatments under investigation, usually in a randomly determined sequence, and with a prespecified amount of time (washout period) between sequential treatments.

Equivalence and Noninferiority Trial full info

A trial designed to assess whether the treatment or intervention under study (eg, a new intervention) is no worse than an existing alternative (eg, an active control). In these trials, authors must prespecify a margin of noninferiority that is consistent with all relevant studies and within which the new intervention can be assumed to be no worse than the active control.

Cluster Trial full info

A trial that includes random assignment of groups rather than individuals to intervention and control groups.

Nonrandomized Controlled Trial full info

A trial that prospectively assigns groups or populations to study the efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention but in which the assignment to the intervention occurs through self-selection or administrator selection rather than through randomization. Control groups can be historic, concurrent, or both. This design is sometimes called a quasi-experimental design.

• ≤5 tables and/or figures, including a trial flow diagram
• Subtitle should be "A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial"
• TREND checklist

Meta-analysis full info

A systematic review that includes a statistical technique for quantitatively combining the results of multiple studies that measure the same outcome into a single pooled or summary estimate.

• Subtitle should include "A Meta-analysis"
• Follow PRISMA Reporting Guidelines or MOOSE Reporting Guidelines

Cohort Study full info

An observational study that follows a group (cohort) of individuals who are initially free of the outcome of interest. Individuals in the cohort may share some underlying characteristic, such as age, sex, diagnosis, exposure to a risk factor, or treatment.

• Follow STROBE Reporting Guidelines

Case-Control Study full info

An observational study designed to determine the association between an exposure and outcome in which study participants are selected by outcome. Those with the outcome (cases) are compared with those without the outcome (controls) with respect to an exposure or event. Cases and controls may be matched according to specific characteristics (eg, age, sex, or duration of disease).

Cross-sectional Study full info

An observational study of a defined population at a single point in time or during a specific interval, in which exposure and outcome are ascertained simultaneously.

Case Series full info

An observational study that describes a selected group of participants with similar exposure or treatment and without a control group. A case series may also involve observation of larger units such as groups of hospitals or municipalities, as well as smaller units such as laboratory samples.

• Follow Reporting Guidelines

Economic Evaluation full info

A study using formal, quantitative methods to compare 2 or more treatments, programs, or strategies with respect to their resource use and expected outcomes. This includes cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, and cost-minimization analyses.

• Follow CHEERS Reporting Guidelines

Decision Analytical Model full info

A mathematical modeling study that compares consequences of decision options by synthesizing information from multiple sources and applying mathematical simulation techniques, usually with specific software. Reporting should address the relevant non-cost aspects of the CHEERS guideline.

Comparative Effectiveness Research full info

A study that compares different interventions or strategies to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor health conditions to determine which work best for which patients, under what circumstances, and are associated with the greatest benefits and harms.

• Follow ISPOR Reporting Guidelines

Genetic Association Study full info

A study that attempts to identify and characterize genomic variants that may be associated with susceptibility to multifactorial disease.

• Follow STREGA Reporting Guidelines

Diagnostic/Prognostic Study full info

A prospective study designed to develop, validate, or update the diagnostic or prognostic accuracy of a test or model.

• Follow STARD Reporting Guidelines or TRIPOD Reporting Guidelines

Quality Improvement Study full info

A study that uses data to define, measure, and evaluate a health care practice or service to maintain or improve the appropriateness, quality, safety, or value of that practice or service.

• Follow SQUIRE Reporting Guidelines

Survey Study full info

A survey study includes a representative sample of individuals who are asked to describe their opinions, attitudes, or behaviors. Survey studies should have sufficient response rates (generally ≥60%) and appropriate characterization of nonresponders to ensure that nonresponse bias does not threaten the validity of the findings.

• Follow AAPOR Best Practices for Survey Research
• Optional: Survey instrument as supplemental file

Qualitative Study full info

A study based on observation and interview with individuals that uses inductive reasoning and a theoretical sampling model and that focuses on social and interpreted, rather than quantifiable, phenomena and aims to discover, interpret, and describe rather than to test and evaluate. This includes mixed-methods studies that combine quantitative and qualitative designs in a sequential or concurrent manner.

• Follow SRQR Reporting Guidelines or COREQ Reporting Guidelines

These reports typically include randomized trials (see Clinical Trial ), intervention studies, cohort studies, case-control studies, epidemiologic assessments, other observational studies, surveys with high response rates (see Reports of Survey Research ), cost-effectiveness analyses and decision analyses (see Reports of Cost-effectiveness Analyses and Decision Analyses ), and studies of screening and diagnostic tests (see also Reports of Diagnostic Tests ). Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study setting and dates, patients or participants with inclusion and exclusion criteria and/or participation or response rates, or data sources, and how these were selected for the study); the essential features of any interventions; the main outcome measures; the main results of the study; a discussion section placing the results in context with the published literature and addressing study limitations; and the conclusions and relevant implications for clinical practice or health policy. Data included in research reports must be original and should be as timely and current as possible (see Timeliness of Data ). Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines .

A structured abstract is required; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures.

These manuscripts are original research reports, preferably clinical trials, or systematic reviews (see above classifications for manuscript submission requirements by category of article) that address virtually any aspect of critical illness, from prevention and triage, through resuscitation and acute treatment, to rehabilitation and palliative care. Manuscripts that provide new insights into the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of critically ill patients, as well as those that explore pathophysiological, technological, ethical, or other related aspects of critical care medicine, are welcome. Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines . For reports of original data and systematic reviews, a structured abstract is required; see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data or Abstracts for Reviews . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures.

These manuscripts are short reports of original studies or evaluations or unique, first-time reports of clinical case series. Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines . A structured abstract is required; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Recommended length: 1200 words (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material) with no more than a total of 3 tables and/or figures and no more than 15 references. Note: It is very rare for this journal to publish case reports.

Research Letters are concise, focused reports of original research. These should not exceed 600 words of text and 6 references and may include up to 2 tables or figures. Online supplementary material is only allowed for brief additional and absolutely necessary methods but not for any additional results or discussion. The text should include the full name, academic degrees, and institutional affiliation for each author and the email address for the corresponding author. Other persons who have contributed to the study may be indicated in an Acknowledgment, with their permission, including their academic degrees, affiliation, contribution to the study, and an indication if compensation was received for their role. Letters must not duplicate other material published or submitted for publication. In general, Research Letters should be divided into the following sections: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. They should not include an abstract or key points, but otherwise should follow all of the guidelines in Manuscript Preparation and Submission Requirements . Letters not meeting these specifications are generally not considered.

This article type requires a presubmission inquiry to [email protected] .

The journal will consider 2 types of review articles:

Systematic Reviews

These types of Review articles differ by the scope and level of analysis of the literature searches and the titles used. Systematic Reviews require a complete systematic search of the literature using multiple databases, covering many years, and grading of the quality of the cited evidence. Narrative Reviews do not require a rigorous literature search but should rely on evidence and should be written by established experts in the field. See below for more detail on each type of Review.

Titles for these Reviews should include a concise description of the main topic. Use specific and not overly broad wording for the title; the type of review should be indicated in the subtitle. For example:

Behavioral Treatment of Obesity: A Systematic Review

Behavioral Treatment of Obesity: A Review (note: the word "narrative" is not included in the subtitle)

Systematic Reviews are critical assessments of the literature and data sources pertaining to clinical topics, emphasizing factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention. Systematic Reviews without meta-analysis are published as Reviews; those with meta-analysis are published as Original Investigations (see Meta-analysis ). Systematic Reviews should address a specific question or issue that is relevant for clinical practice and provide an evidence-based, balanced, patient-oriented review on a focused topic. Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines .

The basic structure of manuscripts reporting Systematic Reviews should include the following: Abstract (structured abstract of no more than 350 words); Introduction (150-250 words); Methods (150-250 words); Results (1000-1250 words, with the following subsections, if appropriate, depending on the specific question or issue addressed: Pathophysiology, Clinical Presentation, Assessment and Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis); Discussion (1000 words); and Conclusions (2-3 sentences).

Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material), with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references. For an example of a published Systematic Review, see JAMA . 2014;312(6):631-640 and below for the general structure of a Systematic Review article.

Prospective authors interested in submitting a review manuscript should prepare a detailed outline of the proposed article. There should also be a brief summary of the extent and quality of the literature supporting the proposed review. Alternatively, if a draft of the manuscript has been completed, this can be sent. Prospective authors should also summarize their publication record in the field. Send this information to the editorial office via email to Mary McDermott, MD, at [email protected] .

Specific Components of a Systematic Review

Key Points (75-100 words)

This feature provides a quick structured synopsis of the Review, following 3 key points: Question, Findings, and Meaning. Limit to no more than 100 words. This is different from the Abstract.

Question: What are the most effective medical treatments for adult chronic sinusitis? Findings: In this systematic review, symptoms of chronic sinusitis were improved with saline irrigation and topical corticosteroid therapy compared to no therapy. Compared with placebo, 3-week courses of systemic corticosteroids or oral doxycycline were associated with reduced polyp size, and a 3-month course of macrolide antibiotic was associated with improved symptoms in patients without polyps. Meaning: First-line therapy for chronic sinusitis should begin with daily topical intranasal corticosteroid in conjunction with saline irrigation; subsequent therapies should be based on the patient's polyp status and severity of symptoms.

Abstract (350 words)

A structured abstract is required; Systematic Review articles should include a structured abstract of no more than 350 words using the headings listed below.

Importance: Include 1 or 2 sentences describing the clinical question or issue and its importance in clinical practice or public health. Objective: State the precise primary objective of the review. Indicate whether the review emphasizes factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention and include information about the specific population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes that are being reviewed. Evidence Review: Describe the information sources used, including the search strategies, years searched, and other sources of material, such as subsequent reference searches of retrieved articles. Methods used for inclusion of identified articles and quality assessment should be explained. Findings: Include a brief summary of the number of articles included, numbers of various types of studies (eg, clinical trials, cohort studies), and numbers of patients/participants represented by these studies. Summarize the major findings of the review of the clinical issue or topic in an evidence-based, objective, and balanced fashion, with the highest-quality evidence available receiving the greatest emphasis. Provide quantitative data. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions should clearly answer the questions posed if applicable, be based on available evidence, and emphasize how clinicians should apply current knowledge. Conclusions should be based only on results described in the abstract Findings subsection.

Introduction (150-250 words)

The first 2 to 3 sentences of the Introduction should draw in readers such that they want to continue reading the article and should establish the importance of the Review. Reviews should include the clinical question or issue and its importance for general medical practice, specialty practice, or public health. The first paragraph should provide a general summary of the clinical problem (eg, obesity). The next paragraph should focus on the specific aspect of the clinical problem the article will explore (eg, treatments for obesity). The epidemiology of the disease or condition should be briefly summarized and generally should include disease prevalence and incidence. The third paragraph should discuss exactly what material will be covered in the Review (eg, obesity treatments reported in trials with a minimum follow-up of 2 years including 80% of the original cohort).

Methods/Literature Search (150-250 words)

The literature search should be as current as possible, ideally with end dates within a month or two before manuscript submission. A search of the primary literature should be conducted, including multiple bibliographic databases (eg, PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO). This can be facilitated by collaborating with a medical librarian to help with the search.

Briefly describe characteristics of the literature searched and included in the review, following the PRISMA reporting guidelines , including the bibliographic databases and other sources searched, search terms used, dates included in the search, date the literature search was conducted, screening process, language limitations, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. The rating system used to evaluate the quality of the evidence should be specified (see table below) and the methods used to evaluate quality should be described, including number of quality raters, how agreement on quality ratings was assessed, and how disagreements on quality ratings were resolved.

The highest-quality evidence (eg, randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and high-quality prospective cohort studies) should receive the greatest emphasis. Clinical practice guidelines ordinarily should not be used as a primary component of the evidence base for the systematic review, although relevant guidelines should be addressed in the Discussion section of the article.

The search methods should be described in sufficient detail so the search can be reproduced based on the information provided in the manuscript. A summary of the methods of the literature search including this information should be included in the main article; details can be included in an online-only supplement. A PRISMA-style flow diagram showing this information should also be included as an online-only supplement. In addition, a completed PRISMA checklist should be submitted for the items completed that apply to systematic reviews (the checklist items that apply to meta-analyses do not need to be completed for systematic reviews without meta-analysis). The checklist will be used during review but will not be published.

Results (1000-1250 words)

First, briefly report the results of the literature search, including the number of articles reviewed and included, numbers of various types of studies (eg, clinical trials, cohort studies) included, and the aggregate numbers of patients included in the reviewed studies. Also provide a brief summary of the quality of the evidence. Details of this information can be included in a PRISMA-style flow diagram and table(s).

Next, the subsections listed below should generally appear in the Results sections of most Reviews although all of these subsections may not be necessary for some topics, depending on the specific question or issue addressed. The word counts following each subsection are suggested to assist with keeping the overall Results section limited to 1000-1250 words.

Pathophysiology (150-250 words). Provide a brief overview of the pathophysiology of the disease. The intent is to provide readers with sufficient background information about the underpinnings of a disease to provide context for the rest of the article. Clinical Presentation (150-250 words). Briefly describe the clinical characteristics that result in a patient seeking medical care for the condition or what features of the disease should lead a clinician to evaluate or treat it. Assessment and Diagnosis (250-300 words). Describe the clinical examination for evaluation of the disease and explain the most salient physical examination findings. If laboratory or imaging studies are necessary, provide the sensitivity and specificity and diagnostic accuracy of these tests and consider providing positive and negative likelihood ratios. Sequences of diagnostic tests are best presented as algorithms or in tables. Treatment (250-500 words). Treatments should be based on the most recently available and highest level of evidence. Treatment options should be summarized in the text and presented in detail in tables along with an indication of the strength of evidence supporting the individual treatments. In general, treatment recommendations should be supported by a systematic review of the literature, either performed by the author of the Review or published in the form of a high-quality review or guideline. If possible, the costs for various treatments should be provided. Prognosis (100-150 words). A section outlining the overall prognosis for the condition, once treated, should be included. Discussion (Approximately 1000 words)

Key findings should be summarized in the first paragraph of the Discussion section. All statements made should be supported by evidence. It is very important to not simply list findings from the studies reviewed. This information is best presented in tables. The Discussion should provide a critical synthesis of data and information based on the results of the review, an assessment of the quality of studies summarized, and a description of how studies can be interpreted and used to guide clinical practice. The limitations of the evidence and of the review should be discussed, and gaps in evidence should be addressed. A discussion of controversial or unresolved issues and topics in need of future research also should be included.

Clinical Practice Guidelines: In the Discussion section, describe current clinical practice guidelines, relevant to the topic of the review, if available, and whether the conclusions of this review agree with, or disagree with, the current clinical practice guidelines. If this is done and there is more than 1 guideline, a table should be prepared comparing the major features that differ between the guidelines. Guideline quality should be discussed using the standards outlined for the JAMA Clinical Guidelines Synopsis .

Conclusions

Include a 2- to 3-sentence summary of the major conclusions of the review.

Construct tables that summarize the search results. Tables summarizing treatments should have information organized by category of treatment and then by individual treatments. Columns should include the name of the treatment, strength of evidence supporting the treatment, the treatment's effect (preferably shown as the treatment's effect as compared to control on the measured outcome together with 95% confidence intervals), adverse effects, and very brief comments, if necessary. Lengthy text-based tables should be avoided. Additional or lengthy tables may be published online only, if justified.

Ratings of the quality of the evidence. Tables summarizing evidence should include ratings of the quality of the evidence. Use the rating scheme listed below with ratings of 1-5 for Reviews that include individual studies (modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine for ratings of individual studies).

There are several other preferred systems for rating the quality of evidence in Review articles. For Reviews that synthesize findings from numerous studies into a single summary recommendation, use the rating scale shown above or the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine's Levels of Evidence and Grades of Recommendation or the recommendations in the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines . For reviews that include diagnostic studies, use The Rational Clinical Examination Levels of Evidence table .

Follow additional instructions for preparation and submission of Tables .

A PRISMA-style flow diagram should be included as an online supplement that summarizes the results of the literature search and the numbers of articles/records/studies and patients/participants represented in the studies identified, screened, eligible, and included in the final review.

Additional figures that illustrate pathophysiology or clinical presentation may be considered. Note: All figures will be re-created. For each proposed illustration, the authors should provide a list of the elements to be included in the illustration; 3-4 relevant recent references; example illustrations, if available; a working figure title and legend; and an explanation of how this new illustration would add to the published literature. We encourage videos, if appropriate, to illustrate a point made or process described in the Review.

Follow additional instructions for preparation and submission of Figures and Video .

Narrative Reviews on clinical topics provide an up-to-date review for clinicians on a topic of general common interest from the perspective of internationally recognized experts in these disciplines. The focus of Narrative Reviews will be an update on current understanding of the physiology of the disease or condition, diagnostic consideration, and treatment. These reviews should address a specific question or issue that is relevant for clinical practice. Narrative Reviews do not require (but may include) a systematic review of the literature search. Recommendations should be supported with evidence and should rely on recent systematic reviews and guidelines, if available, emphasizing factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention.

The basic structure of manuscripts reporting Narrative Reviews should include the following: Abstract (structured abstract of no more than 300 words); Introduction (150-250 words); Methods, if included (150-250 words); Discussion/Observations (1000-1250 words, with the following subsections, if appropriate: Pathophysiology, Clinical Presentation, Assessment and Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis); and Conclusions (2-3 sentences).

Typical length: 2000-3500 words (maximum), with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures, and no more than 50-75 references. For an example of this type of article, see JAMA . 2015;314(23):2544-2554 .

Specific Components of a Narrative Review

Abstract (300 words)

Narrative Review articles should include a 3-part structured abstract of no more than 300 words using the headings listed below:

Importance: An overview of the topic and discussion of the main objective or reason for this review. Observations: The principal observations and findings of the review. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions of the review that are supported by the information, along with clinical applications. How the findings are clinically relevant should be specifically stated.

The first 2 to 3 sentences of the Introduction should draw in readers in such that they want to continue reading the article and should establish the importance of the Review. Reviews should include the clinical question or issue and its importance for general medical practice, specialty practice, or public health. The first paragraph should provide a general summary of the clinical problem (eg, obesity). The next paragraph should focus on the specific aspect of the clinical problem the article will explore (eg, treatments for obesity). Briefly summarize the epidemiology of the disease. This information should include disease prevalence and incidence and perhaps discussion of the presence and frequency of any relevant subpopulations and any geographic or seasonal variations of the disease if these are relevant. The third paragraph should discuss exactly what material will be covered in the Review (eg, obesity treatments).

Methods (150-250 words)

A Methods section is not required for Narrative Reviews, but may be included to summarize a literature search that was conducted for this Review. If included, briefly describe the characteristics of the literature searched and included in the review, including the bibliographic databases and other sources searched, search terms used, dates included in the search, date the literature search was conducted, and any process used to evaluate the literature.

Discussion/Observations (1000-1250 words)

The principal observations of the Narrative Review generally should include the subsections listed below, although each section may not be necessary for some topics. The word counts following each subsection are suggested to assist with keeping the overall Observations section limited to 1000-1250 words.

Pathophysiology (150-250 words). Provide a brief overview of the pathophysiology of the disease. The intent is to provide readers with sufficient background information about the underpinnings of a disease to provide context for the rest of the article. Clinical Presentation (150-250 words). Briefly describe the clinical characteristics that result in a patient seeking medical care for the condition or what features of the disease should lead a physician to evaluate or treat it. Assessment and Diagnosis (250-300 words). Describe the clinical examination for evaluation of the disease and explain the most salient physical examination findings. If laboratory or imaging studies are necessary, provide the sensitivity and specificity and diagnostic accuracy of these tests and consider providing positive and negative likelihood ratios. Sequences of diagnostic tests are best presented as algorithms or in tables. Treatment (250-500 words). Treatments should be based on the most recently available and highest level of evidence. Treatment options should be summarized in the text and presented in detail in tables along with an indication of the strength of evidence supporting the individual treatments. In general, treatment recommendations should be supported by a systematic review or a high-quality guideline. If possible, the costs for various treatments should be provided. Prognosis (100-150 words). A section outlining the overall prognosis for the condition, once treated, should be included.

For most Narrative Reviews, tables should be included that summarize the epidemiology, diagnostic tools, and therapies available for the disease. In some cases, these 3 topics may not all be relevant to the review topic and tables may be appropriately modified to fit the review. Include a fourth table that compares the findings of the review and current clinical practice recommendations or diagnostic and therapeutic uncertainty or controversies.

Table 1: Major epidemiologic and burden of disease facts Table 2: Major diagnostic tools available Table 3: Major therapies available Table 4: Current clinical practice recommendations and/or diagnostic and therapeutic uncertainty, and controversies

Tables summarizing treatments should have information organized by category of treatment and then by individual treatments. Columns may include the treatment, strength of evidence supporting the treatment, the effect of the treatment (preferably shown as the treatment's effect as compared to control on the measured outcome together with 95% confidence intervals), adverse effects, and very brief explanatory comments, if necessary. Lengthy text-based tables should be avoided. Additional or lengthy tables may be published online only, if justified.

