preparing a research article for publication

How to write a research article to submit for publication

Pharmacists and healthcare professionals who are undertaking research should have an understanding of how to produce a research article for publication, and be aware of the important considerations relating to submission to a peer-reviewed journal.

Viennaslide / Alamy Stock Photo

Undertaking and performing scientific, clinical and practice-based research is only the beginning of the scholarship of discovery [1] . For the full impact of any research to be achieved and to have an effect on the wider research and scientific community, it must be published in an outlet accessible to relevant professionals [2] .

Scientific research is often published in peer-reviewed journals. Peer review is defined as the unbiased, independent, critical assessment of scholarly or research manuscripts submitted to journals by experts or opinion leaders [3] . The process and requirements of reviewers has been covered recently [4] . On account of this rigorous process, peer-reviewed scientific journals are considered the primary source of new information that impacts and advances clinical decision-making and practice [5] , [6] .

The development of a research article can be helpful for the promotion of scientific thinking [7] , [8] and the advancement of effective writing skills, allowing the authors to participate in broader scientific discussions that lie beyond their scope of practice or discipline [2] .

This article aims to provide pharmacists and healthcare professionals who are undertaking research with an understanding of how to produce a research article for publication, as well as points to consider before submission to a peer-reviewed journal.

Importance of the research question

This article will not go into detail about forming suitable research questions, however, in principle, a good research question will be specific, novel and of relevance to the scientific community (e.g. pharmacy – pharmacists, pharmaceutical scientists, pharmacy technicians and related healthcare professionals). Hulley et al . suggest using the FINER criteria (see ‘Figure 1: FINER criteria for a good research question’) to aid the development of a good research question [9] .

Figure 1: FINER criteria for a good research question

Source: Hulley S, Cummings S, Browner W  et al . [9]

The FINER criteria highlight useful points that may generally increase the chances of developing a successful research project. A good research question should specify the population of interest, be of interest to the scientific community and potentially to the public, have clinical relevance and further current knowledge in the field.

Having a clear research question that is of interest to those working in the same field will help in the preparation of an article because it can be used as the central organising principle – all of the content included and discussed should focus on answering this question.

Preparing a first draft

Before writing the article, it is useful to highlight several journals that you could submit the final article to. It also helps to familiarise yourself with these journals’ styles, article structures and formatting instructions before starting to write. Many journals also have criteria that research articles should be able to satisfy. For example, all research article submissions to  Clinical Pharmacist must demonstrate innovative or novel results that are sustainable, reproducible and transferable [10] .

Having researched potential target journals, you should have a clear idea about your target audience, enabling you to pitch the level of the article appropriately [11] (see ‘Box 1: Top tips to prepare for writing’).

Box 1: Top tips to prepare for writing

• Know the focus of the paper – identify two or three important findings and make these the central theme of the article;
• Gather important data, perform any analyses and make rough data plots and tables beforehand. These can then be refined for inclusion or submitted as supplementary information if needed;
• Organise your results to flow in a logical sequence;
• Know the structure and requirements of your target journals (check websites and author guidelines, as well as published articles);
• Think about the style of the piece and look to pitch the article at the level of the intended audience;
• Clarity should be your guiding principle.

Structuring a research article

Most research articles follow a similar structure and format that includes an abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion, as well as a summary of the key points discussed in the article.

One approach is to start with the methods section, which can be derived from the protocol and any pilot phase. Many of the figures and tables can be constructed in advance, which will help with writing the results section. The questions addressed by the study can be used alongside the results to formulate the introduction, which can guide how the discussion is written [11] .

Clinical Pharmacist , like other peer-reviewed journals, has specific author guidelines and formatting instructions to help authors prepare their articles [10] , [12] , [13] . The following sections will discuss the required sections and important considerations for authors when writing.

Title, abstract and keywords

The title, abstract and keywords are essential to the successful communication of research. Most electronic search engines, databases (e.g. PubMed/MEDLINE) and journal websites extract words from them to determine whether your article will be displayed to interested readers [14] , [15] , [16] , [17] , enabling accurate dissemination and leading to future citations.

In addition, the title and abstract are usually freely available online. If an article is not published in an ‘open access’ format, (i.e. it is free and immediately available online and access is combined with the rights to use these articles fully in the digital environment) [18] , or if the reader does not have a subscription to the journal, they will have to decide on whether to pay to access the full article to continue reading. Therefore, it is imperative that they are informative and accurate.

The title should accurately reflect the research, identify the main issue and begin with the subject matter, while being both simple and enticing enough to attract the audience [19] . Authors should avoid using ‘a study of’, ‘investigations into’ and ‘observations on’ in titles. It is also worth remembering that abstracting and indexing services, such as MEDLINE, require accurate titles, because they extract keywords from them for cross-referencing [19] .

Many journals require the abstract to be structured in the same way as the main headings of the paper (e.g. introduction, methods, results, discussion and conclusion) and to be around 150–300 words in length [10] . In general, references should not be cited in the abstract.

Introduction

The introduction should provide the background and context to the study. Two or three paragraphs can be dedicated to the discussion of any previous work and identification of gaps in current knowledge. The rest of the introduction should then outline what this piece of work aims to address and why this is important, before stating the objectives of the study and the research question [20] .