Figures that illustrate pathophysiology or clinical presentation may be included. Note: All figures will be re-created. For each proposed illustration, the authors should provide a list of the elements to be included in the illustration; 3-4 relevant recent references; example illustrations, if available; a working figure title and legend; and an explanation of how this new illustration would add to the published literature. We encourage videos, if appropriate, to illustrate a point made or process described in the Review.

Note: This journal publishes very few of these types of articles. These manuscripts describe an important issue in clinical medicine, public health, health policy, or medical research in a scholarly, thorough, well-referenced, systematic, and evidence-based manner.

A structured abstract is required. Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including tables, figures, or references) with no more than a total of 4 tables and/or figures and no more than 50 references. For a recently published example, see JAMA . 2019;322(20):1996-2016 .

Clinical Challenge presents an actual patient scenario about a specific disease or condition with an accompanying clinical image.

Authors should provide 4 single-phrase plausible treatment options describing possible courses of action with one of these being the most correct response for the question "What Would You Do Next?" Manuscripts should include a brief discussion of the relevant clinical issues and provide well-supported (evidence-based) explanations discussing the 4 potential courses of action. For a recently published example, see JAMA . 2022;327(24):2448-2449. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.8384 .

All diagnostic and treatment recommendations should be supported by referencing recent authoritative texts or journal articles. Preferably, these recommendations should be supported by governmental or multisociety guidelines, clinical trials, meta-analyses, or systematic reviews. The text should have a maximum length of 850 words, consisting of no more than 250 words for the case presentation, question, and 4 one-sentence answers, followed by no more than 600 words that include the diagnosis and a brief discussion. There should be no more than 3 authors. At least 1 of the authors, ideally the corresponding author, should have sufficient expertise and experience with the topic. There should be no more than 10 references, and no more than 2 small figures totaling 3 image components (Figure 1, with no more than 2 components, for the case presentation; and Figure 2, with no more than 1 component, for the diagnosis and discussion).

Provide a short title that briefly describes the disease entity or case presentation and does not include the diagnosis. Do not include the patient's race, ethnicity, or country of origin in the title or the first line of the article. If this information is clinically relevant and necessary, it can be included in the case description.

In addition, the JAMA Network Patient Permission form must be completed and signed by the patient (or a family member if the patient has died, is a minor, or is an adult without decisional capacity) and included at the time of manuscript submission. Please read Patient Identification before submitting your manuscript.

The image and case presentation should be from the same patient and must not have been published previously. In some cases, additional figures may be included to accompany the answer explanations (see description of additional figure(s) above). All images submitted should be high-quality .jpg or .tif files. Submit the original version of all image files at the highest resolution possible without labels. In general, the original image file should have a minimum resolution of 350 dpi at a width of about 5 inches. Do not increase the original resolution, resize, or crop the image; where applicable, we will crop to maintain patient confidentiality. If any labels, arrowheads, or A/B panel indicators are desired, provide a separate labeled version of the figure(s) for reference. All labels will be reformatted to journal style.

For more information on how to submit figures, see Figures.

We would like to receive common problems presenting uncommonly, rather than unusual or rare conditions (ie, "zebras"). These cases should be of interest to clinicians; they should be problems that clinicians are likely to encounter and have an outstanding image that illustrates the disorder and contributes to the diagnostic challenge.

Manuscripts not meeting these guidelines will not be considered.

Diagnostic Test Interpretation presents the results of a diagnostic test from a single patient and explores the clinical application of the test result. The Diagnostic Test Interpretation is intended to help clinicians understand the underlying rationale in ordering tests, interpreting test results, and acting on the diagnostic test findings.

The diagnostic test result must be obtained from the care of an actual patient and must include that patient's written permission. The JAMA Network Patient Permission form should be read and completed and signed by the patient (or a family member if the patient has died, is a minor, or is an adult without decisional capacity) and included at the time of manuscript submission. The results of laboratory, pathologic, or radiographic tests are appropriate but clinical images are not. Results of the diagnostic test of interest (and related tests) and the range of reference values should be included after the case. Authors of manuscripts based on clinical images should consult the instructions for Clinical Challenge .

Provide a short title that briefly describes the disease entity or case presentation and does not include the diagnosis. Do not include the patient's race, ethnicity, or country of origin in the title or first line of the article. If this information is clinically relevant and necessary, it can be included in the case description.

Manuscripts for Diagnostic Test Interpretation should have the following sections:

Case presentation. The case presentation should be brief and focus on the diagnostic test in question. At the end of the case presentation the pertinent diagnostic test results and reference ranges should be provided (200 words). Include: JAMA Exclude: Specialty Journals, JNO Comments: How do you interpret these test results? How do you interpret these test results? (or What would you do next?) Four plausible responses should be provided. While most Diagnostic Test Interpretation articles will pose the question "How do you interpret these results?" a subset may more appropriately focus on the next best step regarding workup of the abnormal test result. In these cases, the question "How do you interpret these test results?" can be replaced with "What would you do next?" Either question should be presented in the format of a multiple choice question with a single correct (or best) answer. The answers may be brief phrases or short sentences, should be similar in length, and should be arranged alphabetically by first word in the answer. Response options should not describe treatments (about 50 words). Include: CAR,ONC Exclude: JAMA, DER, IMD, NEU, OPH, PED, OTO, PSY, SUR, JNO Comments: How do you interpret these test results? Test characteristics. A brief review of the diagnostic test should be provided (approximately 200 words). For biomarkers, this should include a brief description of the related physiology. Test accuracy should be reported using sensitivity and specificity or likelihood ratios, and predictive values should be provided for common clinical scenarios. Please use likelihood ratios whenever possible, since they do not depend on disease prevalence. The prevalence of the disease should be stated so that the pretest probability may be estimated. For example, "For patients with a typical disease prevalence of 10%, the predictive values of positive and negative test results are approximately 50% and 1%, respectively." Discussion of the application and utility of the diagnostic test should be based on a high-quality systematic review or authoritative practice guideline. If a more recent, original study supersedes or adds meaningfully to the prior synthesis of research, that article also should be cited. The approximate fee for the test should be provided. For example, some fees for laboratory tests can be obtained from the Medicare fee schedules . Radiology procedure fees can be found at the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule website . Application of test result to this patient. A brief discussion of how the diagnostic test result will facilitate the next steps in a patient's management should be presented. Please also address the correct answer to the question about test interpretation in this section (200 words). What Are Alternative Diagnostic Testing Approaches? If there are different testing strategies that can be used to evaluate patients to establish a diagnosis, please discuss them (100 words). Patient Outcome. Long-term follow-up (most recent as possible) regarding the patient's condition and outcome of treatment is necessary (100 words). Clinical Bottom Line. Please provide a bulleted list of 3-5 items that reflect the most important message readers should obtain from this article.

The overall text of the manuscript should have a maximum of 850 words, no more than 10 references, and no more than 3 authors. At least 1 of the authors, ideally the corresponding author, should have sufficient expertise and experience with the topic. The case presentation must not have been previously published.

For an example of this article type, see JAMA . 2022;327(13):1284-1285. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.2037 .

If there are questions about patient identifiability, please contact the editorial office. Authors interested in submitting a manuscript for Diagnostic Test Interpretation should contact the editorial office prior to manuscript preparation and submission by sending an email to Kristin Walter at [email protected] .

Viewpoints may address virtually any important topic in medicine, public health, research, discovery, prevention, ethics, health policy, or health law and generally are not linked to a specific article. Viewpoints should be well focused, scholarly, and clearly presented but should not include the findings of new research or data that have not been previously published.

Viewpoints must have no more than 3 authors. Editors encourage diversity of gender, race, ethnicity, geographic location, and discipline for Viewpoint authors, and the first author should have sufficient expertise and experience with the topic to provide an authoritative opinion. The text should include the full name, academic degrees, and no more than 2 institutional affiliations for each author. Maximum length: up to 1200 words of text—or 1000 words of text with 1 small table or figure—and no more than 7 references, which should be as current as possible. Viewpoints not meeting these guidelines will not be considered.

Most essays published in A Piece of My Mind are personal vignettes (eg, exploring the dynamics of the patient-physician relationship) taken from wide-ranging experiences in medicine; occasional pieces express views and opinions on the myriad issues that affect the profession. If the patient(s) described in these manuscripts is identifiable, a Patient Permission form , which provides consent for publication, must be completed and signed by the patient(s) or family member(s) and submitted with the manuscript. Manuscripts that describe identifiable patients that do not have a signed form will not be reviewed. Omitting data or making data less specific to deidentify patients is acceptable, but changing any such data is not acceptable. Fictional or composite accounts are not permitted.

Manuscripts are not published anonymously or pseudonymously and must have no more than 3 authors. All manuscripts must be submitted formally via the journal's manuscript submission system; we do not review drafts or unfinished manuscripts prior to submission. Length limit: 1600 words.

Poems related to the medical experience, whether from the point of view of a health care worker or patient, or simply an observer, will be considered. Poems should be original, not previously published or under consideration elsewhere, no longer than 44 lines, and with individual lines no longer than 55 characters (including spaces). Authors should submit each poem separately (ie, one poem per submission record, and only one author per poem). Submissions containing multiple poems will be returned with instructions to split into individual files. Do not submit artwork, music/audio, or other accompanying materials, which are not considered. All poems must be submitted online via the online manuscript submission and review system . Authors of poems that are accepted for publication are required to complete Authorship Forms and transfer copyright to the publisher as part of a publishing agreement. An email with links to the Authorship Form will be sent to authors for completion before final acceptance. Author requests to republish poems are generally granted by our permissions department following a formal request.

Questions about submitting poems (but not submissions) may be sent to [email protected] .

Letters discussing a recent article in this journal should be submitted within 4 weeks of publication of the article in print. 3 Letters received after 4 weeks will rarely be considered. Letters should not exceed 400 words of text and 5 references, 1 of which should be to the recent article. Letters may have no more than 3 authors. The text should include the full name, academic degrees, and a single institutional affiliation for each author and the email address for the corresponding author. Letters must not duplicate other material published or submitted for publication and should not include unpublished data. Letters not meeting these specifications are generally not considered. Letters being considered for publication ordinarily will be sent to the authors of the original article, who will be given the opportunity to reply. Letters will be published at the discretion of the editors and are subject to abridgement and editing for style and content. To read more about Letters, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Replies by authors should not exceed 500 words of text and 6 references. They should have no more than 3 authors.

Clinical Trial

These manuscripts include reports of Randomized Clinical Trials, Parallel-Design Double-blind Trials, Crossover Trials, Equivalence and Noninferiority Trials, Cluster Trials, and Nonrandomized Controlled Trials.

The ICMJE defines a clinical trial as any research project that prospectively assigns human participants to intervention or comparison groups to study the cause-and-effect relationship between an intervention and a health outcome. 4 Interventions include but are not limited to drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioral treatments, educational programs, dietary interventions, quality improvement interventions, process-of-care changes, and the like. All manuscripts reporting clinical trials, including those limited to secondary exploratory or post hoc analysis of trial outcomes, must include the following:

• Copy of the original trial protocol, including the complete statistical analysis plan and any amendments. The journal recommends using the SPIRIT reporting guidelines when preparing original protocols (see Protocols ).
• CONSORT flow diagram (see Figure ).
• Completed trial checklist (see Checklist ).
• Registry at an appropriate online public clinical trial registry (see Trial Registration requirements).
• A Data Sharing Statement to indicate if data will be shared or not. Specific questions regarding the sharing of data are included in the manuscript submission system.

For additional guidance on reporting Randomized Clinical Trial, Parallel-Design Double-blind Trial, Crossover Trial, Equivalence and Noninferiority Trial, Cluster Trial, and Nonrandomized Controlled Trial, see Study Types .

Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study setting and dates, patients or participants with inclusion and exclusion criteria, or data sources, and how these were selected for the study); the essential features of any interventions; the primary and secondary outcome measures (consistent with those reported in the trial protocol); the main results of the study; a discussion section placing the results in context with the published literature and addressing study limitations; and the conclusions.

A structured abstract is required, and trial registration information (registry name, trial ID, and URL) must be listed at the end of the abstract; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and supplemental material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references. The subtitle should include the phrase "A Randomized Clinical Trial" or, for Nonrandomized Controlled Trials, "A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial." To read more about clinical trials, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Trial Registration:

In concert with the ICMJE, JAMA Network requires, as a condition of consideration for publication, registration of all trials in a public trials registry that is acceptable to the ICMJE (ie, the registry must be owned by a not-for-profit entity, be publicly accessible, and require the minimum registration data set as described by ICMJE). 4 , 8 , 9

Acceptable trial registries include the following and others listed at http://www.icmje.org :

• anzctr.org.au
• clinicaltrials.gov
• trialregister.nl
• umin.ac.jp/ctr

All clinical trials, regardless of when they were completed, and secondary analyses of original clinical trials must be registered before submission of a manuscript based on the trial. Secondary data analyses of primary (parent) clinical trials should not be registered as separate clinical trials, but instead should reference the trial registration number of the primary trial. Please note: for clinical trials starting patient enrollment after July 2005, trials must have been registered before onset of patient enrollment. For trials that began before July 2005 but that were not registered before September 13, 2005, trials must have been registered before journal submission. Trial registry name, registration identification number, and the URL for the registry should be included at the end of the abstract and also in the space provided on the online manuscript submission form.

Authors of manuscripts reporting clinical trials must submit trial protocols (including the complete statistical analysis plan) along with their manuscripts. Protocols in non-English languages should be translated into English. This should include the original approved protocol and statistical analysis plan, and all subsequent amendments to either document. Do not submit a summary version that was published as an article in another journal. If the manuscript is accepted, the protocol and statistical analysis plan will be published as a supplement.

CONSORT Flow Diagram and Checklist:

Manuscripts reporting the results of randomized trials must include the CONSORT flow diagram showing the progress of patients throughout the trial. The CONSORT checklist also should be completed and submitted with the manuscript. 10

Figure. Profile of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Trial Protocol

These manuscripts are documents that describe the organization and plan for a randomized clinical trial, including the trial's objective(s), design, methodology, all outcomes to be measured, and statistical analysis plan. All trial protocol manuscripts must include a copy of the trial protocol including the complete statistical analysis plan (see Protocols ). All clinical trials that have begun randomization must be registered at an appropriate online public registry (see Trial Registration requirements). Follow SPIRIT Reporting Guidelines .

A structured abstract is required, and trial registration information (registry name, trial ID, and URL) must be listed at the end of the abstract; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Trial Protocols . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and supplemental material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references. The subtitle should include the phrase "A Trial Protocol."

These manuscripts are systematic, critical assessments of literature and data sources pertaining to clinical topics, emphasizing factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention, and that includes a statistical technique for quantitatively combining the results of multiple studies that measure the same outcome into a single pooled or summary estimate. All articles or data sources should be searched for and selected systematically for inclusion and critically evaluated, and the search and selection process should be described in the manuscript. The specific type of study or analysis, population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes should be described for each article or data source. The data sources should be as current as possible, ideally with the search having been conducted within several months of manuscript submission. Authors of reports of meta-analyses of clinical trials should submit the PRISMA flow diagram and checklist . Authors of meta-analyses of observational studies should submit the MOOSE checklist . Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines .

A structured abstract is required; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Meta-analysis . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material), with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references. The subtitle should include the phrase "A Meta-analysis." To read more about meta-analyses, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Other Observational Studies

These manuscripts include Cohort Study, Case-Control Study, Cross-sectional Study, Case Series, Economic Evaluation, Decision Analytical Model, Comparative Effectiveness Research, Genetic Association Study, Diagnostic/Prognostic Study, Quality Improvement Study, Survey Study, and Qualitative Study. Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study setting and dates, patients or participants with inclusion and exclusion criteria and/or participation or response rates, or data sources, and how these were selected for the study); the essential features of any interventions or exposures; the main outcome measures; the main results of the study; a discussion section placing the results in context with the published literature and addressing study limitations; and the conclusions and relevant implications for clinical practice or health policy. Data included in research reports must be original and should be as timely and current as possible (see Timeliness of Data ). Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines .

A structured abstract is required; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and supplemental material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references.

Format My Manuscript

Manuscript preparation and submission requirements.

All manuscripts must be submitted online via the online manuscript submission and review system .

At the time of submission, complete contact information (affiliation, postal/mail address, email address, and telephone numbers) for the corresponding author is required. First and last names, email addresses, and institutional affiliations of all coauthors are also required. After the manuscript is submitted, the corresponding author will receive an acknowledgment confirming receipt and a manuscript number. Authors will be able to track the status of their manuscripts via the online system. After manuscript submission, all authors of papers under consideration for publication will be sent a link to the Authorship Form to complete and submit. See other details in these instructions for additional requirements. 2 , 4

As recommended by the ICMJE, "if the manuscript has been submitted previously to another journal, it is helpful to include the previous editors' and reviewers' comments with the submitted manuscript, along with the authors' responses to those comments." 4 It is not uncommon for manuscripts to have been submitted to and peer reviewed by other journals and sharing this information will not bias an editor's decision for this journal. Thus, authors are encouraged to submit these previous comments in their entirety and indicate how they have revised the manuscript in response to these comments, which may expedite the review process. In the submission system, there is a file type for Previous Peer Review and Editorial Comments.

Include a cover letter and complete contact information for the corresponding author (affiliation, postal/mail address, email address, and telephone number) and whether the authors have published, posted, or submitted any related papers from the same study (see Previous Publication, Related Manuscripts and Reports, and Preprints ).

Manuscripts should be prepared in accordance with the AMA Manual of Style , 11th edition, 2 and/or the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals . 4

Include in the manuscript file a title page, abstract, text, references, and as appropriate, figure legends and tables. Start each of these sections on a new page, numbered consecutively, beginning with the title page. Figures should be submitted as separate files (1 file per figure) and not included in the manuscript text.

We recommend individual file sizes of no more than 500 kB and not exceeding 1 MB, with the total size for all files not exceeding 5 MB (not including any video files).

For submission and review, please submit the manuscript as a Word document. Do not submit your manuscript in PDF format.

Use 10-, 11-, or 12-point font size, double-space text, and leave right margins unjustified (ragged).

The title page should be the first page of your manuscript file. It should include a manuscript title; the full names, highest academic degrees, and affiliations of all authors (if an author's affiliation has changed since the work was done, the new affiliation also should be listed); name and complete contact information for corresponding author; and manuscript word count (not including title, abstract, acknowledgment, references, tables, and figure legends).

Titles should be concise, specific, and informative. 2(p8) Please limit the length of titles to 100 characters (including spaces) for reports of research and other major articles and 60 characters for shorter article types such as opinion articles and Letters as well as for subtitles to major articles. For scientific manuscripts, do not use overly general titles, declarative titles, titles that include the direction of study results, or questions as titles. For reports of clinical trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews, include the type of study as a subtitle (eg, A Randomized Clinical Trial, A Meta-analysis, A Systematic Review). For reports of other types of research, do not include study type or design in the title or subtitle. Depending on the context, avoid inclusion of specific locations (eg, state, province, or country) and specific years. To read more about titles, see the AMA Manual of Style .

In the manuscript, include a separate section called "Key Points" before the Abstract.

This feature provides a quick structured synopsis of the findings of your manuscript (required only for research and review manuscripts), following 3 key points: Question, Findings, and Meaning. Limit this section to 75-100 words or less.

Question: Focused question based on the study hypothesis or goal/purpose. Limit to 1 sentence. Findings: Results of the study/review. Include the design (eg, clinical trial, cohort study, case-control study, meta-analysis). Focus on primary outcome(s) and finding(s). Do not emphasize secondary outcomes. Report basic numbers only but state if results are statistically significant or not significant; do not include results of statistical tests or measures of variance (see example below). Can include 1 to 2 sentences. Meaning: Key conclusion and implication based on the primary finding(s). Limit to 1 sentence. Example of Research Article Question: What is the immunogenicity of an inactivated influenza A vaccine with and without adjuvant? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial that included 980 adults, the proportion achieving an effective antibody response was 84% with adjuvant vs 2% without adjuvant, a significant difference. Meaning: In an influenza pandemic the use of an adjuvant with inactivated influenza A vaccine may be warranted. Include: All Journals except JNO and JHF Exclude: JNO and JHF Comments: Example of Review Article Example of Review Article Question: What are the most effective medical treatments for adult chronic sinusitis? Findings: In this systematic review, symptoms of chronic sinusitis were improved with saline irrigation and topical corticosteroid therapy compared to no therapy. Compared with placebo, 3-week courses of systemic corticosteroids or oral doxycycline were associated with reduced polyp size, and a 3-month course of macrolide antibiotic was associated with improved symptoms in patients without polyps. Meaning: First-line therapy for chronic sinusitis should begin with daily topical intranasal corticosteroid in conjunction with saline irrigation; subsequent therapies should be based on the patient's polyp status and severity of symptoms.