The methods section should provide the reader with enough detail for them to be able to reproduce the study if desired [3] . The context and setting of the study should be described and the study design specified. The section should further describe the population (including the inclusion and exclusion criteria), sampling strategy and the interventions performed. The main study variables should be identified and the data collection procedures described [3] .

Authors should provide specific, technical and detailed information in this section. Several checklists and guidelines are available for the reporting of specific types of studies:

• CONSORT is used for developing and reporting a randomised controlled trial [21] ;
• The STARD checklist can help with designing a diagnostic accuracy study [22] ;
• The PRISMA checklist can be used when performing a metaâ€analyses or systematic review, but can also help with compiling an introduction [23] .

For the reporting of qualitative research studies, authors should explain which research tradition the study utilises and link the choice of methodological strategies with the research goals [24] .

For studies describing the development of new initiatives or clinical services, authors should describe the situation before the initiative began, the establishment of priorities, formulation of objectives and strategies, mobilisation of resources, and processes used in the methods section [10] .

The final portion of the methods section will include the statistical methods used to analyse the data [25] . The statistical methods employed should be described with enough detail to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to be able to judge its appropriateness for the study and verify the results [3] . For survey-based studies and information on sampling frame, size and statistical powers, see ‘When to use a survey in pharmacy practice research’ [26] .

Findings should be quantified and presented with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty (e.g. confidence intervals). Authors should avoid relying solely on statistical hypothesis testing, such as P values, because these fail to convey important information about effect size and precision of estimates [3] . Statistical terms, abbreviations and most symbols should be defined, and the statistical software package and versions used should be specified. Authors should also take care to distinguish prespecified from exploratory analyses, including subgroup analyses [3] .

The results section should be straightforward and factual and all of the results that relate to the research question should be provided, with detail including simple counts and percentages [27] . Data collection and recruitment should be commented on and the participants described. Secondary findings and the results of subgroup analyses can also be presented [27] .

Figures, schemes and tables

To present data and results of the research study, figures, schemes and tables can be used. They should include significant digits, error bars and levels of statistical significance.

Tables should be presented with a summary title, followed by caption, a sentence or two that describes the content and impact of the data included in the table. All captions should provide enough detail so that the table or figure can be interpreted and understood as stand-alone material, separate from the article.

Figures should also be presented with a summary title, a caption that describes the significant result or interpretation that can be made from the figure, the number of repetitions within the experiment, as well as what the data point actually represents. All figures and tables should be cited in the manuscript text [11] .

When compiling tables and figures, important statistics, such as the number of samples (n), the index of dispersion (standard deviation [SD], standard error of the mean [SEM]), and the index of central tendency (mean, median or mode), must be stated. The statistical analysis performed should also be included and specific statistical data should be indicated (e.g. P values) [11] .

Discussion and conclusions

The discussion section should state the main findings of the study. The main results should be compared with reference to previous research and current knowledge, and where this has been extended it should be fully described [2] , [11] , [25] . For clinical studies, relevant discussion of the implications the results may have on policy should be included [10] . It is important to include an analysis of the strengths and limitations of the study and offer perspectives for future work [2] . Excessive presentation of data and results without any discussion should be avoided and it is not necessary to cite a published work for each argument presented. Any conclusions should include the major findings, followed by a brief discussion of future perspectives and the application of this work to other disciplines [10] .

The list of references should be appropriate; important statements presented as facts should be referenced, as well as the methods and instruments used. Reference lists for research articles, however, unlike comprehensive reviews of a topic, do not necessarily have to be exhaustive. References to unpublished work, to documents in the grey literature (technical reports), or to any source that the reader will have difficulty finding or understanding should be avoided [27] . Most journals have reference limits and specific formatting requirements, so it is important to check the journal’s author guidelines [10] , [11] , [12] , [13] , [19] .

Authorship and acknowledgements

Determining contributors who qualify as authors and those who should be acknowledged can be difficult. Clinical Pharmacist follows guidance from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, which recommends that authorship be based on the following four criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
• Drafting the work or revising 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 [3] .

Therefore, only individuals who meet all four criteria should be identified as authors [3] . The contribution of individuals who do not meet all four criteria should instead be included in the acknowledgements.

In addition, a statement that recognises any funding sources for the work should be added to the acknowledgements. This statement should adhere to the guidelines provided by the funding institution [11] .

Supplementary and supporting information

A key principle of research publication is that others should be able to replicate and build upon an author’s published claims. Therefore, submitted manuscripts should contain the necessary detail about the study and analytical design, and the data must be available for editors and peer-reviewers to allow full evaluation to take place. This is now commonplace and is seen as best practice. Author guidelines now include sections related to misconduct and falsification of data [28] . By participating in self-archiving practices and providing full data sets, authors can play their part in transparency.

The Royal Pharmaceutical Society website hosts a database to help share data from research studies. The map of evidence collates existing evidence and ongoing initiatives that can ultimately inform policy and practice relating to pharmacy; enables the sharing and showcasing of good pharmacy practice and innovation; and aims to increase the knowledge exchange and learning in pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences [29] .

Revising your article prior to submission

Once a draft research article has been prepared, it should be shared among all of the co-authors for review and comments. A full revision of the draft should then take place to correct grammar and check flow and logic before journal submission. All authors will have to agree on the authenticity of the data and presentation before formal submission can take place [3] (see ‘Box 2: Common mistakes and reasons why research articles are rejected for publication’).

Box 2: Common mistakes and reasons why research articles are rejected for publication

• Lack of novelty and importance of the research question;
• Poor study design;
• Methods not accurately and adequately described;
• Results poorly reported, along with little analysis of data;
• Lack of statistical analysis;
• Not acknowledging the study’s limitations;
• Providing unsupported conclusions or overstating the results of the study;
• Poor writing;
• Not following the journal’s style and formatting guidance;
• Submitting a manuscript that is incomplete or outside of the aims and scope.

Selecting a journal and submitting your manuscript

It is important to select a journal for submission wisely because this choice can determine the impact and dissemination of your work [13] . Impact factor (a measure of the frequency with which the average article in a journal has been cited in a particular year), the scope and readership of a title may also influence your choice.

Furthermore, approval and adequate disclosures must be obtained from all co-authors. A conflict of interests form is also completed as part of the submissions process (normally completed by the lead author on behalf of all authors).

Many journals now request that a cover letter is also submitted to the editor, putting the study in context and explaining why the research is of importance to their audience and why it should be considered for publication in their journal.

Once this is all completed, the article can be formally submitted (usually via email or an online submission system). Figure 2 provides a sample process for a manuscript once submitted to a journal for consideration for publication.

Figure 2: Sample process for a submitted manuscript

Source: The Pharmaceutical Journal

All journals follow a similar process for article submissions, whether they use a formal online submissions system or simply email.  Clinical Pharmacist uses a process similar to this and it is useful for authors to be aware of how their submission may progress once submitted to a journal for publication.

Useful Links

• The EQUATOR Network
• Research4Life – Authorship skills modules
• Pharmacy Research UK

Reading this article counts towards your CPD

You can use the following forms to record your learning and action points from this article from Pharmaceutical Journal Publications.

Your CPD module results are stored against your account here at The Pharmaceutical Journal . You must be registered and logged into the site to do this. To review your module results, go to the ‘My Account’ tab and then ‘My CPD’.

Any training, learning or development activities that you undertake for CPD can also be recorded as evidence as part of your RPS Faculty practice-based portfolio when preparing for Faculty membership. To start your RPS Faculty journey today, access the portfolio and tools at www.rpharms.com/Faculty

If your learning was planned in advance, please click:

If your learning was spontaneous, please click:

[1] Boyer E. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities for the professoriate . 1990. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

[2] Hoogenboom BJ & Manske RC. How to write a scientific article. Int J Sports Phys Ther . 2012;7(5):512–517. PMCID: PMC3474301

[3] International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. 2014. Available at: http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf (accessed November 2016).

[4] Dowdall M. How to be an effective peer reviewer. Clinical Pharmacist 2015;7(10). doi: 10.1211/CP.2015.20200006

[5] Nahata MC. Tips for writing and publishing an article. Ann Pharmaco . 2008;42:273–277. doi: 10.1345/aph.1K616

[6] Dixon N. Writing for publication: A guide for new authors. Int J Qual Health Care . 2001;13:417–421. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/13.5.417

[7] Keys CW. Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Sci Educ . 1999;83:115–130.

[8] Gopen G & Swan J. The science of scientific writing. Am Sci . 1990;78:550–558. Available at: http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/the-science-of-scientific-writing (accessed November 2016)

[9] Hulley S, Cummings S, Browner W et al . Designing clinical research. 3rd ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2007.

[10] The Pharmaceutical Journal and Clinical  Pharmacist. Author Guidance (2015). Available at: http://www.pharmaceutical-journal.com/for-authors-and-referees/article-types/#Practice_reports (accessed November 2016)

[11] Fisher JP, Jansen JA, Johnson PC et al . Guidelines for writing a research article for publication. Mary Ann Liebert Inc. Available at: https://www.liebertpub.com/media/pdf/English-Research-Article-Writing-Guide.pdf (accessed November 2016)

[12] Nature. Author Resources: How to write a paper. Available at: http://www.nature.com/authors/author_resources/how_write.html (accessed November 2016)

[13] Wiley Online Library. Resources for authors and reviewers: preparing your article. Available at: http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-828006.html (accessed November 2016)

[14] SAGE Publications. Help readers find your article. Available at: http://www.uk.sagepub.com/journalgateway/findArticle.htm (accessed November 2016)

[15] Bem DJ. Writing the empirical journal article. In: MP Zanna & JM Darley (Eds.), The complete academic: a practical guide for the beginning social scientist (pp. 171–201). New York: Random House; 1987.

[16] Fathalla M & Fathalla M. A practical guide for health researchers. Available at: http://www.emro.who.int/dsaf/dsa237.pdf (accessed November 2016)

[17] Coghill A & Garson L (Eds.). Scientific Papers. In: A Coghill & L Garson (Eds.), The ACS Style Guide, 3 rd Edition (pp. 20–21). New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.

[18] The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Institute. Available at: http://sparcopen.org/open-access/ (accessed November 2016).

[19] Elsevier. Understanding the publishing process: how to publish in scholarly journals. Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/91173/Brochure_UPP_April2015.pdf (accessed November 2016).