Include a structured abstract for reports of original data, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews. Abstracts should be prepared in JAMA Network style—see instructions for preparing abstracts below. Abstracts are not required for Editorials, Viewpoints, and special features. No information should be reported in the abstract that does not appear in the text of the manuscript. To read more about abstracts, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Abstracts for Reports of Original Data:

Reports of original data should include an abstract of no more than 350 words using the headings listed below. For brevity, parts of the abstract may be written as phrases rather than complete sentences. Each section should include the following content:

Importance: The abstract should begin with a sentence or 2 explaining the clinical (or other) importance of the study question. Objective: State the precise objective or study question addressed in the report (eg, "To determine whether..."). If more than 1 objective is addressed, the main objective should be indicated and only key secondary objectives stated. If an a priori hypothesis was tested, it should be stated. Design: Describe the basic design of the study and include the specific study type (eg, randomized clinical trial, cohort, cross-sectional, case-control, case series, survey, meta-analysis, bibliometric analysis). State the years of the study and the duration of follow-up. For older studies (eg, those completed >3 years ago), add the date of the analysis being reported. If applicable, include the name of the study (eg, the Framingham Heart Study). As relevant, indicate whether observers were blinded to patient groupings, particularly for subjective measurements. Setting: Describe the study setting to assist readers to determine the applicability of the report to other circumstances, for example, multicenter, population-based, primary care or referral center(s), etc. Participants: State the clinical disorders, important eligibility criteria, and key sociodemographic features of patients (or other study participants). The numbers of eligible participants and how they were selected should be provided, including the number approached but who refused or were excluded. For selection procedures, these terms should be used, if appropriate: random sample (where random refers to a formal, randomized selection in which all eligible individuals have a fixed and usually equal chance of selection); population-based sample; referred sample; consecutive sample; volunteer sample; convenience sample. If matching is used for comparison groups, characteristics that are matched should be specified. In follow-up studies, the proportion of participants who completed the study must be indicated.

Note: The preceding 3 sections are usually combined for accepted papers during the editing process as "Design, Setting, and Participants," but for manuscript submission these sections should be kept separate.

Intervention(s) (for clinical trials) or Exposure(s) (for observational studies): The essential features of any interventions, or exposures, should be described, including their method and duration. The intervention, or exposure, should be named by its most common clinical name, and nonproprietary drug names should be used. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): Indicate the primary study outcome measurement(s) as planned before data collection began. If the manuscript does not report the main planned outcomes of a study, this fact should be stated and the reason indicated. State clearly if the hypothesis being tested was formulated during or after data collection. Explain outcomes or measurements unfamiliar to a general medical readership. Results: Summary demographic information (eg, characteristics such as sex and age) and the number of study participants should be reported in the first sentence of the Results paragraph. The main outcomes of the study should be reported and quantified, including final included/analyzed sample. When possible, present numerical results (eg, absolute numbers and/or rates) with appropriate indicators of uncertainty, such as confidence intervals. Include absolute numbers and/or rates with any ratio measures and avoid redundant reporting of relative data (eg, % increase or decrease). Use means and standard deviations (SDs) for normally distributed data and medians and ranges or interquartile ranges (IQRs) for data that are not normally distributed. Avoid solely reporting the results of statistical hypothesis testing, such as  P  values, which fail to convey important quantitative information. For most studies,  P  values should follow the reporting of comparisons of absolute numbers or rates and measures of uncertainty (eg, 0.8%, 95% CI −0.2% to 1.8%;  P  =.13).  P  values should never be presented alone without the data that are being compared. See also Reporting Standards and Data Presentation . Measures of relative risk also may be reported (eg, relative risk, hazard ratios) and should include confidence intervals. Studies of screening and diagnostic tests should report sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio. If predictive value or accuracy is reported, prevalence or pretest likelihood should be given as well. All randomized clinical trials should include the results of intention-to-treat analysis as well. In intervention studies, the number of patients withdrawn because of adverse effects should be given. Approaches such as number needed to treat to achieve a unit of benefit may be included when appropriate. All surveys should include response/participation rates. Conclusions and Relevance: Provide only conclusions of the study that are directly supported by the results. Give equal emphasis to positive and negative findings of equal scientific merit. Also, provide a statement of relevance indicating implications for clinical practice or health policy, avoiding speculation and overgeneralization. The relevance statement may also indicate whether additional study is required before the information should be used in clinical settings. Trial Registration: For clinical trials only (not nontrial observational studies), the name of the trial registry, registration number, and URL of the registry must be included. See Trial Registration .

Abstracts for Meta-analysis:

Manuscripts reporting the results of meta-analyses should include an abstract of no more than 350 words using the headings listed below. The text of the manuscript should also include a section describing the methods used for data sources, study selection, data extraction, and data synthesis. Each heading should be followed by a brief description:

Importance: A sentence or 2 explaining the importance of the systematic review question that is used to justify the meta-analysis. Objective: State the precise primary objective of the meta-analysis. Indicate whether the systematic review for the meta-analysis emphasizes factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention and include information about the specific population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes that are being analyzed. Data Sources: Succinctly summarize data sources, including years searched. The search should include the most current information possible, ideally with the search being conducted within several months before the date of manuscript submission. Potential sources include computerized databases and published indexes, registries, meeting abstracts, conference proceedings, references identified from bibliographies of pertinent articles and books, experts or research institutions active in the field, and companies or manufacturers of tests or agents being reviewed. If a bibliographic database is used, state the exact indexing terms used for article retrieval, including any constraints (for example, English language or human study participants). If abstract space does not permit this level of detail, summarize sources in the abstract including databases and years searched, and place the remainder of the information in the Methods section. Study Selection: Describe inclusion and exclusion criteria used to select studies for detailed review from among studies identified as relevant to the topic. Details of selection should include particular populations, interventions, outcomes, or methodological designs. The method used to apply these criteria should be specified (for example, blinded review, consensus, multiple reviewers). State the proportion of initially identified studies that met selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Describe guidelines (eg, PRISMA , MOOSE ) used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. The method by which the guidelines were applied should be stated (for example, independent extraction by multiple observers). Indicate whether data were pooled using a fixed-effect or random-effects model. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): Indicate the primary study outcome(s) and measurement(s) as planned before data collection began. If the manuscript does not report the main planned outcomes of a study, this fact should be stated and the reason indicated. State clearly if the hypothesis being tested was formulated during or after data collection. Explain outcomes or measurement unfamiliar to a general medical readership. Results: Provide the number of studies and patients/participants in the analysis and state the main quantitative results of the review. When possible, present numerical results (eg, absolute numbers and/or rates) with appropriate indicators of uncertainty, such as confidence intervals. Include absolute numbers and/or rates with any ratio measures and avoid redundant reporting of relative data (eg, % increase or decrease). Use means and standard deviations (SDs) for normally distributed data and medians and ranges or interquartile ranges (IQRs) for data that are not normally distributed. Avoid solely reporting the results of statistical hypothesis testing, such as  P  values, which fail to convey important quantitative information. For most studies,  P  values should follow the reporting of comparisons of absolute numbers or rates and measures of uncertainty (eg, 0.8%, 95% CI −0.2% to 1.8%;  P  = .13).  P  values should never be presented alone without the data that are being compared. See also Reporting Standards and Data Presentation . Meta-analyses should state the major outcomes that were pooled and include odds ratios or effect sizes and, if possible, sensitivity analyses. Evaluations of screening and diagnostic tests should include sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, receiver operating characteristic curves, and predictive values. Assessments of prognosis should summarize survival characteristics and related variables. Major identified sources of variation between studies should be stated, including differences in treatment protocols, co-interventions, confounders, outcome measures, length of follow-up, and dropout rates. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions and their applications (clinical or otherwise) should be clearly stated, limiting interpretation to the domain of the review.

Abstracts for Systematic Reviews or Special Communications:

Systematic Review articles should include a structured abstract of no more than 350 words using the headings listed below.

Importance:  Include 1 or 2 sentences describing the clinical question or issue and its importance in clinical practice or public health. Objective:  State the precise primary objective of the review. Indicate whether the review emphasizes factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention and include information about the specific population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes that are being reviewed. Evidence Review:  Describe the information sources used, including the search strategies, years searched, and other sources of material, such as subsequent reference searches of retrieved articles. Methods used for inclusion of identified articles and quality assessment should be explained. Findings:  Include a brief summary of the number of articles included, numbers of various types of studies (eg, clinical trials, cohort studies), and numbers of patients/participants represented by these studies. Summarize the major findings of the review of the clinical issue or topic in an evidence-based, objective, and balanced fashion, with the highest-quality evidence available receiving the greatest emphasis. Provide quantitative data. Conclusions and Relevance:  The conclusions should clearly answer the questions posed if applicable, be based on available evidence, and emphasize how clinicians should apply current knowledge. Conclusions should be based only on results described in the abstract Findings subsection.

Abstracts for Narrative Reviews or Special Communications:

Importance:  An overview of the topic and discussion of the main objective or reason for this review. Observations:  The principal observations and findings of the review. Conclusions and Relevance:  The conclusions of the review that are supported by the information, along with clinical applications. How the findings are clinically relevant should be specifically stated.

Ratings of the quality of the evidence

Tables summarizing evidence should include ratings of the quality of the evidence. Use the rating scheme listed below with ratings of 1-5 for Reviews that include individual studies (modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine for ratings of individual studies).

Do not use abbreviations in the title or abstract and limit their use in the text. Expand all abbreviations at first mention in the text. To read more about abbreviation use, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Laboratory values are expressed using conventional units of measure, with relevant Système International (SI) conversion factors expressed secondarily (in parentheses) only at first mention. Articles that contain numerous conversion factors may list them together in a paragraph at the end of the Methods section. In tables and figures, a conversion factor to SI should be presented in the footnote or legend. The metric system is preferred for the expression of length, area, mass, and volume. For more details, see the Units of Measure conversion table on the website for the AMA Manual of Style . 2

To read more about units of measure, click here .

Use nonproprietary names of drugs, devices, and other products and services, unless the specific trade name of a drug is essential to the discussion. 2(pp567-569) In such cases, use the trade name once and the generic or descriptive name thereafter. Do not include trademark symbols. To read more about names of drugs, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Authors describing genes or related structures in a manuscript should include the names and official symbols provided by the US National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) or the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee . Before submission of a research manuscript reporting on large genomic data sets (eg, protein or DNA sequences), the data sets should be deposited in a publicly available database, such as NCBI's GenBank , and a complete accession number (and version number if appropriate) must be provided in the Methods section or Acknowledgment of the manuscript. To read more about gene nomenclature, see the AMA Manual of Style .

JAMA does not republish text, tables, figures, or other material from other publishers, except under rare circumstances. Please delete any such material and replace with originals.

The submission and publication of content created by artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies is discouraged, unless part of formal research design or methods, and is not permitted without clear description of the content that was created and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors must take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated by these models and tools. See also Use of AI in Publication and Research .

Authors are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of their references and for correct text citation. Number references in the order they appear in the text; do not alphabetize. In text, tables, and legends, identify references with superscript arabic numerals. When listing references, follow AMA style and abbreviate names of journals according to the journals list in PubMed . List all authors and/or editors up to 6; if more than 6, list the first 3 followed by "et al." Note: Journal references should include the issue number in parentheses after the volume number.

Examples of reference style:

Youngster I, Russell GH, Pindar C, Ziv-Baran T, Sauk J, Hohmann EL. Oral, capsulized, frozen fecal microbiota transplantation for relapsing Clostridium difficileinfection. JAMA . 2014;312(17):1772-1778. Murray CJL. Maximizing antiretroviral therapy in developing countries: the dual challenge of efficiency and quality [published online December 1, 2014]. JAMA . doi:10.1001/jama.2014.16376 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. CMS proposals to implement certain disclosure provisions of the Affordable Care Act. http://www.cms.gov/apps/media/press/factsheet.asp?Counter=4221 . Accessed January 30, 2012. McPhee SJ, Winker MA, Rabow MW, Pantilat SZ, Markowitz AJ, eds. Care at the Close of Life: Evidence and Experience . New York, NY: McGraw Hill Medical; 2011.

For more examples of electronic references, click here .

Tables and Figures

Restrict tables and figures to those needed to explain and support the argument of the article and to report all outcomes identified in the Methods section. Number each table and figure and provide a descriptive title for each. Every table and figure should have an in-text citation. Verify that data are consistently reported across text, tables, figures, and supplementary material.

See also Tables and Figures .

Frequency data should be reported as "No. (%)," not as percentages alone (exception, sample sizes exceeding ~10,000). Whenever possible, proportions and percentages should be accompanied by the actual numerator and denominator from which they were derived. This is particularly important when the sample size is less than 100. Do not use decimal places (ie, xx%, not xx.xx%) if the sample size is less than 100. Tables that include results from multivariable regression models should focus on the primary results. Provide the unadjusted and adjusted results for the primary exposure(s) or comparison(s) of interest. If a more detailed description of the model is required, consider providing the additional unadjusted and adjusted results in supplementary tables.

Tables have a minimum of 2 columns. Comparisons must read across the table columns.

Do not duplicate data in figures and tables. For all primary outcomes noted in the Methods section, exact values with measures of uncertainty should be reported in the text or in a table and in the Abstract, and not only represented graphically in figures.

Pie charts and 3-D graphs should not be used and should be revised to alternative graph types.

Bar graphs should be used to present frequency data only (ie, numbers and rates). Avoid stacked bar charts and consider alternative formats (eg, tables or splitting bar segments into side-by-side bars) except for comparisons of distributions of ordinal data.

Summary data (eg, means, odds ratios) should be reported using data markers for point estimates, not bars, and should include error bars indicating measures of uncertainty (eg, SDs, 95% CIs). Actual values (not log-transformed values) of relative data (for example, odds ratios, hazard ratios) should be plotted on log scales.

For survival plots, include the number at risk for each group included in the analysis at intervals along the x-axis scale. For any figures in which color is used, be sure that colors are distinguishable.

All symbols, indicators, line styles, and colors in statistical graphs should be defined in a key or in the figure legend. Axes in statistical graphs must have labels. Units of measure must be provided for continuous data.

Note: All figures are re-created by journal graphics experts according to reporting standards using the JAMA Network style guide and color palette.

• Number all tables in the order of their citation in the text.
• Include a brief title for each table (a descriptive phrase, preferably no longer than 10 to 15 words).
• Include all tables at the end of the manuscript file.
• Refer to Categories of Articles for limits on the number of tables.
• NOTE: Do not embed tables as images in the manuscript file or upload tables in image formats, and do not upload tables as separate files.

Table Creation

Use the table menu in the software program used to prepare the text. Tables can be built de novo using Insert→Table or copied into the text file from another document (eg, Word, Excel, or a statistical spreadsheet).

Avoid using tabs, spaces, and hard returns to set up the table; such tables will have to be retyped, creating delays and opportunities for error.

Tables should be single-spaced and in a 10- or 12-point font (do not shrink the point size to fit the table onto the page). Do not draw extra lines or rules—the table grid will display the outlines of each cell.

Missing data and blank space in the table field (ie, an empty cell) may create ambiguity and should be avoided; use abbreviations such as NA for not applicable or not available. Each piece of data needs to be contained in its own cell. Do not try to align cells with hard returns or tabs; alignment will be imposed in the production system if the manuscript is accepted. To show an indent, add 2 spaces.

When presenting percentages, include numbers (numerator and denominator).

Include statistical variability where applicable (eg, mean [SD], median [IQR]). For additional detail on requirements for data presentation in tables, see Statistical Methods and Data Presentation .

Place each row of data in a separate row of cells, and note that No. (%) and measures of variability are presented in the same cell as in the example Table 1 below:

Table 1. Baseline Values in the Editors' Health Study

SI conversion factors: To convert cholesterol to mmol/L, multiply values by 0.0259.

Note that JAMA Network journals report laboratory values in conventional units. In a table, provide a footnote with the conversion factor to SI units. For a calculator of SI and conventional units, see the AMA Manual of Style . 2

To present data that span more than 1 row, merge the cells vertically. For example, in Table 2 the final column presents the P value for overall age comparisons.

Table 2. Blood Pressure Values Stratified by Age

The table should be constructed such that the primary comparison reads horizontally. For example, see Table 3 (incorrect) and Table 4 (correct).

Table 3. Patient Data by Study Group

Table 4. Patient Data by Study Group

If a table must be continued, repeat the title and column headings on the second page, followed by "(continued)."

Table Footnotes

Footnotes to tables may apply to the entire table, portions (eg, a column), or an individual entry.

The order of the footnotes is determined by the placement in the table of the item to which the footnote refers.

When both a footnote letter and reference number follow data in a table, set the superscript reference number first followed by a comma and the superscript letter.

Use superscript letters (a, b, c) to mark each footnote and be sure each footnote in the table has a corresponding note (and vice versa).

List abbreviations in the footnote section and explain any empty cells.

If relevant, add a footnote to explain why numbers may not sum to group totals or percentages do not add to 100%.

For more detail on the components and recommended structure of tables, see the AMA Manual of Style . 2

Number all figures (graphs, charts, photographs, and illustrations) in the order of their citation in the text. The number of figures should be limited. Avoid complex composite or multipart figures unless justified. See Categories of Articles for limits on the number of figures and/or tables according to article type.

For initial manuscript submissions, figures must be of sufficient quality and may be embedded at the end of the file for editorial assessment and peer review. If a revision is requested and before a manuscript is accepted, authors will be asked to provide figures that meet the requirements described in Figure File Requirements for Publication .

Graphs, charts, some illustrations, titles, legends, keys, and other elements related to figures in accepted manuscripts will be re-created and edited according to JAMA Network style and standards prior to publication. Online-only figures will not be edited or re-created (see Online-Only Supplements and Multimedia ).

Image Integrity

Preparation of scientific images (clinical images, radiographic images, micrographs, gels, etc) for publication must preserve the integrity of the image data. Digital adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color applied uniformly to an entire image are permissible as long as these adjustments do not selectively highlight, misrepresent, obscure, or eliminate specific elements in the original figure, including the background. Selective adjustments applied to individual elements in an image are not permissible. Individual elements may not be moved within an image field, deleted, or inserted from another image. Cropping may be used for efficient image display or to deidentify patients but must not misrepresent or alter interpretation of the image by selectively eliminating relevant visual information. Juxtaposition of elements from different parts of a single image or from different images, as in a composite, must be clearly indicated by the addition of dividing lines, borders, and/or panel labels.

The submission and publication of images created by artificial intelligence, machine learning tools, or similar technologies is discouraged, unless part of formal research design or methods, and is not permitted without clear description of the content that was created and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors must take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated by these models and tools. See also Use of AI in Publication and Research .

When inappropriate images or image adjustments are detected by the journal staff, authors will be asked for an explanation and will be requested to submit the image as originally captured prior to any adjustment, cropping, or labeling. Authors may be asked to resubmit the image prepared in accordance with the above standards.

Acceptable Figure Files for Initial Submission and Review

Each figure for the main article may be uploaded as a separate file or appended to the end of the manuscript with the figure titles and legends. Online-only figures must be combined into the PDF of the online-only supplement (see Online-Only Supplements and Multimedia ). Note: If a revision is requested and before acceptance, authors must upload each figure for the main article as a separate file and follow the instructions in Figure File Requirements for Publication .

See the Table of Figure Requirements for additional guidance for specific types of figures for suggested resolution and file formats. In general each figure should be no larger than 1 MB.

Figure File Requirements for Publication

Each figure for the main article must be uploaded as a separate file. Online-only figures must be combined into the PDF of the online-only supplement (see Online-Only Supplements and Multimedia ).

See the Table of Figure Requirements for additional guidance and file formats for specific types of figures.

Files created by vector programs are best for accurately plotting and maintaining data points. JAMA Network journals are unable to use file formats native to statistical software applications to prepare figures for publication; most statistical software programs allow users to save or export files in digital vector formats.

Images created digitally (by digital camera or electronically created illustrations) must meet the minimum resolution requirements at the time of creation. Electronically increasing the resolution of an image after creation causes a breakdown of detail and will result in an unacceptable poor-quality image. Each component of a composite image must be uploaded separately at submission and individually meet the minimum resolution requirement.

Color photographs should be submitted in RGB mode using profiles such as Adobe RGB or sRGB. Digital cameras capture images in RGB. Do not change any color settings once the file is on the computer. Black-and-white photographs (eg, radiographs, ultrasound images, CT and MRI scans, and electron micrographs) can be submitted in either RGB or grayscale modes.

Figure Titles and Legends (Captions)

At the end of the manuscript, include a title for each figure. The figure title should be a brief descriptive phrase, preferably no longer than 10 to 15 words. A figure legend (caption) can be used for a brief explanation of the figure or markers if needed and expansion of abbreviations. For photomicrographs, include the type of specimen, original magnification or a scale bar, and stain in the legend. For gross pathology specimens, label any rulers with unit of measure. Digitally enhanced images must be clearly identified in the figure legends as enhanced or manipulated, eg, computed tomographic scans, magnetic resonance images, photographs, photomicrographs, x-ray films.

Figures With Labels, Arrows, or Other Markers

Photographs, clinical images, photomicrographs, gel electrophoresis, and other types that include labels, arrows, or other markers must be submitted in 2 versions: one version with the markers and one without. Provide an explanation for all labels, arrows, or other markers in the figure legend. The Figure field in the File Description tab of the manuscript submission system allows for uploading of 2 versions of the same figure.

Number of Figures

Refer to Categories of Articles because there may be a limit on the number of figures by article type.

General Figure Guidelines

• Primary outcome data should not be presented in figures alone. Exact values with measure of variability should be reported in the text or table as well as in the abstract.
• All symbols, indicators (including error bars), line styles, colors, and abbreviations should be defined in a legend.
• Each axis on a statistical graph must have a label and units of measure should be labeled.
• Do not use pie charts, 3-D graphs, and stacked bar charts as these are not appropriate for accurate statistical presentation of data and should be revised to another figure type or converted to a table.
• Error bars should be included in both directions, unless only 1-sided variability was calculated.
• Values for ratio data—odds ratios, relative risks, hazard ratios—should be plotted on a log scale. Values for ratio data should not be log transformed.
• For footnotes, use letters (a, b, c, etc) not symbols.
• Do not submit figures with more than 4 panels unless otherwise justified.
• See the AMA Manual of Style for more guidance on figure types and components.

For images featuring patients or other identifiable persons, it is not acceptable to use black bars across the eyes in an attempt to deidentify. Cropping may be acceptable as long as the condition under discussion is clearly visible and necessary anatomic landmarks display. If the person in the image is possibly identifiable (not only by others but also by her/himself), permission for publication is required (see Patient Identification ).

Table of Figure Requirements

To present frequency data (numbers or percentages). Each bar represents a category.

Bar graphs are typically vertical but when categories have long titles or there are many of them, they may run horizontally.

The scale on the frequency axis should begin at 0, and the axis should not be broken.

If the data plotted are a percentage or rate, error bars may be used to show statistical variability.

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .ai, .bmp, .docx, .emf, .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt, .psd, .tif, .wmf, .xls

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .ai, .emf, .eps, .pdf, .wmf, .xls

To demonstrate the relationship between 2 or more quantitative variables, such as changes over time.

The dependent variable appears on the vertical axis (y) and the independent variable on the horizontal axis (x); the axes should be continuous, not broken.

Flow diagram

To show participant recruitment and follow-up or inclusions and exclusions (such as in a systematic review).

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .ai, .docx, .emf, .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .ai, .docx, .emf, .eps, .pdf

Survival plot

To display the proportion or percentage of individuals (represented on the y-axis) remaining free of or experiencing a specific outcome over time (represented on the x-axis).

The curve should be drawn as a step function (not smoothed).

The number of individuals followed up for each time interval (number at risk) should be shown underneath the x-axis.

Box-and-whisker plot (box plot)

To show data distribution from 1 or more groups, particularly aggregate/summary data.

Each element should be described (the ends of the boxes, the middle line, and the whiskers). Data points that fall beyond the whiskers are typically shown as circles.

Forest plot

To illustrate summary data, particularly in meta-analyses and systematic reviews.

The data are presented both tabularly and graphically.

The sources (with years and citations, when relevant) should comprise the first column.

Provide indicators of both directions of results at the top of the plot on either side of the vertical line (eg, favors intervention).

Typically, proportionally sized boxes represent the weight of each study and a diamond shows the overall effect at the bottom of the plot.

To display quantitative data other than counts or frequencies on a single scaled axis according to categories on a baseline (horizontal or vertical). Point estimates are represented by discrete data markers, preferably with error bars (in both directions) to designate variability.

Scatterplot

To show individual data points plotted according to coordinate values with continuous, quantitative x- and y-axis scales.

A curve that is generated mathematically may be fitted to the data to summarize the relationship among the variables.

Illustration

To explain physiological mechanisms, describe clinical maneuvers and surgical techniques, or provide orientation to medical imaging.

Required minimum resolution for publication: ≥350 ppi

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .ai, .docx, .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt, .psd., tif

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .ai, .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .psd, .tif

Photographs and other clinical images

To display clinical findings, experimental results, or clinical procedures, including medical imaging, photomicrographs, clinical photographs, and photographs of biopsy specimens.

Legends for photomicrographs should include details about the type of stain used and magnification.

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt, .psd, .tif

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .eps, .jpg, .psd, .tif

Line drawings

To illustrate anatomy or procedures.

Line drawings are almost always black and white.

Required minimum resolution for publication: ≥600 ppi

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .docx, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt, .psd, .tif

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .jpg, .psd, .tif

Authors may submit supporting material to accompany their article for online-only publication when there is insufficient space to include the material in the print article. This material should be important to the understanding and interpretation of the report and should not repeat material in the print article. The amount of online-only material should be limited and justified. Online-only material should be original and not previously published.

Online-only material will undergo editorial and peer review with the main manuscript. If the manuscript is accepted for publication and if the online-only material is deemed appropriate for publication by the editors, it will be posted online at the time of publication of the article as additional material provided by the authors. This material will not be edited or formatted; thus, authors are responsible for the accuracy and presentation of all such material.

Online-only material should be submitted in a single Word document with pages numbered consecutively. Each element included in the online-only material should be cited in the text of the main manuscript (eg, eTable in the Supplement) and numbered in order of citation in the text (eg, eTable 1, eTable 2, eFigure 1, eFigure 2, eMethods). The first page of the online-only document should list the number and title of each element included in the document.

Online-Only Text

Online-only text should be set in Times New Roman font, 10 point in size, and single-spaced. The main heading of the online-only text should be in 12 point and boldface; subheadings should be in 10 point and boldface.

Online-Only References

All references cited within the online-only document must be included in a separate reference section, including those that also were cited in the main manuscript. They should be formatted just as in the main manuscript and numbered and cited consecutively in the online-only material.

Online-Only Tables

Online-only tables should be inserted in the document and numbered consecutively according to the order of citation as eTable 1, eTable 2, etc. All online-only tables should be cited in the relevant text of the main manuscript. The text and data in online tables should be Arial font, 10 point in size, and single-spaced. The table title should be set in Arial font, 12 point, and bold. Headings within tables should be set in 10 point and bold. Table footnotes should be set in 8 point and single-spaced. See also instructions for Tables above. If a table runs on to subsequent pages, repeat the column headers at the top of each page. Wide tables may be presented using a landscape orientation.

If data are better displayed in a separate Excel file, this can be submitted, provided that the Excel file is cited as an eTable and is numbered in the order cited in the text. If multiple Excel files of data are submitted, these should be placed in a single Excel file, with multiple tabs (sheets) at the bottom of the file. The first tab (sheet) should include a table of contents with eTable numbers and titles, and the subsequent tabs (sheets) should be labeled as eTable 1, eTable 2, etc. Please note: the journal is not a data repository; large data sets should be deposited into publicly accessible data repositories, and a link should be provided in the Methods or Results section and the Data Sharing Statement .

Online-Only Figures

Online-only figures should be inserted in the document and numbered consecutively according to the order of citation as eFigure 1, eFigure 2, etc. All online-only figures should be cited in the relevant text of the main manuscript. Figure titles should be set in Arial font, 12 point, bold, and single-spaced. Text within figures should be set as Arial font, 10 point. Figure legends should be set in 8 point and single-spaced. Graphs and diagrams should be exported directly out of the software application used to create them in a vector file format, such as .wmf, and then inserted into the Word document. Image file formats such as .jpg, .tif, and .gif are generally not suitable for graphs. Photographs, including all radiological images, should be prepared as .jpg (highest option) or .tif (uncompressed) files at a resolution of 300 dpi and width of 3-5 inches, but the resolution of photographic files with an original resolution <300 dpi should not be increased digitally to achieve a 300-dpi resolution. Photographs should be inserted in the document with the "Link to File" button turned off. Wide figures may be presented using a landscape orientation.

For editorial and review of an initial submission, submit videos according to the following specifications:

• Acceptable file formats: .mov, .wmv, .mpg, .mpeg, .mp4, or .avi
• Maximum file size: ≤25 MB
• Preferred dimensions: 1920x1080 (HD) or greater (4k UHD footage is acceptable)
• Minimum dimensions: 640 pixels wide by 360 pixels deep
• Recommended frame rate: 24 fps (or 23.976 fps), 25 and 30 fps (or 29.97 fps)
• Maximum length: ≤5 minutes
• Desired aspect ratio: 4:3 (standard) or 16:9 (widescreen)
• If compression is required to reduce file size for uploading, please use a minimum bit rate of 10,000 kbit/s – 20,000 kbit/s
• When filming, please use a landscape orientation, not a portrait orientation. This is especially important when filming video or taking photographs with a smartphone or a mobile device.

Verify that the videos are viewable in QuickTime or Windows Media Player before uploading.

For each video, provide an in-text citation (eg, Video 1). At the end of the manuscript file, include a title (a brief phrase, preferably no longer than 10 to 15 words) and a caption that includes the file format and a brief explanation for each video. The same title and caption must be entered in the designated fields in the manuscript submission system when uploading each video. If multiple video files are submitted, number them in the order in which they should be viewed.

If patient(s) are identifiable in the video, authors must submit a Patient Permission form completed and signed by each patient. See also Patient Identification .

If the author does not hold copyright to the video, the author must obtain permission for the video to be published in the journal. This permission must be for unrestricted use in all print, online, and licensed versions of the journal.

NOTE: If your manuscript and accompanying videos are accepted for publication, the video files will be placed into a journal video frame and will be edited by JAMA Network video production staff according to journal style. In addition, a JAMA Network staff person may contact you to resubmit your videos to meet our production specifications. For example, a larger size may be needed, and if your videos were submitted with embedded text such as titles, annotations, labels, or captions, we will ask you to remove the text at this stage and resubmit the video without text, and JAMA Network video production will re-create all text using our house style.

Guidelines for Optimal Video Quality

• Use plenty of diffuse light; avoid shadows.
• Use the appropriate white-balance based on your lighting conditions. Different cameras have different settings, but most have presets for incandescent (yellow) light, fluorescent light, daylight, and tungsten light. Please make sure to select the correct one so that the color of your footage renders accurately.
• Do not overexpose the image; a bit underexposed is preferable.
• Use a tripod. This is especially important in close-ups.
• Avoid excessive zooming. Use the optical zoom only; do not use a digital zoom.
• Turn off all camera special effects.
• Avoid using autofocus. Manual focus is more accurate. Keep the camera at a fixed distance from the subject.
• Instruct people on camera to speak clearly and face the camera when speaking. Try to avoid large movements while speaking or immediately after speaking. Allow pauses before and after speaking for easier editing.
• If the situation permits, ensure that individuals being filmed are not wearing white clothing or clothing with busy patterns or stripes, especially shirts, jackets, and ties. Subdued medium blue, brown, tan, beige, and green colors all work well for shirt and clothing choices.
• Do not include an introduction by the physician as a "talking head" explaining a procedure. All footage should be of the procedure or relevant subject matter only.
• Record a few extra seconds before and after each cut or after changing the camera's position. This allows for easier editing.

Additional Considerations for Filming Surgical Procedures

• Coordinate with the surgical staff to establish a vantage point for the camera that has a clear view of the surgical field.
• Before the procedure, if the situation permits, identify the surgical staff's positions for access into and out of the surgical field to ensure there is no immediate obstruction of the camera.
• During the procedure, avoid typical obstructions of the camera's main view such as arms reaching across the field or soiled surgical sponges. Where possible, keep the heads, hands, and any instruments away from the immediate sightline of the camera. This will ensure that all moments of the procedure are captured in full view and focus.
• If the situation permits a choice of glove type, use brown or tan. White gloves reflect bright light; vividly colored surgical gloves can distract the viewer from the teaching point of the video.
• If the situation permits, avoid rapid movements for procedural steps that should be noticed and understood. To demonstrate a key moment or use of an instrument, movement that is deliberate and steady will allow a standard camera to focus properly.

For editorial and review of an initial submission, submit audio files according to the following minimum requirements:

• Acceptable file formats: .mp3, .wav, or .aiff
• Maximum file size: 25 MB
• To achieve the best quality, use a setting of 256 kbps or higher for stereo or 128 kbps or higher for mono.
• Sampling rate should be either 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz.
• Bit rate should be either 16 or 24 bit.
• To avoid audible clipping noise, please make sure that audio levels do not exceed 0 dBFS.

For each audio file, provide an in-text citation. At the end of the manuscript, include a title (a brief phrase, preferably no longer than 10-15 words) and a caption that includes the file format and a brief explanation for each audio.

NOTE: If your manuscript is accepted for publication, JAMA Network video production staff may contact you to request an original uncompressed audio file in .wav or .aiff format. There is no maximum file size requirement for publication at this stage.

After Submission

Authors will be sent notifications of the receipt of manuscripts and editorial decisions by email. During the review process, authors can check the status of their submitted manuscript via the online manuscript submission and review system . Authors should not disclose the fact that their manuscript has been submitted to anyone, except coauthors and contributors, without permission of the editor.

All submitted manuscripts are reviewed initially by one of the editors. Manuscripts are evaluated according to the following criteria: material is original and timely, writing is clear, study methods are appropriate, data are valid, conclusions are reasonable and supported by the data, information is important, and topic has general interest to readers of this journal. From these basic criteria, the editors assess a paper's eligibility for publication. Manuscripts with insufficient priority for publication are rejected promptly. Other manuscripts are sent to expert consultants for peer review. The journal uses a single-anonymized peer review process: peer reviewer identities are kept confidential (unless reviewers choose to reveal their names in their formal reviews); author identities are made known to reviewers. The existence of a manuscript under review is not revealed to anyone other than peer reviewers and editorial staff. Peer reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality about the manuscripts they review and must not divulge any information about a specific manuscript or its content to any third party without prior permission from the journal editors. Reviewers are instructed to not submit confidential manuscripts, abstracts, or other text into a chatbot, language model, or similar tool. At submission, authors may choose to have manuscripts that are not accepted by the journal referred to one of the JAMA Network specialty journals and/or JAMA Network Open along with reviewers' comments (if available). Information from submitted manuscripts may be systematically collected and analyzed as part of research to improve the quality of the editorial or peer review process. Identifying information remains confidential. Final decisions regarding manuscript publication are made by an editor who does not have any relevant conflicts of interest.

At the time of manuscript submission, authors may preselect the option to have their manuscript and reviewers' comments automatically referred to one of the JAMA Network specialty journals if the manuscript is not accepted by JAMA .

JAMA -EXPRESS

JAMA -EXPRESS provides rapid peer review and publication of major clinical trials and other original research studies that have immediate or public health importance. Authors who wish to have manuscripts considered for JAMA -EXPRESS should send the manuscript file and a request letter to [email protected] or call (312) 464-4444. Authors will be notified promptly whether the manuscript is approved for rapid peer review. Authors of those manuscripts determined not to qualify for rapid review may be invited to submit the manuscript for further consideration under the standard review process.

Authors may appeal decisions. All appeals are reviewed by the editor in chief, on a case-by-case basis, or a designated editor if the editor in chief is recused from the review.

After Revision/Acceptance

All authors are required to complete an Authorship Form and Publishing Agreement. See Authorship Criteria and Contributions .

Accepted manuscripts are edited in accordance with the AMA Manual of Style , 2 and returned to the corresponding author (or her/his designee) for approval. Authors are responsible for all statements made in their work, including changes made during editing and production that are authorized by the corresponding author.

Authors should not disclose the fact that their manuscript has been accepted to anyone, except coauthors and contributors, until it is published without permission of the editor or as described in the guidance on Previous or Planned Meeting Presentaton or Release of Information and Embargo Policy .

If accepted for publication, all articles are published quickly in one of JAMA 's weekly print/online issues; selected articles are published Online First.

After Publication

Postpublication correspondence.

For accepted manuscripts, the corresponding author will be asked to respond to letters to the editor.

Reprints and e-prints may be ordered online when the edited manuscript is sent for approval to the corresponding author.

Requests to publish corrections should be sent to the editorial office. Errors and requests for corrections are reviewed by editors and authors, and, if warranted, a Correction notice summarizing the errors and corrections is published promptly and linked online to the original article, and the original article is corrected online with the date of correction. 15

First and last authors of peer-reviewed articles are eligible to receive CME credit. See CME From the JAMA Network .

About Previous Release of Information, Embargo, and Access

Manuscripts are considered with the understanding that they have not been published previously and are not under consideration by another publication.

Copies of all related or similar manuscripts and reports by the same authors (ie, those containing substantially similar content or using the same, similar, or a subset of data) that have been previously published or posted electronically or are under consideration elsewhere must be provided at the time of manuscript submission. All related previously published articles should be cited as references and described in the submitted manuscript along with explanation of how the submitted manuscript differs from the related previously published article(s).

Manuscripts that have been previously posted on a preprint server may be submitted for consideration for publication. When the manuscript is submitted, authors must provide information about the preprint, including a link to it and a description of whether the submitted manuscript has been revised or differs from the preprint.

See also Previous or Planned Meeting Presentation or Release of Information and Research Article Public Access, Depositing in Repositories, and Discoverability.

Meeting presentation: A complete manuscript submitted to the journal following or prior to presentation at a scientific meeting or publication of preliminary findings elsewhere (ie, as an abstract) is eligible for consideration for publication. Authors considering presenting or planning to present the work at an upcoming scientific meeting should indicate the name and date of the meeting on the manuscript submission form. For accepted papers, the editors may be able to coordinate publication with the meeting presentation. Authors of submitted papers, including those accepted but not yet published, should not disclose the status of such papers during such meeting presentations that occur before the work is published. Authors who present information contained in a manuscript that is under consideration by this journal during scientific or clinical meetings should not distribute complete reports (ie, copies of manuscripts) or full data presented as tables and figures to conference attendees or journalists. Publication of abstracts in print and online conference proceedings, as well as posting of slides or videos from the scientific presentation on the meeting website, is acceptable. However, for manuscripts under consideration by this journal, publication of full reports in meeting proceedings or online, issuing detailed news releases reporting the results of the study that go beyond the meeting abstract, or participation in formal news conferences will ordinarily jeopardize chances for publication of the submitted manuscript in this journal. 5 Media coverage of presentations at scientific meetings will not jeopardize consideration, but direct release of information through press releases or news media briefings may preclude consideration of the manuscript by this journal. 5 Rare instances of papers reporting public health emergencies should be discussed with the editor. Authors submitting manuscripts or letters to the editor regarding adverse drug or medical device reactions, reportable diseases, etc, should also report this information to the relevant government agency.

Authors should not release information about accepted manuscripts via social media until publication.

See also Previous Publication, Related Manuscripts and Reports, and Preprints . For more information, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Authors should not disclose the fact that their manuscript has been accepted to anyone, except coauthors and contributors, without permission of the editor until it is published. All information regarding the content and publication date of accepted manuscripts is strictly confidential. Unauthorized prepublication release of accepted manuscripts and information about planned publication date may result in rescinding the acceptance and rejecting the paper. This policy applies to all categories of articles, including research, review, opinion, correspondence, etc. Information contained in or about accepted articles cannot appear in print, audio, video, or digital form or be released by the news media until the specified embargo release date. 2 , 5 See also Previous or Planned Meeting Presentation or Release of Information .

The journal makes all JAMA research articles free public access 6 months after publication on the journal website.

Authors of research articles may deposit the accepted version (ie, the peer-reviewed manuscript that you submitted on which this decision is based) of the manuscript in a repository of your choice on or after the date of publication provided that it links to the final published version on the journal website. You may not deposit the published article (version of record), which is the final copyedited, formatted, and proofed version published by the journal. The journal will deposit a copy of the published research article into PubMed Central (PMC) at the time of publication, where it will be publicly available 6 months after publication. A few weeks after publication, you may obtain your PMCID on the PMC site at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/pmctopmid/ . These options apply only to research articles. Non-research articles may not be deposited into repositories.

In addition, the journal will add metadata to all articles to ensure web-based search engine discoverability and will provide publicly discoverable information about your article to PubMed/Medline and numerous other bibliographic databases on the day of publication.

Author Responsibilities

Most of the JAMA Network journals' editorial policies for authors are summarized in these instructions. Citations and links to the AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors 2 and other publications with additional information are also provided.

Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. 2 One or more authors should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article. According to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), 4 authorship credit should be based on the following 4 criteria:

• substantial contributions to conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; and
• drafting of the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; and
• final approval of the version to be published; and
• 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.

Each author should be accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done. In addition, each author should be able to identify which coauthors are responsible for specific other parts of the work and should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of any coauthors.

All those designated as authors should meet all 4 criteria for authorship, and all who meet the 4 criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all 4 criteria should be acknowledged (see Acknowledgment Section ).