[20] SciDevNet. How do I write a scientific paper? 2008. Available at: http://www.scidev.net/global/publishing/practical-guide/how-do-i-write-a-scientific-paper-.html (accessed November 2016)

[21] Moher D, Schultz KR & Altman DG. CONSORT GROUP (Consolidatied Standards of Reporting Trials). The CONSORT statement: Revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel‐group randomized controlled trials. Ann Intern Med . 2001;134:657–662. PMID: 11304106

[22] Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE et al . Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD Initiative. Ann Int Med 2003;138:40–44. PMID: 12513043

[23] Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al . The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6(6):e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed1000097

[24] Devers KJ & Frankel RM. Getting qualitative research published. Educ Health 2001;14:109–117. doi: 10.1080/13576280010021888

[25] Van Way CW. Writing a scientific paper. Nutr Clin Pract 2007;22:636–640. PMID: 18042951

[26] Kishore V. When to use a survey in pharmacy practice research. The Pharmaceutical Journal 296(7886). doi: 10.1211/PJ.2016.20200700

[27] Perneger PV & Hudelson PM. Writing a research article: advice to beginners . Int J Qual Health Care 2004;16(3):191–192. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzh053

[28] World Association of Medical Editors. Professionalism Code of Conduct. 2016. Available at: http://www.wame.org/News/Details/16 (accessed November 2016)

[29] Royal Pharmaceutical Society. Map of Evidence. Available at: http://www.rpharms.com/support/map-of-evidence.asp (accessed November 2016)

You might also be interested in…

Working to improve our digital archive

The Pharmaceutical Journal is moving forward into a digital future

The launch of our new digital platform is just the beginning of our plans for the future of PJ

Manuscript preparation and submission

Learn how to prepare your manuscript for submission to an APA journal.

From following the latest APA Publication Manual to using the Editorial Manager peer review system, here is the most important information that you will need to successfully prepare and submit your manuscript.

Journal manuscript preparation guidelines

Guidance on preparing your manuscript for submission to an APA journal, including the information on APA open access policies and APA Style Journal Article Reporting Standards (APA Style JARS).

Using Editorial Manager

Videos illustrating commonly used features for authors in Editorial Manager, our online manuscript submission and peer review system.

What is peer review?

An overview of what to expect from peer review.

Academic writing and English language editing services

Resources for additional academic writing or language editing support.

Maximize the impact of your published work

Was your manuscript accepted for publication? Congratulations! Explore our resources on maximizing the impact of your published work.

• APA publishing resources
• Reviewer Resource Center
• Editor resource center
• Why publish with APA Journals™
• Equity, diversity, and inclusion in APA Journals™

APA Publishing Insider

APA Publishing Insider is a free monthly newsletter with tips on APA Style, open science initiatives, active calls for papers, research summaries, and more.

Visit the APA Style website for style and grammar guidelines, free instructional aids, reference examples, the APA Style blog, APA Style products, and more.

Contact Journals

You are using an outdated browser . Please upgrade your browser today !

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper in 7 Steps

What comes next after you're done with your research? Publishing the results in a journal of course! We tell you how to present your work in the best way possible.

This post is part of a series, which serves to provide hands-on information and resources for authors and editors.

Things have gotten busy in scholarly publishing: These days, a new article gets published in the 50,000 most important peer-reviewed journals every few seconds, while each one takes on average 40 minutes to read. Hundreds of thousands of papers reach the desks of editors and reviewers worldwide each year and 50% of all submissions end up rejected at some stage.

In a nutshell: there is a lot of competition, and the people who decide upon the fate of your manuscript are short on time and overworked. But there are ways to make their lives a little easier and improve your own chances of getting your work published!

Well, it may seem obvious, but before submitting an academic paper, always make sure that it is an excellent reflection of the research you have done and that you present it in the most professional way possible. Incomplete or poorly presented manuscripts can create a great deal of frustration and annoyance for editors who probably won’t even bother wasting the time of the reviewers!

This post will discuss 7 steps to the successful publication of your research paper:

• Check whether your research is publication-ready
• Choose an article type
• Choose a journal
• Construct your paper
• Decide the order of authors
• Check and double-check
• Submit your paper

1. Check Whether Your Research Is Publication-Ready

Should you publish your research at all?

If your work holds academic value – of course – a well-written scholarly article could open doors to your research community. However, if you are not yet sure, whether your research is ready for publication, here are some key questions to ask yourself depending on your field of expertise:

• Have you done or found something new and interesting? Something unique?
• Is the work directly related to a current hot topic?
• Have you checked the latest results or research in the field?
• Have you provided solutions to any difficult problems?
• Have the findings been verified?
• Have the appropriate controls been performed if required?
• Are your findings comprehensive?

If the answers to all relevant questions are “yes”, you need to prepare a good, strong manuscript. Remember, a research paper is only useful if it is clearly understood, reproducible and if it is read and used .

2. Choose An Article Type

The first step is to determine which type of paper is most appropriate for your work and what you want to achieve. The following list contains the most important, usually peer-reviewed article types in the natural sciences:

Full original research papers disseminate completed research findings. On average this type of paper is 8-10 pages long, contains five figures, and 25-30 references. Full original research papers are an important part of the process when developing your career.

Review papers present a critical synthesis of a specific research topic. These papers are usually much longer than original papers and will contain numerous references. More often than not, they will be commissioned by journal editors. Reviews present an excellent way to solidify your research career.

Letters, Rapid or Short Communications are often published for the quick and early communication of significant and original advances. They are much shorter than full articles and usually limited in length by the journal. Journals specifically dedicated to short communications or letters are also published in some fields. In these the authors can present short preliminary findings before developing a full-length paper.