All authors (ie, the corresponding author and each coauthor) must read, complete, and submit an electronic Authorship Form with required statements on Authorship Responsibility, Criteria, and Contributions; Confirmation of Reporting Conflicts of Interest and Funding; and Publishing Agreement. 2(pp128-133) In addition, authors are required to identify their specific contributions to the work described in the manuscript. Requests by authors to designate equal contributions or shared authorship positions (eg, co-first authorship) may be considered if justified and within reason. 6 An email with links to the Authorship Form will be sent to authors for completion after manuscripts have been submitted.

For reports of original data, authors' specific contributions will be published in the Acknowledgment section (see Manuscript Preparation and Submission Requirements , Acknowledgment section ). 2 All other persons who have made substantial contributions to the work reported in this manuscript (eg, data collection, analysis, or writing or editing assistance) but who do not fulfill the authorship criteria should be named with their specific contributions and affiliations in an Acknowledgment in the manuscript. Written permission to include the names of individuals in the Acknowledgment section must be obtained.

Nonhuman artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies do not qualify for authorship. If these models or tools are used to create content or assist with writing or manuscript preparation, authors must take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated by these tools. Authors should report the use of artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies to create content or assist with writing or editing of manuscripts in the Acknowledgment section or Methods section if this is part of formal research design or methods. See also Use of AI in Publication and Research , Reproduced and Re-created Material , and Image Integrity .

The authors also must certify that the manuscript represents valid work and that neither this manuscript nor one with substantially similar content under their authorship has been published or is being considered for publication elsewhere (see also About Previous Release of Information, Embargo, and Access ). 2 Authors of manuscripts reporting original data or systematic reviews must provide an access to data statement from 1 or 2 named authors, often the corresponding author (see also Data Access, Responsibility, and Analysis ). If requested, authors should be prepared to provide the data and must cooperate fully in obtaining and providing the data on which the manuscript is based for examination by the editors or their assignees.

A single corresponding author (or coauthor designee in the event that the corresponding author is unavailable) will serve on behalf of all coauthors as the primary correspondent with the editorial office during the submission and review process. If the manuscript is accepted, the corresponding author will review an edited manuscript and proof, make decisions regarding release of information in the manuscript to the news media or federal agencies, handle all postpublication communications and inquiries, and will be identified as the corresponding author in the published article.

The corresponding author also is responsible for ensuring that the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript is complete (see Acknowledgment Section ) and that the conflict of interest disclosures reported in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript are accurate, up-to-date, and consistent with the information provided in each author's potential conflicts of interest section in the Authorship Form (see Conflicts of Interest and Financial Disclosures ).

The corresponding author also must complete the Acknowledgment statement part of the Authorship Form confirming that all persons who have contributed substantially but who are not authors are identified in the Acknowledgment section and that written permission from each person acknowledged has been obtained (see Acknowledgment Section ).

Requests for co-corresponding authors will be considered on a very limited basis if justified, but no more than 2 co-corresponding authors will be permitted. In such cases, a primary corresponding author must be designated as the point of contact responsible for all communication about the manuscript and article, manage the tasks described above, and will be listed first in the corresponding author section. 6 To read more about the role and responsibilities of corresponding authors, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Authors should determine the order of authorship among themselves and should settle any disagreements before submitting their manuscript. Changes in authorship (ie, order, addition, and deletion of authors) should be discussed and approved by all authors. Any requests for such changes in authorship after initial manuscript submission and before publication should be explained in writing to the editor in a letter or email from all authors. 2(pp128-133)

The JAMA Network recognizes that authors may change their names for personal reasons, and the editors respect authors' rights to autonomy and privacy in this regard. Authors who request confidential name changes after publication because of changes in identity, marital status, religion, or other reasons may have their names changed in articles without indication of the reason for the change and without a formal correction notice. If an author prefers this change to be public, a formal Correction notice can be issued, with or without the reason per author preference. The journal will not request the approval of coauthors, but the requesting author may wish to notify coauthors if this change will affect subsequent citations to the article. The requester may be asked to notify the corresponding author about this change to the published article; alternatively, the journal may inform the corresponding author of this change (without explaining the reason for the change). The journal will make this change to the online and PDF versions of the published article and will notify postpublication indexes and databases as a standard process but cannot guarantee when or if the change will be reflected in these indexes and databases.

If authorship is attributed to a group (either solely or in addition to 1 or more individual authors), all members of the group must meet the full criteria and requirements for authorship as described above, and all group member authors must complete Authorship Forms. 6 If all members of a group do not meet all authorship criteria, a group must designate 1 or more individuals as authors or members of a writing group who meet full authorship criteria and requirements and who will take responsibility for the group. 2 , 6 Group names should appear at the end of the byline and should not be interspersed within the list of individually named authors. Group authors may not be included for article types with limited numbers of authors (eg, opinion articles).

For articles with a large number of authors (eg, >50), a long list of authors will not fit in the byline of a print/PDF version of the article. In such cases, a group byline will be recommended with the individual names of each author listed at the end of the article. All author names would still be individually indexed, displayed, and easily searchable in bibliographic records such as PubMed. 6

Nonauthor Collaborators: Other group members who do not meet the criteria for authorship (eg, investigators, advisors, assistants) may be identified. For group author manuscripts, a Nonauthor Collaborator Template (with names, academic degrees, institution, location, role/contribution, and subgroup) must be completed during revision. The template will be available to authors with the request for revision. The collaborators will be published in an online Supplement based on this template and will be deposited to PubMed.

To read more about authorship, click here .

A conflict of interest may exist when an author (or the author's institution or employer) has financial or personal relationships or affiliations that could influence (or bias) the author's decisions, work, or manuscript. All authors are required to report potential conflicts of interest including specific financial interests relevant to the subject of their manuscript in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript 2 and in the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest section of the Authorship Form. Note: These forms will be requested after a manuscript has been submitted, but authors should also include conflict of interest disclosures in the Acknowledgment section of the submitted manuscript.

Definitions and Terms of Conflicts of Interest Disclosures:

Authors are expected to provide detailed information about all relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations (other than those affiliations listed in the title page of the manuscript) including, but not limited to, employment, affiliation, funding and grants received or pending, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speakers' bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Following the guidelines of the ICMJE, 4 the definitions and terms of such disclosures include

Any potential conflicts of interest "involving the work under consideration for publication" (during the time involving the work, from initial conception and planning to present), Any "relevant financial activities outside the submitted work" (over the 3 years prior to submission), and Any "other relationships or activities that readers could perceive to have influenced, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing" what is written in the submitted work (based on all relationships that were present during the 3 years prior to submission).

Authors without conflicts of interest, including relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations, should indicate such in their disclosures and include a statement of no such interests in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. Failure to include this information in the manuscript may delay evaluation and review of the manuscript. Authors should err on the side of full disclosure and should contact the editorial office if they have questions or concerns.

Although many universities and other institutions and organizations have established policies and thresholds for reporting financial interests and other conflicts of interest, the JAMA Network requires complete disclosure of all relevant financial relationships and potential financial conflicts of interest, regardless of amount or value. For example, authors of a manuscript about hypertension should report all financial relationships they have with all manufacturers and owners of products, devices, tests, and services used in the management of hypertension, not only those relationships with entities whose specific products, devices, tests, and services are mentioned in the manuscript. If authors are uncertain about what constitutes a relevant financial interest or relationship, they should contact the editorial office.

For all accepted manuscripts, the corresponding author will have been asked to confirm that each coauthor's disclosures of conflicts of interest and relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations and declarations of no such interests are accurate, up-to-date, and consistent with the disclosures reported in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript because this information will be published in the Acknowledgment section of the article. Decisions about whether such information provided by authors should be published, and thereby disclosed to readers, are usually straightforward. Although editors are willing to discuss disclosure of specific conflicts of interest with authors, JAMA Network policy is one of complete disclosure of all potential conflicts of interest, including relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations (other than those affiliations listed in the title page of the manuscript). The policy requiring disclosure of conflicts of interest applies for all manuscript submissions, including letters to the editor. If an author's disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is determined to be inaccurate or incomplete after publication, a correction will be published to rectify the original published disclosure statement, and additional action may be taken as necessary.

All authors must also complete the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest section of the Authorship Form. 7

All financial and material support for the research and the work should be clearly and completely identified in an Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. At the time of submission, information on the funding source (including grant identification) must also be completed via the online manuscript submission and review system. The specific role of the funding organization or sponsor in each of the following should be specified: "design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication." 7 To read more about reporting funding and other support, see the AMA Manual of Style .

For all reports (regardless of funding source) containing original data, at least 1 named author (eg, the principal investigator), and no more than 2 authors, must indicate that she or he "had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis." 7 This exact statement should be included in the Acknowledgment section at the end of the manuscript. Modified statements or generic statements indicating that all authors had such access are not acceptable. In addition, for all reports containing original data, the names and affiliations of all authors (or other individuals) who conducted and are responsible for the data analysis must be indicated in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. If the individual who conducted the analysis is not named as an author, a detailed explanation of his/her contributions and reasons for his/her involvement with the data analysis should be included.

For all reports of research, authors are required to provide a Data Sharing Statement to indicate if data will or will not be shared. Specific questions regarding the sharing of data are included in the manuscript submission system. If authors choose to share or not share data, this information will be published in a Data Sharing Statement in an online supplement linked to the published article. Authors will be asked to identify the data, including individual patient data, a data dictionary that defines each field in the data set, and supporting documentation (eg, statistical/analytic code), that will be made available to others; when, where, and how the data will be available (eg, a link to a data repository); types of analyses that are permitted; and if there will be any restrictions on the use of the data. Authors also have the option to explain why data may not be shared. A list of generalist public repositories that authors may consider using is available from the National Library of Medicine .

The Acknowledgment section is the general term for the list of contributions, disclosures, credits, and other information included at the end of the text of a manuscript but before the references. The Acknowledgment section includes authors' contributions; information on author access to data; disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, including financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations; sources of funding and support; an explanation of the role of funder(s)/sponsor(s); names, degrees, and affiliations of participants in a large study or other group (ie, collaborators); any important disclaimers; information on previous presentation of the information reported in the manuscript; and the contributions, names, degrees, affiliations, and indication if compensation has been received for all persons who have made substantial contributions to the work but who are not authors. 2

All other persons who have made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (eg, data collection, analysis, and writing or editing assistance) but who do not fulfill the authorship criteria should be named with their specific contributions in an Acknowledgment in the manuscript.

Authors must obtain written permission to include the names of all individuals included in the Acknowledgment section, and the corresponding author must confirm that such permission has been obtained in the Authorship Form.

Authors should report the use of artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies to create content or assist with writing or editing of manuscripts in the Acknowledgment section or the Methods section if this is part of formal research design or methods. This should include a description of the content that was created or edited and the name of the language model or tool, version and extension numbers, manufacturer, date(s) of use, and confirmation that the authors take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated. (Note: this does not include basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references, etc.) See also Use of AI in Publication and Research and Statistical Analysis Subsection .

Requirements for Reporting

Authors of research articles should follow the EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines . See specific Study Types for detailed guidance on reporting.

Causal language (including use of terms such as effect and efficacy) should be used only for randomized clinical trials. For all other study designs (including meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials), methods and results should be described in terms of association or correlation and should avoid cause-and-effect wording. To read more about use of causal language, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Research reports should be timely and current and should be based on data collected as recently as possible. Manuscripts based on data from randomized clinical trials should be reported as soon as possible after the trial has ended, ideally within 1 year after follow-up has been completed.

For cohort studies, the date of final follow-up should be no more than 5 years before manuscript submission. Likewise, data used in case-control or cross-sectional studies should have been collected as recently as possible, but no more than 5 years before manuscript submission. Manuscripts in which the most recent data have been collected more than 5 years ago ordinarily will receive lower priority for publication; thus, authors of such manuscripts should provide a detailed explanation of the relevance of the information in light of current knowledge and medical practice as well as the most recent date(s) of analysis of the study.

General Considerations

Authors are encouraged to consult "Reporting Statistical Information in Medical Journal Articles." 1 In the Methods section, describe statistical methods with enough detail to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to reproduce the reported results. Such description should include appropriate references to the original literature, particularly for uncommon statistical methods. For more advanced or novel methods, provide a brief explanation of the methods and appropriate use in the text and consider providing a detailed description in an online supplement.

In the reporting of results, when possible, quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty, such as confidence intervals (see Reporting Standards and Data Presentation ). Avoid relying solely on statistical hypothesis testing, such as the use of P values, which fails to convey important quantitative information. For observational studies, provide the numbers of observations. For randomized trials, provide the numbers randomized. Report losses to observation or follow up (see Missing Data ). For multivariable models, report all variables included in models, and report model diagnostics and overall fit of the model when available (see Statistical Procedures ).

Define statistical terms, abbreviations, and symbols, if included. Avoid nontechnical uses of technical terms in statistics, such as correlation, normal, predictor, random, sample, significant, trend. Do not use inappropriate hedge terms such as marginal significance or trend toward significance for results that are not statistically significant. Causal language (including use of terms such as effect and efficacy) should be used only for randomized clinical trials. For all other study designs (including meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials), methods and results should be described in terms of association or correlation and should avoid cause-and-effect wording.

Sample Size Calculations

For randomized trials, a statement of the power or sample size calculation is required (see the EQUATOR Network CONSORT Guidelines ). For observational studies that use an established population, a power calculation is not generally required when the sample size is fixed. However, if the sample size was determined by the researchers, through any type of sampling or matching, then there should be some justification for the number sampled. In any case, describe power and sample size calculations at the beginning of the Statistical Methods section, following the general description of the study population.

Descriptive Statistics

It is generally not necessary to provide a detailed description of the methods used to generate summary statistics, but the tests should be briefly noted in the Methods section (eg, ANOVA or Fisher exact test).

Statistical Procedures

Identify regression models with more than 1 independent variable as multivariable and regression models with more than 1 dependent variable as multivariate. Report all variables included in models, as well as any mathematical transformations of those variables. Provide the scientific rationale (clinical, statistical, or otherwise) for including variables in regression models.

For regression models fit to dependent data (eg, clustered or longitudinal data), the models should account for the correlations that arise from clustering and/or repeated measures. Failure to account for such correlation will result in incorrect estimates of uncertainty (eg, confidence intervals). Describe how the model accounted for correlation. For example, for an analysis based on generalized estimating equations, identify the assumed correlation structure and whether robust (or, sandwich) variance estimators were used. Or, for an analysis based on mixed-effects models, identify the assumed structure for the random effects, such as the level of random intercepts and whether any random slopes were included. Fixed-effects estimation should be described as conditional likelihood. Avoid the term fixed effects for describing covariates.

Missing Data

Report losses to observation, such as dropouts from a clinical trial or those lost to follow-up or unavailable in an observational study. If some participants are excluded from analyses because of missing or incomplete data, provide a supplementary table that compares the observed characteristics between participants with complete and incomplete data. Consider multiple imputation methods to impute missing data and include an assessment of whether data were missing at random. Approaches based on "last observation carried forward" should not be used.

Primary Outcomes, Multiple Comparisons, and Post Hoc Comparisons

Both randomized and observational studies should identify the primary outcome(s) before the study began, as well as any prespecified secondary, subgroup, and/or sensitivity analyses. Comparisons arrived at during the course of the analysis or after the study was completed should be identified as post hoc. For analyses of more than 1 primary outcome, corrections for multiple testing should generally be used. For secondary outcomes, address multiple comparisons or consider such analyses as exploratory and interpret them as hypothesis-generating. The reporting of all outcomes should match that included in study protocols. For randomized clinical trials, protocols with complete statistical analysis plans should be cited in the Methods section and submitted as online supplementary content. Randomized clinical trials should be primarily analyzed according to the intention-to-treat approach. Deviations from strict intention-to-treat analysis should be described as "modified intention-to-treat," with the modifications clearly described.

Statistical Analysis Subsection

At the end of the Methods section, briefly describe the statistical tests used for the analysis. State any a priori levels of significance and whether hypothesis tests were 1- or 2-sided. Also include the statistical software used to perform the analysis, including the version and manufacturer, along with any extension packages (eg, the svy suite of commands in Stata or the survival package in R). Do not describe software commands (eg, SAS proc mixed was used to fit a linear mixed-effects model). If analysis code is included, it should be placed in the online supplementary content.

Reporting Standards and Data Presentation

Analyses should follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines and be consistent with the protocol and statistical analysis plan, or described as post hoc.

When possible, present numerical results (eg, absolute numbers and/or rates) with appropriate indicators of uncertainty, such as confidence intervals. Include absolute numbers and/or rates with any ratio measures and avoid redundant reporting of relative data (eg, % increase or decrease). Use means and standard deviations (SDs) for normally distributed data and medians and ranges or interquartile ranges (IQRs) for data that are not normally distributed. Avoid solely reporting the results of statistical hypothesis testing, such as P values, which fail to convey important quantitative information. For most studies, P values should follow the reporting of comparisons of absolute numbers or rates and measures of uncertainty (eg, 0.8%, 95% CI −0.2% to 1.8%; P  = .13). P values should never be presented alone without the data that are being compared. If P values are reported, follow standard conventions for decimal places: for P values less than .001, report as " P <.001"; for P values between .001 and .01, report the value to the nearest thousandth; for P values greater than or equal to .01, report the value to the nearest hundredth; and for P values greater than .99, report as " P >.99." For studies with exponentially small P values (eg, genetic association studies), P values may be reported with exponents (eg, P  = 1×10 −5 ). In general, there is no need to present the values of test statistics (eg, F statistics or χ² results) and degrees of freedom when reporting results.

For secondary and subgroup analyses, there should be a description of how the potential for type I error due to multiple comparisons was handled, for example, by adjustment of the significance threshold. In the absence of some approach, these analyses should generally be described and interpreted as exploratory, as should all post hoc analyses.

For randomized trials using parallel-group design, there is no validity in conducting hypothesis tests regarding the distribution of baseline covariates between groups; by definition, these differences are due to chance. Because of this, tables of baseline participant characteristics should not include P values or statements of statistical comparisons among randomized groups. Instead, report clinically meaningful imbalances between groups, along with potential adjustments for those imbalances in multivariable models. To read more about statistical tests and data presentation, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Researchers are encouraged to report studies that include diverse and representative participants and to indicate participant inclusion and exclusion criteria and how the findings generalize to the population(s) that are the focus of or are compatible with the research question. Aggregate, deidentified demographic information (eg, age, sex, race and ethnicity, and socioeconomic indicators) should be reported for all research reports along all prespecified outcomes. Demographic variables collected for a specific study should be reported in the Methods section. Demographic information assessed should be reported in the Results section, either in the main article or in an online supplement or both. If any demographic characteristics that were collected are not reported, the reason should be stated. Summary demographic information (eg, baseline characteristics of study participants) should be reported in the first line of the Results section of Abstracts.

Reporting Age

Study inclusion or exclusion criteria by age or age group should be defined in the Methods section. Stratification by age groups should be based on relevance to disease, condition, or population (eg, <5 or >65 years). The ages for study participants should be reported in aggregate (ie, mean and SD or median and IQR or range) in the Results section.

Reporting Sex and Gender

The term sex should be used when reporting biological factors and gender should be used when reporting gender identity or psychosocial/cultural factors. The methods used to obtain information on sex, gender, or both (eg, self-reported, investigator observed or classified, or laboratory test) should be explained in the Methods section. 12 The distribution of study participants or samples should be reported in the Results section, including for studies of humans, tissues, cells, or animals. All participants should be reported, not just the category that represents the majority of the sample. Studies that address pregnancy should follow these recommendations, and if the gender identity of participants was not assessed, use the terms "pregnant participants," "pregnant individuals," "pregnant patients," etc, as appropriate.

In research articles, sex or gender should be reported and defined, and how sex or gender was assessed should be described. Whenever possible, all main outcomes should be reported by sex (or gender if appropriate). In nonresearch reports, choose sex-neutral terms that avoid bias, suit the material under discussion, and do not intrude on the reader's attention.

Reporting Race and Ethnicity

The Methods section should include an explanation of who identified participant race and ethnicity and the source of the classifications used (eg, self-report or selection, investigator observed, database, electronic health record, survey instrument).

If race and ethnicity categories were collected for a study, the reasons that these were assessed also should be described in the Methods section. If collection of data on race and ethnicity was required by the funding agency, that should be noted.

Specific racial and ethnic categories are preferred over collective terms, when possible. Authors should report the specific categories used in their studies and recognize that these categories will differ based on the databases or surveys used, the requirements of funders, and the geographic location of data collection or study participants. Categories included in groups labeled as "other" should be defined.

Categories should be listed in alphabetical order in text and tables.

Race and ethnicity of the study population should be reported in the Results section.

For additional information, see " Updated Guidance on Reporting Race and Ethnicity in Medical and Science Journals " and the Summary Guide for Preferred Terms When Reporting Race and Ethnicity .