3. Choose a Journal

Are you looking for the right place to publish your paper? Find out here whether a De Gruyter journal might be the right fit.

Submit to journals that you already read, that you have a good feel for. If you do so, you will have a better appreciation of both its culture and the requirements of the editors and reviewers.

Other factors to consider are:

• The specific subject area
• The aims and scope of the journal
• The type of manuscript you have written
• The significance of your work
• The reputation of the journal
• The reputation of the editors within the community
• The editorial/review and production speeds of the journal
• The community served by the journal
• The coverage and distribution
• The accessibility ( open access vs. closed access)

4. Construct Your Paper

Each element of a paper has its purpose, so you should make these sections easy to index and search.

Don’t forget that requirements can differ highly per publication, so always make sure to apply a journal’s specific instructions – or guide – for authors to your manuscript, even to the first draft (text layout, paper citation, nomenclature, figures and table, etc.) It will save you time, and the editor’s.

Also, even in these days of Internet-based publishing, space is still at a premium, so be as concise as possible. As a good journalist would say: “Never use three words when one will do!”

Let’s look at the typical structure of a full research paper, but bear in mind certain subject disciplines may have their own specific requirements so check the instructions for authors on the journal’s home page.

4.1 The Title

It’s important to use the title to tell the reader what your paper is all about! You want to attract their attention, a bit like a newspaper headline does. Be specific and to the point. Keep it informative and concise, and avoid jargon and abbreviations (unless they are universally recognized like DNA, for example).

4.2 The Abstract

This could be termed as the “advertisement” for your article. Make it interesting and easily understood without the reader having to read the whole article. Be accurate and specific, and keep it as brief and concise as possible. Some journals (particularly in the medical fields) will ask you to structure the abstract in distinct, labeled sections, which makes it even more accessible.

A clear abstract will influence whether or not your work is considered and whether an editor should invest more time on it or send it for review.

4.3 Keywords

Keywords are used by abstracting and indexing services, such as PubMed and Web of Science. They are the labels of your manuscript, which make it “searchable” online by other researchers.

Include words or phrases (usually 4-8) that are closely related to your topic but not “too niche” for anyone to find them. Make sure to only use established abbreviations. Think about what scientific terms and its variations your potential readers are likely to use and search for. You can also do a test run of your selected keywords in one of the common academic search engines. Do similar articles to your own appear? Yes? Then that’s a good sign.

4.4 Introduction

This first part of the main text should introduce the problem, as well as any existing solutions you are aware of and the main limitations. Also, state what you hope to achieve with your research.

Do not confuse the introduction with the results, discussion or conclusion.

4.5 Methods

Every research article should include a detailed Methods section (also referred to as “Materials and Methods”) to provide the reader with enough information to be able to judge whether the study is valid and reproducible.

Include detailed information so that a knowledgeable reader can reproduce the experiment. However, use references and supplementary materials to indicate previously published procedures.

4.6 Results

In this section, you will present the essential or primary results of your study. To display them in a comprehensible way, you should use subheadings as well as illustrations such as figures, graphs, tables and photos, as appropriate.

4.7 Discussion

Here you should tell your readers what the results mean .

Do state how the results relate to the study’s aims and hypotheses and how the findings relate to those of other studies. Explain all possible interpretations of your findings and the study’s limitations.

Do not make “grand statements” that are not supported by the data. Also, do not introduce any new results or terms. Moreover, do not ignore work that conflicts or disagrees with your findings. Instead …

Be brave! Address conflicting study results and convince the reader you are the one who is correct.

4.8 Conclusion

Your conclusion isn’t just a summary of what you’ve already written. It should take your paper one step further and answer any unresolved questions.

Sum up what you have shown in your study and indicate possible applications and extensions. The main question your conclusion should answer is: What do my results mean for the research field and my community?

4.9 Acknowledgments and Ethical Statements

It is extremely important to acknowledge anyone who has helped you with your paper, including researchers who supplied materials or reagents (e.g. vectors or antibodies); and anyone who helped with the writing or English, or offered critical comments about the content.

Learn more about academic integrity in our blog post “Scholarly Publication Ethics: 4 Common Mistakes You Want To Avoid” .

Remember to state why people have been acknowledged and ask their permission . Ensure that you acknowledge sources of funding, including any grant or reference numbers.

Furthermore, if you have worked with animals or humans, you need to include information about the ethical approval of your study and, if applicable, whether informed consent was given. Also, state whether you have any competing interests regarding the study (e.g. because of financial or personal relationships.)

4.10 References

The end is in sight, but don’t relax just yet!

De facto, there are often more mistakes in the references than in any other part of the manuscript. It is also one of the most annoying and time-consuming problems for editors.

Remember to cite the main scientific publications on which your work is based. But do not inflate the manuscript with too many references. Avoid excessive – and especially unnecessary – self-citations. Also, avoid excessive citations of publications from the same institute or region.

5. Decide the Order of Authors

In the sciences, the most common way to order the names of the authors is by relative contribution.

Generally, the first author conducts and/or supervises the data analysis and the proper presentation and interpretation of the results. They put the paper together and usually submit the paper to the journal.

Co-authors make intellectual contributions to the data analysis and contribute to data interpretation. They review each paper draft. All of them must be able to present the paper and its results, as well as to defend the implications and discuss study limitations.

Do not leave out authors who should be included or add “gift authors”, i.e. authors who did not contribute significantly.

6. Check and Double-Check

As a final step before submission, ask colleagues to read your work and be constructively critical .

Make sure that the paper is appropriate for the journal – take a last look at their aims and scope. Check if all of the requirements in the instructions for authors are met.

Ensure that the cited literature is balanced. Are the aims, purpose and significance of the results clear?

Conduct a final check for language, either by a native English speaker or an editing service.

7. Submit Your Paper

When you and your co-authors have double-, triple-, quadruple-checked the manuscript: submit it via e-mail or online submission system. Along with your manuscript, submit a cover letter, which highlights the reasons why your paper would appeal to the journal and which ensures that you have received approval of all authors for submission.

It is up to the editors and the peer-reviewers now to provide you with their (ideally constructive and helpful) comments and feedback. Time to take a breather!

If the paper gets rejected, do not despair – it happens to literally everybody. If the journal suggests major or minor revisions, take the chance to provide a thorough response and make improvements as you see fit. If the paper gets accepted, congrats!

It’s now time to get writing and share your hard work – good luck!

If you are interested, check out this related blog post

[Title Image by Nick Morrison via Unsplash]

David Sleeman

David Sleeman worked as Senior Journals Manager in the field of Physical Sciences at De Gruyter.

You might also be interested in

Academia & Publishing

Taking Libraries into the Future, Part 4: How IFLA Harnesses Social Media

10 summer reads for the intellectually curious, how to maximize your message through social media: a global masterclass from library professionals, visit our shop.

De Gruyter publishes over 1,300 new book titles each year and more than 750 journals in the humanities, social sciences, medicine, mathematics, engineering, computer sciences, natural sciences, and law.

Pin It on Pinterest

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal

• Open access
• Published: 30 April 2020
• Volume 36 , pages 909–913, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Clara Busse   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0178-1000 1 &
• Ella August   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5151-1036 1 , 2  

282k Accesses

17 Citations

708 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Communicating research findings is an essential step in the research process. Often, peer-reviewed journals are the forum for such communication, yet many researchers are never taught how to write a publishable scientific paper. In this article, we explain the basic structure of a scientific paper and describe the information that should be included in each section. We also identify common pitfalls for each section and recommend strategies to avoid them. Further, we give advice about target journal selection and authorship. In the online resource 1 , we provide an example of a high-quality scientific paper, with annotations identifying the elements we describe in this article.

Similar content being viewed by others

How to Choose the Right Journal

The Point Is…to Publish?

Writing and publishing a scientific paper

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Writing a scientific paper is an important component of the research process, yet researchers often receive little formal training in scientific writing. This is especially true in low-resource settings. In this article, we explain why choosing a target journal is important, give advice about authorship, provide a basic structure for writing each section of a scientific paper, and describe common pitfalls and recommendations for each section. In the online resource 1 , we also include an annotated journal article that identifies the key elements and writing approaches that we detail here. Before you begin your research, make sure you have ethical clearance from all relevant ethical review boards.

Select a Target Journal Early in the Writing Process

We recommend that you select a “target journal” early in the writing process; a “target journal” is the journal to which you plan to submit your paper. Each journal has a set of core readers and you should tailor your writing to this readership. For example, if you plan to submit a manuscript about vaping during pregnancy to a pregnancy-focused journal, you will need to explain what vaping is because readers of this journal may not have a background in this topic. However, if you were to submit that same article to a tobacco journal, you would not need to provide as much background information about vaping.

Information about a journal’s core readership can be found on its website, usually in a section called “About this journal” or something similar. For example, the Journal of Cancer Education presents such information on the “Aims and Scope” page of its website, which can be found here: https://www.springer.com/journal/13187/aims-and-scope .

Peer reviewer guidelines from your target journal are an additional resource that can help you tailor your writing to the journal and provide additional advice about crafting an effective article [ 1 ]. These are not always available, but it is worth a quick web search to find out.

Identify Author Roles Early in the Process

Early in the writing process, identify authors, determine the order of authors, and discuss the responsibilities of each author. Standard author responsibilities have been identified by The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) [ 2 ]. To set clear expectations about each team member’s responsibilities and prevent errors in communication, we also suggest outlining more detailed roles, such as who will draft each section of the manuscript, write the abstract, submit the paper electronically, serve as corresponding author, and write the cover letter. It is best to formalize this agreement in writing after discussing it, circulating the document to the author team for approval. We suggest creating a title page on which all authors are listed in the agreed-upon order. It may be necessary to adjust authorship roles and order during the development of the paper. If a new author order is agreed upon, be sure to update the title page in the manuscript draft.

In the case where multiple papers will result from a single study, authors should discuss who will author each paper. Additionally, authors should agree on a deadline for each paper and the lead author should take responsibility for producing an initial draft by this deadline.