For all manuscripts reporting data from studies involving human participants or animals, formal review and approval, or formal review and waiver, by an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee is required and should be described in the Methods section. 2(p226) For those investigators who do not have formal ethics review committees, the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki should be followed. 13 For investigations of humans, state in the Methods section the manner in which informed consent was obtained from the study participants (ie, oral or written) and whether participants received a stipend. Authors of research studies involving humans should not make independent determinations of exemption or exclusion of IRB or ethical review; they should cite the institutional or regulatory policy for that determination and indicate if the data are deidentified and publicly available or protected by prior consent or privacy safeguards. Editors may request that authors provide documentation of the formal review and recommendation from the institutional review board or ethics committee responsible for oversight of the study.

A signed statement of informed consent to publish patient descriptions, photographs, video, and pedigrees should be obtained from all persons (parents or legal guardians for minors) who can be identified (including by the patients themselves) i/n such written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees and should be submitted with the manuscript and indicated in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. Such persons should be offered the opportunity to see the manuscript before its submission. 2(pp229-232)

Omitting data or making data less specific to deidentify patients is acceptable, but changing any such data is not acceptable. Only those details essential for understanding and interpreting a specific case report or case series should be provided. Although the degree of specificity needed will depend on the context of what is being reported, specific ages, race/ethnicity, and other sociodemographic details should be presented only if clinically or scientifically relevant and important. 2 Cropping of photographs to remove identifiable personal features that are not essential to the clinical message may be permitted as long as the photographs are not otherwise altered. Please do not submit masked photographs of patients. Patients' initials or other personal identifiers must not appear in an image.

Patient Permission Form:

The Patient Permission form for publication of identifying material is available here . Translated versions in Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Hindi, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, and Spanish are available on request.

AI Used in Manuscript Preparation

When traditional and generative AI technologies are used to create, review, revise, or edit any of the content in a manuscript, authors should report in the Acknowledgment section the following:

• Name of the AI software platform, program, or tool
• Version and extension numbers
• Manufacturer
• Date(s) of use
• A brief description of how the AI was used and on what portions of the manuscript or content
• Confirmation that the author(s) take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated

Note this guidance does not apply to basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references, and similar.

AI Used in Research

When AI (eg, large language model [LLM] or natural language processing [NLP], supervised or unsupervised machine learning [ML] for predictive/prescriptive or clustering tasks, chatbots, or similar other technologies) is used as part of a scientific study, authors should:

• Follow relevant reporting guidelines for specific study designs when they exist and report each recommended guideline element with sufficient detail to enable reproducibility.
• Avoid inclusion of identifiable patient information in text, tables, and figures.
• Be aware of copyright and intellectual property concerns - if including content (text, images) generated by AI, and indicate rights or permissions to publish that content as determined by the AI service or owner.

Also address the following:

Methods Section

• Include the study design and, if a relevant reporting guideline exists, indicate how it was followed, with sufficient detail to enable reproducibility.
• Describe how AI was used for specific aspects of the study (eg, to generate or refine study hypotheses, assist in the generation of a list of adjustment variables, create graphs to show visual relationships).
• For studies using LLMs, provide the name of the platform or program, tool, version, and manufacturer; specify dates and prompt(s) used and their sequence and any revisions to prompts in response to initial outputs.
• For studies reporting ML and algorithm development, include details about data sets used for development, training, and validation. Clearly state if algorithms were trained and tested only on previously collected or existing data sets or if the study includes prospective deployment. Include the ML model and describe the variables and outcome(s) and selection of the fine-tuning parameters. Describe any assumptions involved (eg, log linearity, proportionality) and how these assumptions were tested.
• Indicate the metric used to evaluate the performance of the algorithms, including bias, discrimination, calibration, reclassification, and others as appropriate.
• Indicate the methods used to address missing data.
• Indicate institutional review board/ethics review, approval, waiver, or exemption.
• Describe methods or analyses included to address and manage AI-related methodologic bias and inaccuracy of AI-generated content.
• Indicate, when appropriate, if sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the performance of the AI model in vulnerable or underrepresented subgroups.
• Provide a data sharing statement, including if code will be shared.

Results Section

• When reporting comparisons, provide performance assessments (eg, against standard of care), include effect sizes and measures of uncertainty (eg, 95% CIs) and other measurements such as likelihood ratios, and include information about performance errors, inaccurate or missing data, and sufficient detail for others to reproduce the findings.
• Report the results of analyses to address methodologic bias and population representation.
• If examples of generated text or content are included in tables or figures, be sure to indicate the source and licensing information, as noted above.

Discussion Section

• Discuss the potential for AI-related bias and what was done to identify and mitigate such bias.
• Discuss the potential for inaccuracy of AI-generated content and what was done to identify and manage this.
• Discuss generalizability of findings across populations and results of analyses performed to explore the performance of the AI model in vulnerable or underrepresented subgroups.

A signed statement of permission should be included from each individual identified as a source of information in a personal communication or as a source for unpublished data, and the date of communication and whether the communication was written or oral should be specified. 2(p199) Personal communications should not be included in the list of references but added to the text parenthetically.

Authors and reviewers are expected to notify editors if a manuscript could be considered to report dual use research of concern (ie, research that could be misused by others to pose a threat to public health and safety, agriculture, plants, animals, the environment, or material). 14 The editor in chief will evaluate manuscripts that report potential dual use research of concern and, if necessary, consult additional reviewers.

Journal Policies

Final decisions regarding manuscript publication are made by the editor in chief or a designated editor who does not have any relevant conflicts of interest. The journal has a formal recusal process in place to help manage potential conflicts of interest of editors. In the event that an editor has a conflict of interest with a submitted manuscript or with the authors, the manuscript, review, and editorial decisions are managed by another designated editor without a conflict of interest related to the manuscript.

All authors are required to complete and submit a Publishing Agreement that is part of the journal's electronic Authorship Form. In this agreement, authors will transfer copyright or a publication license; or indicate that they are employed by a federal government; or indicate that they are an employee of an institution that considers the work in the manuscript a work for hire, in which case an authorized representative of that institution will assign copyright or a publication license on the author's behalf.

Published articles become the permanent property of the American Medical Association (AMA) and may not be published elsewhere without written permission. Unauthorized use of the journal's name, logo, or any content for commercial purposes or to promote commercial goods and services (in any format, including print, video, audio, and digital) is not permitted by the JAMA Network or the AMA.

1. Cummings P, Rivara FP. Reporting statistical information in medical journal articles. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med . 2003;157(4):321-324. doi:10.1001/archpedi.157.4.321

2. Iverson C, Christiansen S, Flanagin A, et al. AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors . 11th ed. Oxford University Press; 2020. http://www.amamanualofstyle.com

3. Golub RM. Correspondence course: tips for getting a letter published in JAMA . JAMA . 2008;300(1):98-99. doi:10.1001/jama.300.1.98

4. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Updated May 2023. Accessed May 18, 2023. http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/

5. Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A, DeAngelis CD. Update on JAMA 's policy on release of information to the public. JAMA . 2008;300(13):1585-1587. doi:10.1001/jama.300.13.1585

6. Fontanarosa P, Bauchner H, Flanagin A. Authorship and team science. JAMA . 2017;318(24):2433-2437. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.19341

7. Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A, DeAngelis CD. Reporting conflicts of interest, financial aspects of research, and role of sponsors in funded studies. JAMA . 2005;294(1):110-111. doi:10.1001/jama.294.1.110

8. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al; International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA . 2004;292(11):1363-1364. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.6933

9. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al; International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Is this clinical trial fully registered? a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA . 2005;293(23):2927-2929. doi:10.1001/jama.293.23.jed50037

10. The CONSORT Group. The CONSORT statement. Updated 2014. Accessed September 23, 2016. http://www.consort-statement.org/consort-2010

11. American Association for Public Opinion Research. Best practices for survey research. Accessed March 23, 2023. https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/best-practices/

12. Clayton JA, Tannenbaum C. Reporting sex, gender, or both in clinical research? JAMA . 2016;316(18):1863-1864. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.16405

13. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA . 2013;310(20):2191-2194. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053

14. Journal Editors and Authors Group. Statement on scientific publication and security. Science . 2003;299(5610):1149. doi:10.1126/science.299.5610.1149 . Published correction appears in Science . 2003;299(5614):1845.

15. Christiansen S, Flanagin A. Correcting the medical literature: "to err is human, to correct divine." JAMA . 2017;318(9):804-805. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.11833

Last Updated: June 13, 2024

Quick Links

• Why Publish in JAMA
• Submit and Track Your Manuscript
• Author Reprints
• Permissions Requests
• Register for email alerts with links to free full-text articles
• Access PDFs of free articles
• Manage your interests
• Save searches and receive search alerts

Academia Bees

How to Write Acknowledgement for Research Paper (5 Samples)

July 12, 2023

No Comments

By Mohsin Khurshid

Writing acknowledgements is an essential part of crafting a comprehensive research paper. It allows you to express gratitude and recognize the contributions of individuals and institutions who have supported your work. In this article, we will delve into the art of writing acknowledgement for research papers, providing you with valuable insights, practical tips, and five sample acknowledgements to guide you in acknowledging the people and resources that have played a significant role in your research journey.

Table of Contents

• 1 Understanding the Role of Acknowledgements in Research Papers
• 2 Key Elements of an Effective Acknowledgement
• 3 10 Tips for Writing an Acknowledgement for a Research Paper
• 4.1 Sample 1: Acknowledgement for Collaborative Research:
• 4.2 Sample 2: Acknowledgement for Funding Support:
• 4.3 Sample 3: Acknowledgement for Mentorship and Guidance:
• 4.4 Sample 4: Acknowledgement for Institutional Support:
• 4.5 Sample 5: Acknowledgement for Peer Reviewers:
• 6 Conclusion

Understanding the Role of Acknowledgements in Research Papers

Acknowledgements serve as a platform to express appreciation and recognize the collective effort that goes into the completion of a research paper. They provide an opportunity to acknowledge the guidance, support, and assistance received throughout the research process. By including acknowledgements, you can demonstrate your gratitude and give credit to those who have contributed to your success.

Key Elements of an Effective Acknowledgement

Crafting an effective acknowledgement involves considering various elements to ensure its sincerity and clarity. It is crucial to mention specific individuals, institutions, and their contributions, while keeping the acknowledgement concise and relevant. By adhering to ethical considerations and cultural norms, you can create an acknowledgement that reflects your gratitude and professionalism.

10 Tips for Writing an Acknowledgement for a Research Paper

• Be sincere and genuine : Write your acknowledgements with heartfelt gratitude, expressing sincere appreciation for the support and contributions received during your research.
• Identify specific individuals and institutions: Mention the names of people who have played a significant role in your research, such as mentors, advisors, collaborators, and funding agencies. Also, acknowledge the contributions of institutions that provided resources or facilities.
• Be concise and focused: Keep your acknowledgements concise and to the point. Focus on the key individuals and organizations that have made a substantial impact on your research.
• Use a formal tone: Maintain a professional and formal tone throughout your acknowledgements. Remember that this section is a formal acknowledgment of support, not a casual conversation.
• Follow ethical considerations: Ensure that you acknowledge individuals and organizations according to ethical guidelines and norms. Respect the privacy and confidentiality of individuals who may prefer not to be mentioned.
• Include personal touches: If appropriate, you can include personal anecdotes or specific instances where individuals or organizations made a significant impact on your research.
• Tailor acknowledgements to your research context: Consider the nature of your research and tailor your acknowledgements accordingly. For example, if you conducted interdisciplinary research, acknowledge experts from different fields who provided valuable insights.
• Proofread and edit: Like any other section of your research paper, proofread and edit your acknowledgements for grammar, spelling, and clarity. Ensure that the acknowledgements are well-written and free of errors.
• Seek feedback if needed: If you’re uncertain about whom to acknowledge or how to express your gratitude, seek feedback from your mentors, advisors, or colleagues. They can provide valuable guidance and suggestions.
• Show appreciation beyond formal requirements: While it’s important to acknowledge the required individuals and institutions, also consider extending your appreciation to others who may have supported you indirectly, such as family, friends, or colleagues who provided emotional support during your research journey.

Remember, acknowledgements are an opportunity to express your gratitude and recognize the contributions of those who have helped you along the way. Take the time to craft a thoughtful and sincere acknowledgement section that reflects the support and collaborative spirit of your research endeavor.

5 Samples for Acknowledgment in Research Paper

Explore these 5 carefully crafted acknowledgment samples to effectively express gratitude in your research paper.

Sample 1: Acknowledgement for Collaborative Research:

In this sample, we showcase an acknowledgement that acknowledges the collaborative efforts of research collaborators and team members. It highlights the importance of recognizing the joint contributions made towards the research project.

“I would like to express my deepest appreciation to the members of the research team, [Collaborators’ Names], for their invaluable contributions and collaborative spirit throughout this research project. Our collective efforts and synergistic teamwork have significantly enhanced the quality and depth of this study. Each member’s unique expertise and perspectives have brought forth diverse insights, resulting in a more comprehensive and well-rounded analysis.

I am grateful for the dedication, commitment, and professionalism demonstrated by each team member. The constructive discussions, intellectual debates, and shared enthusiasm have fostered an enriching research environment that has truly pushed the boundaries of our collective knowledge. This research project stands as a testament to the power of collaboration and the collective pursuit of knowledge.”

Sample 2: Acknowledgement for Funding Support:

This sample acknowledgement focuses on acknowledging the financial support received for the research. It emphasizes the significance of recognizing funding agencies or organizations that have provided the necessary resources for the research to take place.

“I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to the funding agencies and organizations that have provided financial support for this research. Their generous contributions have made it possible to conduct this study and have significantly contributed to its successful completion. The financial support has allowed for the procurement of necessary research materials, access to specialized equipment, and the opportunity to engage in valuable research experiences.

I would like to express my appreciation to [Name of Funding Agency/Organization 1] for their generous grant, which has played a crucial role in supporting this research project. Their belief in the significance of this study and their commitment to advancing knowledge in this field have been instrumental in its realization.

Furthermore, I would like to acknowledge the support received from [Name of Funding Agency/Organization 2]. Their funding has been vital in facilitating data collection, analysis, and the dissemination of research findings. Their investment in this project has not only provided financial resources but has also validated the importance and potential impact of this research.”

Sample 3: Acknowledgement for Mentorship and Guidance:

Here, we present a sample acknowledgement that expresses gratitude towards mentors and advisors who have provided guidance and support throughout the research journey. It underscores the critical role of mentorship in academic and research endeavors.

“I am deeply grateful to my mentor, [Mentor’s Name], for their exceptional guidance and unwavering support throughout this research endeavor. Their expertise, insightful feedback, and continuous encouragement have been invaluable in shaping the direction and outcomes of this study. Their unwavering commitment to my academic growth and professional development has been truly inspiring.

I am indebted to [Mentor’s Name] for their generous allocation of time and resources, their willingness to share their wealth of knowledge, and their unwavering dedication to pushing me to new heights. Their mentorship has not only enriched the quality of this research but has also had a profound impact on my personal and intellectual growth. I am truly fortunate to have had the privilege of working under their guidance.”

Sample 4: Acknowledgement for Institutional Support:

In this sample, we illustrate an acknowledgement that acknowledges the support and resources provided by institutions. It emphasizes the institutional backing that has facilitated the research process and contributed to its success.

“I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to the faculty members and academic advisors who have provided guidance, feedback, and support throughout my academic journey. Their expertise, wisdom, and dedication to teaching and mentoring have been instrumental in shaping my research skills and scholarly pursuits.

I am grateful to [Name of Faculty Member/Advisor 1] for their unwavering support and invaluable insights. Their expertise and guidance have been critical in refining the research design, analyzing data, and interpreting findings. Their constructive feedback and intellectual discussions have truly enriched this study.

I would also like to acknowledge the contributions of [Name of Faculty Member/Advisor 2]. Their mentorship and encouragement have played a pivotal role in the development of my research abilities and have inspired me to reach for new heights. Their belief in my potential has been a constant source of motivation throughout this research journey.”

Sample 5: Acknowledgement for Peer Reviewers:

“I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the anonymous peer reviewers who have dedicated their time and expertise to provide valuable feedback and constructive criticism on this research paper. Their rigorous evaluation, insightful comments, and suggestions for improvement have immensely contributed to the quality and credibility of this work.

The meticulous review process conducted by the peer reviewers has helped shape and refine the content, methodology, and interpretation of this study. Their expertise in the field and their commitment to upholding scholarly standards have been crucial in ensuring the accuracy, validity, and relevance of the research findings.

I am sincerely grateful for the time and effort invested by each reviewer in thoroughly assessing this paper. Their detailed comments and recommendations have not only helped enhance the clarity and coherence of the manuscript but have also encouraged further reflection and refinement of the research.

The contributions of the peer reviewers are invaluable in the advancement of scientific knowledge and the improvement of academic publications. Their commitment to maintaining the rigor and integrity of the research process plays a pivotal role in fostering academic excellence and promoting the dissemination of high-quality research outcomes.”

When writing an acknowledgement in a research paper, begin by expressing gratitude to individuals, institutions, or organizations who have contributed to the research. Provide a sincere and concise acknowledgement, mentioning their specific contributions and the impact they made on the study.

While specific examples may vary depending on the research context, an acknowledgement section in a journal article typically acknowledges the contributions of individuals, funding sources, or institutions involved in the research process. It expresses gratitude for their support, guidance, or resources.

The purpose of the acknowledgement section in a research paper is to recognize and express gratitude to individuals or entities who have supported the research. It acknowledges their contributions, whether through funding, mentorship, technical assistance, data provision, or other forms of support.

When writing acknowledgements for a publication , start by identifying the key individuals or entities that have contributed to the research. Express gratitude for their support, mentioning specific contributions and the value they added to the study. Keep the acknowledgements concise and focused on the research context.

The acknowledgement section of a research paper should include acknowledgements for individuals or entities that have contributed to the research process. This may include mentors, advisors, funding agencies, research collaborators, or others who have provided valuable support, guidance, or resources.

While including an acknowledgement section in a research paper is not mandatory, it is a common practice in academic publishing. It provides an opportunity to acknowledge and appreciate the contributions of individuals or entities who have supported the research.

When writing an acknowledgements section for a literature review, acknowledge individuals or sources that have influenced and contributed to your understanding of the topic. Express gratitude for their insights, guidance, or resources that have shaped your literature review.

The terms “acknowledgement” and “acknowledgment” are both correct and interchangeable. The choice of spelling (with or without the “e”) may depend on regional or personal preferences.

To acknowledge a source in a research paper, use proper citation and referencing techniques according to the specific citation style guidelines. Include in-text citations and a corresponding entry in the reference list or bibliography to give credit to the original source.

Yes, you can acknowledge individuals who provided personal support in the acknowledgement section, such as family, friends, or loved ones. Recognize their emotional support, encouragement, or understanding during the research process.

Writing acknowledgements for a research paper allows you to express gratitude and acknowledge the invaluable contributions of individuals and institutions who have supported your work. By following the tips and utilizing the sample acknowledgements provided in this article, you can effectively and sincerely express your appreciation. Remember, acknowledgements are an opportunity to show your gratitude and give credit where it is due.

Acknowledgement for Paper Publication (10 Samples)

Acknowledgement for internship report: 10 samples and tips, leave a comment cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Essay Editor

How to Write Recommendations in Research Paper

Every research paper should end with a conclusion and recommendations concerning the main topic. How to write a recommendation report? What should be added in this part, and what – shouldn't be? What is the structure of this section? Having answered these questions, a person may write this fragment of the project perfectly. Let's get into this issue together.

Recommendations in a research paper: meaning and purpose

What is the purpose of recommendations? Why are they so important? Generally, it is the essential element of the research paper because it shows how deeply the material was investigated and analyzed. They are usually given in the form of suggestions based on the research findings and implications.

So, this part of the project deals with areas that occurred underexplored. The author may point out the direction of further possible research or the ways of improving the situation available.

Where to put recommendations?

As a rule, the recommendation section of a research paper is placed in the conclusion or discussion. However, it may depend on the sphere investigated. For example, in business papers, it is possible to write suggestions in an advisory report or set them into a separate segment.

Wherever being included, it should be complete, supporting implications and findings of the project. Clearness, possible practical application, and relevance are the characteristics of this block.

What should recommendations look like?

Your ideas and suggestions are to be well-organized and reasonable. Moreover, value for other researchers in this field should be presented. The approach to the section being solution-oriented, similar investigators will be able to achieve the same results or continue developing the brunch.

There may be three variants of recommendations:

• directives,
• obligations.

The choice depends on the problems and sphere discussed.

When writing your thoughts, try to use a bullet system, not a long straight text. Actionable words are also welcome.

Structure of recommendations

A recommendation section should contain such points as:

• research questions to be discussed;
• a summary of research results;
• their significance for practical application;
• strengths and weaknesses of the work;
• correlation to similar investigations in the sphere mentioned;
• suggestions for future research.