Structure of the Introduction Section

The introduction section should be approximately three to five paragraphs in length. Look at examples from your target journal to decide the appropriate length. This section should include the elements shown in Fig.  1 . Begin with a general context, narrowing to the specific focus of the paper. Include five main elements: why your research is important, what is already known about the topic, the “gap” or what is not yet known about the topic, why it is important to learn the new information that your research adds, and the specific research aim(s) that your paper addresses. Your research aim should address the gap you identified. Be sure to add enough background information to enable readers to understand your study. Table 1 provides common introduction section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

The main elements of the introduction section of an original research article. Often, the elements overlap

Methods Section

The purpose of the methods section is twofold: to explain how the study was done in enough detail to enable its replication and to provide enough contextual detail to enable readers to understand and interpret the results. In general, the essential elements of a methods section are the following: a description of the setting and participants, the study design and timing, the recruitment and sampling, the data collection process, the dataset, the dependent and independent variables, the covariates, the analytic approach for each research objective, and the ethical approval. The hallmark of an exemplary methods section is the justification of why each method was used. Table 2 provides common methods section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Results Section

The focus of the results section should be associations, or lack thereof, rather than statistical tests. Two considerations should guide your writing here. First, the results should present answers to each part of the research aim. Second, return to the methods section to ensure that the analysis and variables for each result have been explained.

Begin the results section by describing the number of participants in the final sample and details such as the number who were approached to participate, the proportion who were eligible and who enrolled, and the number of participants who dropped out. The next part of the results should describe the participant characteristics. After that, you may organize your results by the aim or by putting the most exciting results first. Do not forget to report your non-significant associations. These are still findings.

Tables and figures capture the reader’s attention and efficiently communicate your main findings [ 3 ]. Each table and figure should have a clear message and should complement, rather than repeat, the text. Tables and figures should communicate all salient details necessary for a reader to understand the findings without consulting the text. Include information on comparisons and tests, as well as information about the sample and timing of the study in the title, legend, or in a footnote. Note that figures are often more visually interesting than tables, so if it is feasible to make a figure, make a figure. To avoid confusing the reader, either avoid abbreviations in tables and figures, or define them in a footnote. Note that there should not be citations in the results section and you should not interpret results here. Table 3 provides common results section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Discussion Section

Opposite the introduction section, the discussion should take the form of a right-side-up triangle beginning with interpretation of your results and moving to general implications (Fig.  2 ). This section typically begins with a restatement of the main findings, which can usually be accomplished with a few carefully-crafted sentences.

Major elements of the discussion section of an original research article. Often, the elements overlap

Next, interpret the meaning or explain the significance of your results, lifting the reader’s gaze from the study’s specific findings to more general applications. Then, compare these study findings with other research. Are these findings in agreement or disagreement with those from other studies? Does this study impart additional nuance to well-accepted theories? Situate your findings within the broader context of scientific literature, then explain the pathways or mechanisms that might give rise to, or explain, the results.

Journals vary in their approach to strengths and limitations sections: some are embedded paragraphs within the discussion section, while some mandate separate section headings. Keep in mind that every study has strengths and limitations. Candidly reporting yours helps readers to correctly interpret your research findings.

The next element of the discussion is a summary of the potential impacts and applications of the research. Should these results be used to optimally design an intervention? Does the work have implications for clinical protocols or public policy? These considerations will help the reader to further grasp the possible impacts of the presented work.

Finally, the discussion should conclude with specific suggestions for future work. Here, you have an opportunity to illuminate specific gaps in the literature that compel further study. Avoid the phrase “future research is necessary” because the recommendation is too general to be helpful to readers. Instead, provide substantive and specific recommendations for future studies. Table 4 provides common discussion section pitfalls and recommendations for addressing them.

Follow the Journal’s Author Guidelines

After you select a target journal, identify the journal’s author guidelines to guide the formatting of your manuscript and references. Author guidelines will often (but not always) include instructions for titles, cover letters, and other components of a manuscript submission. Read the guidelines carefully. If you do not follow the guidelines, your article will be sent back to you.

Finally, do not submit your paper to more than one journal at a time. Even if this is not explicitly stated in the author guidelines of your target journal, it is considered inappropriate and unprofessional.

Your title should invite readers to continue reading beyond the first page [ 4 , 5 ]. It should be informative and interesting. Consider describing the independent and dependent variables, the population and setting, the study design, the timing, and even the main result in your title. Because the focus of the paper can change as you write and revise, we recommend you wait until you have finished writing your paper before composing the title.

Be sure that the title is useful for potential readers searching for your topic. The keywords you select should complement those in your title to maximize the likelihood that a researcher will find your paper through a database search. Avoid using abbreviations in your title unless they are very well known, such as SNP, because it is more likely that someone will use a complete word rather than an abbreviation as a search term to help readers find your paper.

After you have written a complete draft, use the checklist (Fig. 3 ) below to guide your revisions and editing. Additional resources are available on writing the abstract and citing references [ 5 ]. When you feel that your work is ready, ask a trusted colleague or two to read the work and provide informal feedback. The box below provides a checklist that summarizes the key points offered in this article.

Checklist for manuscript quality

Data Availability

Michalek AM (2014) Down the rabbit hole…advice to reviewers. J Cancer Educ 29:4–5

Article   Google Scholar  

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Defining the role of authors and contributors: who is an author? http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authosrs-and-contributors.html . Accessed 15 January, 2020

Vetto JT (2014) Short and sweet: a short course on concise medical writing. J Cancer Educ 29(1):194–195

Brett M, Kording K (2017) Ten simple rules for structuring papers. PLoS ComputBiol. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005619

Lang TA (2017) Writing a better research article. J Public Health Emerg. https://doi.org/10.21037/jphe.2017.11.06

Download references

Acknowledgments

Ella August is grateful to the Sustainable Sciences Institute for mentoring her in training researchers on writing and publishing their research.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Maternal and Child Health, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, 135 Dauer Dr, 27599, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Clara Busse & Ella August

Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-2029, USA

Ella August

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ella August .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interests.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

(PDF 362 kb)

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Busse, C., August, E. How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal. J Canc Educ 36 , 909–913 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Download citation

Published : 30 April 2020

Issue Date : October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Manuscripts
• Scientific writing
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Writing a Research Paper for an Academic Journal: A Five-step Recipe for Perfection

The answer to writing the perfect research paper is as simple as following a step-by-step recipe. Here we bring to you a recipe for effortlessly planning, writing, and publishing your paper as a peer reviewed journal article.

Updated on March 15, 2022

As a young researcher, getting your paper published as a journal article is a huge milestone; but producing it may seem like climbing a mountain compared to, perhaps, the theses, essays, or conference papers you have produced in the past.

You may feel overwhelmed with the thought of carrying innumerable equipment and may feel incapable of completing the task. But, in reality, the answer to writing the perfect research paper is as simple as following a recipe with step-by-step instructions.

In this blog, I aim to bring to you the recipe for effortlessly planning, writing, and publishing your paper as a peer reviewed journal article. I will give you the essential information, key points, and resources to keep in mind before you begin the writing process for your research papers.

Secret ingredient 1: Make notes before you begin the writing process

Because I want you to benefit from this article on a personal level, I am going to give away my secret ingredient for producing a good research paper right at the beginning. The one thing that helps me write literally anything is — cue the drum rolls — making notes.

Yes, making notes is the best way to remember and store all that information, which is definitely going to help you throughout the process of writing your paper. So, please pick up a pen and start making notes for writing your research paper.

Step 1. Choose the right research topic

Although it is important to be passionate and curious about your research article topic, it is not enough. Sometimes the sheer excitement of having an idea may take away your ability to focus on and question the novelty, credibility, and potential impact of your research topic.

On the contrary, the first thing that you should do when you write a journal paper is question the novelty, credibility, and potential impact of your research question.

It is also important to remember that your research, along with the aforementioned points, must be original and relevant: It must benefit and interest the scientific community.

All you have to do is perform a thorough literature search in your research field and have a look at what is currently going on in the field of your topic of interest. This step in academic writing is not as daunting as it may seem and, in fact, is quite beneficial for the following reasons:

• You can determine what is already known about the research topic and the gaps that exist.
• You can determine the credibility and novelty of your research question by comparing it with previously published papers.
• If your research question has already been studied or answered before your first draft, you first save a substantial amount of time by avoiding rejections from journals at a much later stage; and second, you can study and aim to bridge the gaps of previous studies, perhaps, by using a different methodology or a bigger sample size.

So, carefully read as much as you can about what has already been published in your field of research; and when you are doing so, make sure that you make lots of relevant notes as you go along in the process. Remember, your study does not necessarily have to be groundbreaking, but it should definitely extend previous knowledge or refute existing statements on the topic.

Secret ingredient 2: Use a thematic approach while drafting your manuscript

For instance, if you are writing about the association between the level of breast cancer awareness and socioeconomic status, open a new Word or Notes file and create subheadings such as “breast cancer awareness in low- and middle-income countries,” “reasons for lack of awareness,” or “ways to increase awareness.”

Under these subheadings, make notes of the information that you think may be suitable to be included in your paper as you carry out your literature review. Ensure that you make a draft reference list so that you don't miss out on the references.

Step 2: Know your audience

Finding your research topic is not synonymous with communicating it, it is merely a step, albeit an important one; however, there are other crucial steps that follow. One of which is identifying your target audience.

Now that you know what your topic of interest is, you need to ask yourself “Who am I trying to benefit with my research?” A general mistake is assuming that your reader knows everything about your research topic. Drafting a peer reviewed journal article often means that your work may reach a wide and varied audience.

Therefore, it is a good idea to ponder over who you want to reach and why, rather than simply delivering chunks of information, facts, and statistics. Along with considering the above factors, evaluate your reader's level of education, expertise, and scientific field as this may help you design and write your manuscript, tailoring it specifically for your target audience.

Here are a few points that you must consider after you have identified your target audience:

• Shortlist a few target journals: The aims and scope of the journal usually mention their audience. This may help you know your readers and visualize them as you write your manuscript. This will further help you include just the right amount of background and details.
• View your manuscript from the reader's perspective: Try to think about what they might already know or what they would like more details on.
• Include the appropriate amount of jargon: Ensure that your article text is familiar to your target audience and use the correct terminology to make your content more relatable for readers - and journal editors as your paper goes through the peer review process.
• Keep your readers engaged: Write with an aim to fill a knowledge gap or add purpose and value to your reader's intellect. Your manuscript does not necessarily have to be complex, write with a simple yet profound tone, layer (or sub-divide) simple points and build complexity as you go along, rather than stating dry facts.
• Be specific: It is easy to get carried away and forget the essence of your study. Make sure that you stick to your topic and be as specific as you can to your research topic and audience.

Secret ingredient 3: Clearly define your key terms and key concepts

Do not assume that your audience will know your research topic as well as you do, provide compelling details where it is due. This can be tricky. Using the example from “Secret ingredient 2,” you may not need to define breast cancer while writing about breast cancer awareness. However, while talking about the benefits of awareness, such as early presentation of the disease