If speaking about a short version of the structure, it may consist of 3 parts:

• A research question.
• A conclusion.
• Recommendations.

As an example

Recommendations in research papers: key features

The whole investigation process should be systematic and logical; the results – objective, unprejudiced, and replicable. A researcher usually prepares a solid basis of evidence, which serves as a background for further recommendations.

They should be:

• achievable,
• meaningful,

If your ideas meet these requirements, be sure of their success.

How to write recommendations in research papers: a working guideline

Here we'd like to give some definite tips. Just follow the matter to make recommendations as smart and useful as possible.

• Use a clear and neutral language. Try to avoid both professional terms and jargon. Let your recommendation consist of one precise sentence.
• Organize all your thoughts in a coherent system. Define bullet points; think over relevant headings and subheadings.
• Make up measurable and specific recommendations. There should be a clear connection between the investigated issue and the solutions you point out. 
• Be sure that all your suggestions are in line with conclusions and research results. It is much better to recommend one efficient thing for all conclusions than to give a bunch of vague ones.
• Formulate only achievable solutions. All of them should be practical and easy-to-render.
• Analyze everything in complex. Give a recommendation, covering all important spheres, explored in your project.
• Avoid presenting new data in this segment. It should be based only on the researched phenomenon.
• Prepare the content, suitable for your audience (colleagues, teammates, companions in the researching field, etc.). Your ideas should make further investigation possible.
• Give an expanded explanation of your recommendations. Do not only list them but provide the readers with evidence, underlining their effectiveness.
• Do not minimize your achievements and merits in the investigated field. Just accentuate that your work is like a takeoff runway for further work.
• Define and analyze the lack of information or possibilities, concerning your research, if there are any. It will testify to your critical thinking skills.
• Finish this part of the research paper with a summary, highlighting the significance and practical value of your suggestions.

Except for the paper segment filling, be sure that you know the standards of recommendation report format. You may find them in local institution guidelines. 

Finally, you have enough information to create effective and well-structured recommendations for your research paper. And if you still need any inspiration, visit the essay generator Aithor . It is free and easy to use.

Related articles

How to write essay introductions.

When you acquaint two strangers, you introduce one person to another, right? The same thing concerns the text and any material you wish to present to your reader or listener. At that moment an introduction composed of letters comes onto the stage and plays its leading part. Being the first thing the audience is faced with, an essay introduction should catch a person's attention, give information about the topic and idea the author discusses, and prepare him for the following comprehension. How ...

How to Write a Business Report With Example

One of the most effective ways to convey essential information is through a business report. This article will guide you through the purpose of a business report, provide valuable writing tips, outline how to format your business report correctly and offer an example for better understanding. What is the Purpose of a Business Report? A business report serves as a critical tool for decision-making within an organization. Its primary purpose is to analyze a particular situation or issue, evalua ...

How to Write a Successful Letter of Motivation

Every person wishing to get to College or University faces a real challenge – writing a motivation letter. Through lack of knowledge, the process may seem quite stressful and backbreaking. But the devil is not so black as he is painted. Just calm down and let's start. Today we will: 1. discuss the structure of a motivation letter and its peculiarities in terms of sense and format; 2. accentuate the moments, colleges pay special attention to; and 3. give some tips on how to create a real suc ...

Classification Essay Guide

A classification essay is a powerful tool in academic writing, enabling writers to break down broad topics into organized categories for better understanding. This guide will show you how to write a classification essay, from designing a perfect outline to selecting compelling topics. Continue reading to learn how to create a clear, insightful, and engaging classification essay. What is a Classification Essay? A Brief Overview A classification essay is a type of academic writing that involves ...

Essay Format Tips from an English Teacher

Writing a solid and well-crafted essay is crucial for students and researchers, as it involves presenting arguments clearly and succinctly. Whether you are writing a paper for an assignment, a scientific journal, or a personal statement, understanding the correct essay format is pivotal. This meticulously collated guide covers key features of essay formatting and provides tips to refine your writing. What is an Essay Format? An essay format is a blueprint for shaping your written assignment, ...

Diagnostic Essay Writing Guide and Outline Sample

Imagine stepping into a classroom on the first day and being asked to write an essay. This exercise, commonly referred to as a diagnostic essay, is a common tool used by instructors to gauge their students' writing proficiency. Interestingly, in a study exploring the effectiveness of evaluation papers, over 70% of participants reported that these tasks significantly improved their understanding of their writing strengths and challenges. This finding underscores the assessment assignment's role i ...

How to Write a Good Conclusion For a Lab Report

Writing a good conclusion for your science lab report can be the difference between a good grade and a great one. It's your last chance to show you understand the experiment and why it matters. This article will help you learn how to write a lab conclusion that sums up your work and shows your teacher that you understood what you did. What Should Be in Your Lab Report Conclusion? A good lab report conclusion wraps up your lab work in a neat package. When you're thinking about how to write a c ...

How to Write a Reaction Paper Nice and Easy

In the world of student home assignments there lives an interesting and creative project, a reaction essay, by name. It deals with the person's feedback on a movie, book, article, a piece of work, evoking thoughts and emotions. What is the essence of this paper? How to write a perfect one? Let's get acquainted with this issue. At first, imagine the situation when you've just watched a deep philosophical movie or read an article that cut you to the very heart. You feel like thunderstruck. You ne ...

How to Write A Research Paper From Topic To Final Draft

Navigating the journey of writing a research paper can be daunting but achievable with a structured approach.

contributed

Each step is crucial, from understanding your assignment to submitting a well-crafted document. This guide aims to streamline the process, providing clear directions to enhance your research and writing skills.

Topic Selection

Understanding the assignment.

Start by comprehensively reviewing your assignment to grasp the required scope and objectives. This process, like what writers do when you pay for paper writing, ensures that your chosen topic meets all academic criteria and aligns with the assignment’s goals.

Brainstorming Ideas

Generate potential topics through brainstorming, focusing on areas that spark your interest. Just like when you pay for paper , this initial enthusiasm will fuel your research and writing phases, making the process more engaging.

Preliminary Research

Assess the availability of sources for your potential topics. This step is vital to ensure enough material supports your paper. Narrow your focus based on these findings to refine your topic choice.

Finalizing the Topic

Select a topic that is specific, relevant, and researchable. Confirm this choice with your instructor to ensure it fits the assignment’s requirements.

Conducting Research

Creating a research plan.

Develop a clear plan with set goals and a timeline. This will guide your research activities and help you stay on track, ensuring a thorough investigation of your chosen topic.

Identifying Reliable Sources

To gather credible information, differentiate between primary and secondary sources. Review scholarly materials from academic journals and books and evaluate each source’s credibility.

Note-taking Strategies

Organize your notes effectively using digital tools or index cards. This organization is crucial for managing the information you’ll gather and for later reference during writing.

Managing Citations

Maintain meticulous records of your sources to avoid plagiarism. Use tools like Zotero or EndNote for efficient citation management, ensuring all references are correctly noted.

Developing a Thesis Statement

Defining a thesis statement.

A thesis statement is your research paper’s backbone, outlining the main argument or claim. It sets the direction for your paper and focuses your research.

Crafting a Strong Thesis

Your thesis should be clear, concise, and arguable. Reflect on examples of both strong and weak thesis statements to ensure yours stands firm.

Refining the Thesis Statement

Based on your research findings, revise your thesis as necessary to ensure it remains aligned with your paper’s evolving content.

Creating an Outline

Purpose of an outline.

An outline organizes your thoughts and structures your argument. It is essential to maintain a clear direction and ensure that each part of your paper contributes to your overall thesis – this is something experts pay a lot of attention to when you pay for custom research paper.

Structure of an Outline

To effectively plan the introduction, body, and conclusion sections, use a hierarchical structure with Roman numerals, letters, and numbers.

Detailed Outline Example

I. Introduction 

A. Hook: Interesting fact or statistic 

B. Background information on the topic 

C. Thesis statement: Assertive and clearly defined

II. Body 

A. Main point 1: Supporting evidence and analysis 

B. Main point 2: Further evidence and contrasting viewpoints 

C. Main point 3: Additional analysis and how it supports your thesis

III. Conclusion 

A. Summary of main points 

B. Restatement of the thesis in light of the discussion 

C. Closing thought or call to action

This structure ensures each section contributes towards supporting your thesis statement.

Writing the First Draft

Writing the introduction.

Start with a compelling hook and introduce your thesis and main points. This sets the tone and direction for the entire paper.

Developing Body Paragraphs

To present and analyze your research, follow a structured format within your paragraphs. Use transitions to connect ideas smoothly, maintaining a logical flow.

Writing the Conclusion

Summarize the main points and restate your thesis, reflecting on the implications of your findings. End with a strong closing statement to leave a lasting impression.

Maintaining a Consistent Writing Process

Effective writing involves staying focused and motivated. Set specific goals and adhere to a schedule to manage your workload. Incorporate regular breaks to prevent burnout and continuously revise your work to enhance clarity and coherence. This routine ensures steady progress and high-quality results in your research paper.

Revising and Editing

Self-revision techniques.

Self-revision is a critical step in refining your research paper. Focus on content clarity, coherence, and consistency. Evaluate the logical flow and organization to ensure that every section effectively contributes to your argument. This involves tightening your narrative, sharpening your points, and ensuring clear thesis communication.

Peer Review

The peer review process offers invaluable insights. Having classmates or colleagues review your draft can provide fresh perspectives and important feedback. Be open to receiving constructive criticism and prepared to offer thoughtful feedback on others’ work. This collaborative process can help identify overlooked weaknesses and opportunities to strengthen your argument.

Professional Editing

Consider using professional editing services to ensure your paper meets the highest academic standards. Tools like Grammarly and the Hemingway App can assist in polishing grammar, enhancing readability, and eliminating stylistic errors.

Finalizing the Research Paper

Formatting the paper.

Proper formatting must adhere to specific academic styles like APA, MLA, or Chicago. Ensure your paper’s structure is correct, including the title page, headers, footnotes, and bibliography. 

This not only contributes to the paper’s professionalism but also to its readability and compliance with academic standards.

Proofreading

A thorough final proofread is essential to catch any remaining errors. Effective proofreading strategies include reading aloud and focusing on one type of error at a time, such as punctuation, grammar, or spelling. This detailed review ensures that the final document is polished and free of errors that could distract from the content.

Submitting the Paper

Before submitting, double-check the submission guidelines to ensure your paper complies with all requirements. Submit your work on time and in the correct format to avoid last-minute stress and potential penalties.

In conclusion, embracing thorough research, systematic organization, meticulous revision, and careful proofreading can significantly enhance the quality of your paper. 

Remember, resources online are available to assist you, offering everything from pay-for-research paper services to expert guidance. Following these structured steps, you can develop a strong research paper that effectively communicates your findings and stands out academically.

TeachThought is an organization dedicated to innovation in education through the growth of outstanding teachers.

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

How to Write an Abstract in Research Papers (with Examples)

An abstract in research papers is a keyword-rich summary usually not exceeding 200-350 words. It can be considered the “face” of research papers because it creates an initial impression on the readers. While searching databases (such as PubMed) for research papers, a title is usually the first selection criterion for readers. If the title matches their search criteria, then the readers read the abstract, which sets the tone of the paper. Titles and abstracts are often the only freely available parts of research papers on journal websites. The pdf versions of full articles need to be purchased. Journal reviewers are often provided with only the title and abstract before they agree to review the complete paper. [ 1]  

Abstracts in research papers provide readers with a quick insight into what the paper is about to help them decide whether they want to read it further or not. Abstracts are the main selling points of articles and therefore should be carefully drafted, accurately highlighting the important aspects. [ 2]  

This article will help you identify the important components and provide tips on how to write an abstract in research papers effectively

What is an Abstract?  

An abstract in research papers can be defined as a synopsis of the paper. It should be clear, direct, self-contained, specific, unbiased, and concise. These summaries are published along with the complete research paper and are also submitted to conferences for consideration for presentation.  

Abstracts are of four types and journals can follow any of these formats: [ 2]  

• Structured  
• Unstructured  
• Descriptive  
• Informative  

Structured abstracts are used by most journals because they are more organized and have clear sections, usually including introduction/background; objective; design, settings, and participants (or materials and methods); outcomes and measures; results; and conclusion. These headings may differ based on the journal or the type of paper. Clinical trial abstracts should include the essential items mentioned in the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials) guidelines.  

Figure 1. Structured abstract example [3] 

Unstructured abstracts are common in social science, humanities, and physical science journals. They usually have one paragraph and no specific structure or subheadings. These abstracts are commonly used for research papers that don’t report original work and therefore have a more flexible and narrative style.  

Figure 2. Unstructured abstract example [3] 

Descriptive abstracts are short (75–150 words) and provide an outline with only the most important points of research papers. They are used for shorter articles such as case reports, reviews, and opinions where space is at a premium, and rarely for original investigations. These abstracts don’t present the results but mainly list the topics covered.  

Here’s a sample abstract . [ 4]  

“Design of a Radio-Based System for Distribution Automation”  

A new survey by the Maryland Public Utilities Commission suggests that utilities have not effectively explained to consumers the benefits of smart meters. The two-year study of 86,000 consumers concludes that the long-term benefits of smart meters will not be realized until consumers understand the benefits of shifting some of their power usage to off-peak hours in response to the data they receive from their meters. The study presents recommendations for utilities and municipal governments to improve customer understanding of how to use the smart meters effectively.  

Keywords: smart meters, distribution systems, load, customer attitudes, power consumption, utilities  

Informative abstracts (structured or unstructured) give a complete detailed summary, including the main results, of the research paper and may or may not have subsections.   

Figure 3. Informative abstract example [5] 

Purpose of Abstracts in Research    

Abstracts in research have two main purposes—selection and indexing. [ 6,7]  

• Selection : Abstracts allow interested readers to quickly decide the relevance of a paper to gauge if they should read it completely.   
• Indexing : Most academic journal databases accessed through libraries enable you to search abstracts, allowing for quick retrieval of relevant articles and avoiding unnecessary search results. Therefore, abstracts must necessarily include the keywords that researchers may use to search for articles.  

Thus, a well-written, keyword-rich abstract can p ique readers’ interest and curiosity and help them decide whether they want to read the complete paper. It can also direct readers to articles of potential clinical and research interest during an online search.  

Contents of Abstracts in Research  

Abstracts in research papers summarize the main points of an article and are broadly categorized into four or five sections. Here are some details on how to write an abstract .   

Introduction/Background and/or Objectives  

This section should provide the following information:  

• What is already known about the subject?  
• What is not known about the subject or what does the study aim to investigate?  

The hypothesis or research question and objectives should be mentioned here. The Background sets the context for the rest of the paper and its length should be short so that the word count could be saved for the Results or other information directly pertaining to the study. The objective should be written in present or past simple tense.  

Examples:  

The antidepressant efficacy of desvenlafaxine (DV) has been established in 8-week, randomized controlled trials. The present study examined the continued efficacy of DV across 6 months of maintenance treatment . [ 1]  

Objective: To describe gastric and breast cancer risk estimates for individuals with CDH1 variants.  

Design, Setting, and Participants (or Materials and Methods)  

This section should provide information on the processes used and should be written in past simple tense because the process is already completed.  

A few important questions to be answered include:  

• What was the research design and setting?  
• What was the sample size and how were the participants sampled?  
• What treatments did the participants receive?  
• What were the data collection and data analysis dates?  
• What was the primary outcome measure?  

Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated for each cancer type and used to calculate cumulative risks and risks per decade of life up to age 80 years.  

This section, written in either present or past simple tense, should be the longest and should describe the main findings of the study. Here’s an example of how descriptive the sentences should be:  

Avoid: Response rates differed significantly between diabetic and nondiabetic patients.  

Better: The response rate was higher in nondiabetic than in diabetic patients (49% vs 30%, respectively; P<0.01).  

This section should include the following information:  

• Total number of patients (included, excluded [exclusion criteria])  
• Primary and secondary outcomes, expressed in words, and supported by numerical data  
• Data on adverse outcomes  

Example: [ 8]  

In total, 10.9% of students were reported to have favorable study skills. The minimum score was found for preparation for examination domain. Also, a significantly positive correlation was observed between students’ study skills and their Grade Point Average (GPA) of previous term (P=0.001, r=0.269) and satisfaction with study skills (P=0.001, r=0.493).  

Conclusions  

Here, authors should mention the importance of their findings and also the practical and theoretical implications, which would benefit readers referring to this paper for their own research. Present simple tense should be used here.  

Examples: [ 1,8]  

The 9.3% prevalence of bipolar spectrum disorders in students at an arts university is substantially higher than general population estimates. These findings strengthen the oft-expressed hypothesis linking creativity with affective psychopathology.  

The findings indicated that students’ study skills need to be improved. Given the significant relationship between study skills and GPA, as an index of academic achievement, and satisfaction, it is necessary to promote the students’ study skills. These skills are suggested to be reinforced, with more emphasis on weaker domains.  

When to Write an Abstract  

In addition to knowing how to write an abstract , you should also know when to write an abstract . It’s best to write abstracts once the paper is completed because this would make it easier for authors to extract relevant parts from every section.  

Abstracts are usually required for: [ 7]    

• submitting articles to journals  
• applying for research grants   
• writing book proposals  
• completing and submitting dissertations  
• submitting proposals for conference papers  

Mostly, the author of the entire work writes the abstract (the first author, in works with multiple authors). However, there are professional abstracting services that hire writers to draft abstracts of other people’s work.   

How to Write an Abstract (Step-by-Step Process)  

Here are some key steps on how to write an abstract in research papers: [ 9]  

• Write the abstract after you’ve finished writing your paper.  
• Select the major objectives/hypotheses and conclusions from your Introduction and Conclusion sections.  
• Select key sentences from your Methods section.  
• Identify the major results from the Results section.  
• Paraphrase or re-write the sentences selected in steps 2, 3, and 4 in your own words into one or two paragraphs in the following sequence: Introduction/Objective, Methods, Results, and Conclusions. The headings may differ among journals, but the content remains the same.  
• Ensure that this draft does not contain: a.   new information that is not present in the paper b.   undefined abbreviations c.   a discussion of previous literature or reference citations d.   unnecessary details about the methods used  
• Remove all extra information and connect your sentences to ensure that the information flows well, preferably in the following order: purpose; basic study design, methodology and techniques used; major findings; summary of your interpretations, conclusions, and implications. Use section headings for structured abstracts.  
• Ensure consistency between the information presented in the abstract and the paper.  
• Check to see if the final abstract meets the guidelines of the target journal (word limit, type of abstract, recommended subheadings, etc.) and if all the required information has been included.  

Choosing Keywords for Abstracts  

Keywords [ 2] are the important and repeatedly used words and phrases in research papers and can help indexers and search engines find papers relevant to your requirements. Easy retrieval would help in reaching a wider audience and eventually gain more citations. In the fields of medicine and health, keywords should preferably be chosen from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) list of the US National Library of Medicine because they are used for indexing. These keywords need to be different from the words in the main title (automatically used for indexing) but can be variants of the terms/phrases used in the title, abstract, and the main text. Keywords should represent the content of your manuscript and be specific to your subject area.  

Basic tips for authors [ 10,11]  

• Read through your paper and highlight key terms or phrases that are most relevant and frequently used in your field, to ensure familiarity.  
• Several journals provide instructions about the length (eg, 3 words in a keyword) and maximum number of keywords allowed and other related rules. Create a list of keywords based on these instructions and include specific phrases containing 2 to 4 words. A longer string of words would yield generic results irrelevant to your field.  
• Use abbreviations, acronyms, and initializations if these would be more familiar.  
• Search with your keywords to ensure the results fit with your article and assess how helpful they would be to readers.  
• Narrow down your keywords to about five to ten, to ensure accuracy.  
• Finalize your list based on the maximum number allowed.  

  Few examples: [ 12]  

Important Tips for Writing an Abstract  

Here are a few tips on how to write an abstract to ensure that your abstract is complete, concise, and accurate. [ 1,2]  

• Write the abstract last.  
• Follow journal-specific formatting guidelines or Instructions to Authors strictly to ensure acceptance for publication.  
• Proofread the final draft meticulously to avoid grammatical or typographical errors.  
• Ensure that the terms or data mentioned in the abstract are consistent with the main text.  
• Include appropriate keywords at the end.

Do not include:  

• New information  
• Text citations to references  
• Citations to tables and figures  
• Generic statements  
• Abbreviations unless necessary, like a trial or study name  

Key Takeaways    

Here’s a quick snapshot of all the important aspects of how to write an abstract . [2]

• An abstract in research is a summary of the paper and describes only the main aspects. Typically, abstracts are about 200-350 words long.  
• Abstracts are of four types—structured, unstructured, descriptive, and informative.  
• Abstracts should be simple, clear, concise, independent, and unbiased (present both favorable and adverse outcomes).  
• They should adhere to the prescribed journal format, including word limits, section headings, number of keywords, fonts used, etc.  
• The terminology should be consistent with the main text.   
• Although the section heading names may differ for journals, every abstract should include a background and objective, analysis methods, primary results, and conclusions.  
• Nonstandard abbreviations, references, and URLs shouldn’t be included.  
• Only relevant and specific keywords should be used to ensure focused searches and higher citation frequency.  
• Abstracts should be written last after completing the main paper.  

Frequently Asked Questions   

Q1. Do all journals have different guidelines for abstracts?  

A1. Yes, all journals have their own specific guidelines for writing abstracts; a few examples are given in the following table. [ 6,13,14,15]  

Q2. What are the common mistakes to avoid when writing an abstract?  

A2. Listed below are a few mistakes that authors may make inadvertently while writing abstracts.  

• Copying sentences from the paper verbatim  

An abstract is a summary, which should be created by paraphrasing your own work or writing in your own words. Extracting sentences from every section and combining them into one paragraph cannot be considered summarizing.  

• Not adhering to the formatting guidelines  

Journals have special instructions for writing abstracts, such as word limits and section headings. These should be followed strictly to avoid rejections.  

• Not including the right amount of details in every section  

Both too little and too much information could discourage readers. For instance, if the Background has very little information, the readers may not get sufficient context to appreciate your research. Similarly, incomplete information in the Methods and a text-heavy Results section without supporting numerical data may affect the credibility of your research.  

• Including citations, standard abbreviations, and detailed measurements  

Typically, abstracts shouldn’t include these elements—citations, URLs, and abbreviations. Only nonstandard abbreviations are allowed or those that would be more familiar to readers than the expansions.  

• Including new information  

Abstracts should strictly include only the same information mentioned in the main text. Any new information should first be added to the text and then to the abstract only if necessary or if permitted by the word limit.  

• Not including keywords  

Keywords are essential for indexing and searching and should be included to increase the frequency of retrieval and citation.  

Q3. What is the difference between abstracts in research papers and conference abstracts? [16]  

A3. The table summarizes the main differences between research and conference abstracts.  

  Thus, abstracts are essential “trailers” that can market your research to a wide audience. The better and more complete the abstract the more are the chances of your paper being read and cited. By following our checklist and ensuring that all key elements are included, you can create a well-structured abstract that summarizes your paper accurately.  

References  

• Andrade C. How to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation. Indian J Psychiatry . 2011; 53(2):172-175. Accessed June 14, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3136027/  
• Tullu MS. Writing the title and abstract for a research paper: Being concise, precise, and meticulous is the key. 2019; 13(Suppl 1): S12-S17. Accessed June 14, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6398294/  
• Zawia J. Writing an Academic Paper? Get to know Abstracts vs. Structured Abstracts. Medium. Published October 16, 2023. Accessed June 16, 2024. https://medium.com/@jamala.zawia/writing-an-academic-paper-get-to-know-abstracts-vs-structured-abstracts-11ed86888367  
• Markel M and Selber S. Technical Communication, 12 th edition. 2018; pp. 482. Bedford/St Martin’s.  
• Abstracts. Arkansas State University. Accessed June 17, 2024. https://www.astate.edu/a/global-initiatives/online/a-state-online-services/online-writing-center/resources/How%20to%20Write%20an%20Abstract1.pdf  
• AMA Manual of Style. 11 th edition. Oxford University Press.  
• Writing an Abstract. The University of Melbourne. Accessed June 16, 2024. https://services.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/471274/Writing_an_Abstract_Update_051112.pdf  
• 10 Good Abstract Examples that will Kickstart Your Brain. Kibin Essay Writing Blog. Published April 5, 2017. Accessed June 17, 2024. https://www.kibin.com/essay-writing-blog/10-good-abstract-examples/  
• A 10-step guide to make your research paper abstract more effective. Editage Insights. Published October 16, 2013. Accessed June 17, 2024. https://www.editage.com/insights/a-10-step-guide-to-make-your-research-paper-abstract-more-effective  
• Using keywords to write your title and abstract. Taylor & Francis Author Services. Accessed June 15, 2024. https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your-research/writing-your-paper/using-keywords-to-write-title-and-abstract/  
• How to choose and use keywords in research papers. Paperpal by Editage blog. Published March 10, 2023. Accessed June 17, 2024. https://paperpal.com/blog/researcher-resources/phd-pointers/how-to-choose-and-use-keywords-in-research-papers  
• Title, abstract and keywords. Springer. Accessed June 16, 2024. https://www.springer.com/it/authors-editors/authorandreviewertutorials/writing-a-journal-manuscript/title-abstract-and-keywords/10285522  
• Abstract and keywords guide. APA Style, 7 th edition. Accessed June 18, 2024. https://apastyle.apa.org/instructional-aids/abstract-keywords-guide.pdf  
• Abstract guidelines. American Society for Microbiology. Accessed June 18, 2024. https://asm.org/events/asm-microbe/present/abstract-guidelines  
• Guidelines for conference abstracts. The Lancet. Accessed June 16, 2024. https://www.thelancet.com/pb/assets/raw/Lancet/pdfs/Abstract_Guidelines_2013.pdf  
• Is a conference abstract the same as a paper abstract? Global Conference Alliance, Inc. Accessed June 18, 2024. https://globalconference.ca/is-a-conference-abstract-the-same-as-a-paper-abstract/  

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• What are Journal Guidelines on Using Generative AI Tools
• How to Write a High-Quality Conference Paper
• Should You Use AI Tools like ChatGPT for Academic Writing?
• What is the Importance of a Concept Paper and How to Write It 

How to Write Dissertation Acknowledgements?

Top 7 ai tools for research 2024, you may also like, maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., how to structure an essay, leveraging generative ai to enhance student understanding of..., how to write a good hook for essays,..., addressing peer review feedback and mastering manuscript revisions..., how paperpal can boost comprehension and foster interdisciplinary..., what is the importance of a concept paper..., how to write the first draft of a..., mla works cited page: format, template & examples.

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• For authors
• Browse by collection
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Volume 14, Issue 7
• Suicidal behaviours and associated factors among medical students in Bangladesh: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis (2000–2024)
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2832-7254 Mantaka Rahman 1 , 2 ,
• http://orcid.org/0009-0003-0467-3771 M H M Imrul Kabir 3 ,
• http://orcid.org/0009-0006-5683-0013 Sharmin Sultana 1 ,
• Afroza Tamanna Shimu 4 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8880-6524 Mark D Griffiths 5
• 1 International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research Bangladesh , Dhaka , Bangladesh
• 2 MSc Student, Applied Statistics and Data Science , East West University , Dhaka , Bangladesh
• 3 Department of Mathematical and Physical Science (MPS) , East West University , Dhaka , Bangladesh
• 4 Green Life Medical College and Hospital , Dhanmondi , Bangladesh
• 5 Department of Psychology , Nottingham Trent University , Nottingham , UK
• Correspondence to Dr Mantaka Rahman; drmantaka.icddrb{at}gmail.com

Introduction Suicidal behaviour is common among medical students, and the prevalence rates might vary across various regions. Even though various systematic reviews have been conducted to assess suicidal behaviours among medical students in general, no review has ever assessed or carried out a sub-analysis to show the burden of suicidal behaviours among Bangladeshi medical students.

Methods and analysis The research team will search the PubMed (Medline), Scopus, PsycINFO and Google Scholar databases for papers published between January 2000 and May 2024 using truncated and phrase-searched keywords and relevant subject headings. Cross-sectional studies, case series, case reports and cohort studies published in English will be included in the review. Review papers, commentaries, preprints, meeting abstracts, protocols and letters will be excluded. Two reviewers will screen the retrieved papers independently. Disagreements between two reviewers will be resolved by a third reviewer. Exposure will be different factors that initiate suicidal behaviours among medical students. The prevalence of suicidal behaviours (suicidal ideation, suicide plans and suicide attempts) in addition to the factors responsible, and types of suicide method will be extracted. Narrative synthesis and meta-analysis will be conducted and the findings will be summarised. For enhanced visualisation of the included studies, forest plots will be constructed. Heterogeneity among the studies will be assessed and sensitivity analysis will be conducted based on study quality. Included studies will be critically appraised using Joanna Briggs’s Institutional critical appraisal tools developed for different study designs.

Ethics and dissemination The study will synthesise evidence extracted from published studies. As the review does not involve the collection of primary data, ethical approval will not be required. Findings will be disseminated orally (eg, conferences, webinars) and in writing (ie, journal paper).

PROSPERO registration number CDR 42023493595.

• meta-analysis
• suicide & self-harm

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ .

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-083720

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

The present study will be a rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on the prevalence of suicidal behaviours and associated factors among Bangladeshi medical students.

The Cochrane Handbook’s strict methodology will be followed, and the results will be published in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

The review will only include peer-reviewed papers containing primary data reporting Bangladeshi medical students in the selection of the studies.

Most studies will comprise self-reported data, which are subject to various methodological biases.

The potential low quality of the individual studies may limit the conclusions that can be made.

Introduction

Suicidal behaviour is a broad term that includes three subcategories (1) suicide ideation (SI), which refers to thoughts of wanting to end one’s life; (2) suicide plan (SP), which refers to the formulation of a specific method to die and (3) suicide attempt (SA), which refers to engaging in potentially self-injurious behaviour with at least some intent to die or with a non-fatal outcome. 1 2 According to the World Health Organization (WHO), approximately 77% of suicides occur in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Suicide rates in Southeast Asia (10.2 per 100,000) were higher than the global average (9.0 per 100,000) in 2019 due to population growth and population age structure. 3 Suicide ranks as the fourth largest cause of death for those between the ages of 15 and 29 years and claims more lives annually than HIV, malaria, breast cancer, war and murdered individuals. 4

According to the 2022 Bangladesh Education Statistics, out of 174,888 students and 826 institutions, 28.93% of students were admitted to medical college, and 4.11% to dental college, with approximately two-thirds being female (64.42%). 5 Bangladesh is considered as a hub of medical studies in south-east Asia. However, medical students appear to have had greater suicide rates (up to 3–5 times higher) than the general community over the past 130 years, with some estimates being even higher. 6 7 In addition, systematic reviews and meta-analyses have reported a high prevalence of suicidal behaviours among medical students ranging from 3.8% to 18.7%, compared with university student’s 9.0%–9.7%. 1 8 9 Although, the number of suicides among medical students has been little studied globally, 10 surveys show that Bangladeshi public and private medical students’ suicidal ideation ranging from 23.8% to 27.4%, 11 12 which is of concern. However, according to several study findings, medical students in Austria, Turkey, Pakistan and China had, respectively, rates of suicide thoughts and attempts within a year of 11.3% and 0.3%, 12% and 2.1%, 35.6% and 4.8%, and 8.2% and 4.3%. 13 14

Such rates may be because medical school teaching and learning environments are highly competitive, with high expectations for achievement from students, teachers and parents alike. Furthermore, since many psychiatric illnesses among adults begin around the age of 24 years (when medical students are at the height of their training), it is possible that the high incidence of psychiatric disorders among medical students may result from this. 13 One study reported that 33.5% of Bangladeshi medical students had poor mental health status, 15 and another reported that 39.1% of Bangladeshi medical students had various degrees of depression. 16 In contrast, a web-based study reported 80.2% of Bangladeshi medical students had moderate to severe depression symptoms. 17 In other countries, a systematic review reported that the prevalence of depression among medical students in China was 32.74%, in Turkey 39%, in Nepal 29.9%, in Egypt 65% and outside North America 7.7%–65.5%. 18–20 Psychiatric disorders (primarily depression) contribute greatly to suicidal behaviour and are among the most important risk factors for suicidality.

Throughout the world, the study of medicine is seen as being intrinsically difficult and demanding 21 due to the pressures of the classroom, overexpectations, 13 the demands of the workplace, burn-out and depression (particularly among younger doctors), as well as the ongoing trouble of balancing job, family and financial obligations. 7 In addition, other factors that contribute to suicidal behaviour among medical students include chronic stress, 22 poor mental health status, 15 academic stress, familial pressure, depression, 10 relationship status, drug addiction, alcohol use, 12 online addictions, 23 sleeping difficulties, thoughts of dropping out, physical or sexual assault, 1 parenting style 24 and family history. 10 11

The under-reporting of suicides is a well-known phenomenon in the field of suicidology, potentially complicating the accurate estimation of medical student suicide rates. 25 A meta-analysis of the prevalence of suicide behaviours among Bangladeshi medical students has never been previously conducted, even though numerous reviews have been carried out evaluating suicidal behaviours among medical students and university students more generally. Although numerous studies have reported on suicide behaviours in Bangladesh, as aforementioned, no meta-analysis has previously examined the factors contributing to suicidal behaviours among medical students in Bangladesh.

Aim and research question

The overall aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to meta-analyse the prevalence of suicidal behaviours (suicidal ideation, suicidal attempts and suicidal plans), factors associated with suicidal behaviour and methods used for suicidal behaviours among the medical students of Bangladesh. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) mnemonic, Condition, Context and Population, 26 was used to formulate the research question. Here, the condition is suicidal behaviour (SI, SP and SA), the context is Bangladesh and the population is Bangladeshi Medical students. The research question is ‘What is the prevalence of suicidal behaviours (SI, SP and SA) among medical students of Bangladesh?’

Study design

This systematic review protocol will be conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) Protocols 2015 guidelines 27 and the Meta-analysis of observational studies in Epidemiology guidelines for systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. 28 The protocol has been registered in PROSPERO (CDR 42023493595).

Eligibility criteria

The study will include all empirical studies with available full texts, published from 1 January 2000 to May 2024. This time frame ensures a comprehensive inclusion of recent research while capturing a substantial body of literature for the systematic review and meta-analysis. All papers published in English with human participants will be considered. Cross-sectional studies, case series, case reports and cohort studies will all be included in this study. Studies concerning university students who did not specify the exact number of medical students who had suicidal behaviour will be excluded. Review papers, study protocols, books, chapters, preprints, meeting abstracts, commentaries, letters and editorials will also be excluded.

Information sources

Using comprehensive and advanced search strategies, the research team will search the major databases including Medline (PubMed), Scopus, PsycINFO and Google Scholar. The search strategy will include terms related to exposure and outcome, and built-in filters in the databases will be used to customise the final search output.

Search strategy

A comprehensive search strategy has been developed in consultation with an expert systematic reviewer which will be adapted for selected bibliographic databases in combination with a combination of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), keyword terms and filters ( Figure 1 ) using the VOSviewer software tool visualising bibliometric networks. 29 The tentative search strategy for different databases is presented in Table 1 summarising the key search terms for population and outcome. All studies published in English will be considered for inclusion in the meta-analyses.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Cluster analysis showing searched keywords from PubMed database.

• View inline

Key terms which will be used for developing search strategy

Condition/domain being studied

The conditions being studied include suicidal behaviours and medical students from Bangladesh.

Population/participants

The review will include studies of all ethnicities, genders and all over the country including medical students (bachelor in medicine, bachelor in dental surgery), undergraduate medical students, intern doctors, preclinical students, clinical students, and residency or non-residency medical graduate trainees.

Being a medical student.

Comparator(s)/control

Not applicable. There will be no comparison group.

Understanding suicidal behaviour and associated factors among Bangladeshi medical students.

Exclusion criteria

The types of output that will be excluded include:

Review papers, study protocols, books, chapters, preprints, meeting abstracts, commentaries, letters and editorials.

Full-text inaccessible studies.

Papers not published in the English language.

Studies regarding university students without specifying the exact number of medical students with suicidal behaviour.

Any relevant studies published before 1 January 2000.

The population/participants that will be excluded include:

Non-medical students.

Medical students outside Bangladesh.

The primary outcome will be to identify the prevalence of suicidal behaviours and its associated factors. The secondary outcome will be to address the methods used for suicide (hanging, poisoning, etc.) among the medical students of Bangladesh.

Study records

Data management.

EndNote V.21.0 reference management software (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, USA) will be used to compile the papers retrieved from the comprehensive literature search. 30 The search results from the databases and relevant references (if needed) will be combined and duplicate articles will be removed. The remaining papers will be exported to the web-based application ‘Rayyan QCRI’ to facilitate article screening and collaboration among the reviewers. 31 Citation abstracts and full-text papers will be uploaded to Rayyan web application.

Selection process

To identify the studies that qualify, two independent reviewers (SS, ATS) independently checked the titles and abstracts of all retrieved papers. Then, for the final inclusion, both the independent reviewers will examine the full-text papers of the qualifying research. A third reviewer will settle any disagreements that the two reviewers have. There will be a log of the reasons for exclusion. PRISMA flow diagrams ( Figure 2 ) will be used to illustrate a summary of the research paper list for inclusion and exclusion. 32

PRISMA flow diagram of study selection process. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

Data extraction

Data extraction will be conducted using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet (Microsoftn, Washington, USA). To present individual study characteristics and participant characteristics, descriptive statistics and qualitative narrative analysis will be used. To determine the pooled prevalence of suicidal behaviours, a random effect meta-analysis will be performed using R statistical package V.4.3.2 in-built meta-packages based on the number of students who have various suicidal behaviours. Assuming that the selected studies will be convenience samples from a larger population, a random-effects model will be used to generalise findings beyond the included studies. 33

Risk of bias (quality) assessment

The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist will be used to assess study quality. 34 35 The Cochran’s Q statistic and the 𝘐 2 statistic will be used to assess between-study heterogeneity. The studies’ heterogeneity will be examined using prediction intervals for a comprehensive assessment. The results will be displayed on forest plots, and funnel plots will be created to visually assess publication bias. Two review authors will independently assess the risk of bias in studies being considered after full-text review. Disagreements between the review authors over the risk of bias in particular studies will be resolved by discussion, with the involvement of a third review author where necessary.

Strategy for data synthesis

An electronic search will be performed using PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO and Google Scholar databases combining the main key elements of the Population, Exposure, Comparator and Outcomes inclusion criteria. To develop the search strategy, a list of relevant index terms and keywords will be derived from the existing database, relevant literature and combined Boolean operators, truncations and explode functions. In consultation with experts in systematic review, the search strategy will be refined accordingly. A total of almost 690 studies were yielded from a preliminary search conducted on 9 December 2023. All included studies will be summarised and tabulated for data extraction. Egger’s test and funnel plots will be conducted to examine the possibility of publication bias. Moreover, a subgroup analysis will be conducted to calculate the pooled prevalence of suicidal behaviours across different study characteristics. In addition, a narrative synthesis will be carried out in the event that quantitative synthesis is not possible.

Patients and public involvement

This is a protocol for systematic review and no patients will be directly involved in this review. This review will be done to identify the prevalence of suicidal behaviours and their associated factors which influence SI, SA and SP among Bangladeshi medical students which has been a matter of concern.

Ethics and dissemination

The study will synthesise evidence extracted from published studies. As the review does not involve the collection of primary data, ethical approval will not be required. A manuscript will be developed and submitted to an international peer-reviewed journal for publication based on the PRISMA statement as well as the PRISMA for Network Mata-Analyses (PRISMA-NMA guidelines. In addition, the findings may also be verbally disseminated (eg, conferences, webinars).

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication.

Not applicable.

• Kaggwa MM ,
• Najjuka SM ,
• Favina A , et al
• World Health Organization
• ↵ Bangladesh Education Statistics , 2022 . Available : https://banbeis.portal.gov.bd/
• Blacker CJ ,
• Swintak CC , et al
• Govil N , et al
• Rukundo GZ ,
• Byakwaga H ,
• Kinengyere A , et al
• Griffiths MD
• Mozaffor M ,
• Islam MS , et al
• Ventriglio A ,
• Yohannis Z , et al
• Hossain S ,
• Gupta RD , et al
• Likhon RA ,
• Biswas MAAJ ,
• Samir N , et al
• Henderson M
• Puthran R ,
• Zhang MWB ,
• Tam WW , et al
• Liu J , et al
• Ashiq MAR ,
• Jubayer Biswas MAA , et al
• Rosiek-Kryszewska A ,
• Leksowski Ł , et al
• Akhter S , et al
• Tugnoli S ,
• Casetta I ,
• Caracciolo S , et al
• Sampson HH ,
• Lisy K , et al
• Liberati A ,
• Tetzlaff J , et al
• Stroup DF ,
• Berlin JA ,
• Morton SC , et al
• Lessa M , et al
• Gotschall T
• Ouzzani M ,
• Hammady H ,
• Fedorowicz Z , et al
• McKenzie JE ,
• Bossuyt PM , et al
• Cheung MW-L ,
• Lim Y , et al
• Institute TJB
• Aromataris E ,
• Fernandez R ,
• Godfrey CM , et al

Contributors MR conceptualised the review. M H M IK and MDG provided expert opinions in designing the review. MR drafted the protocol manuscript. MR, SS and ATS screened the papers. M H M IK and MDG reviewed and revised the protocol manuscript for intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final version of the protocol manuscript and MR is responsible for the overall content (as guarantor). Chat GPT, Claude AI.

Funding The authors did not receive a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Patient and public involvement No patients and/or the public were involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research. Refer to the Methods section for further details.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Read the full text or download the PDF: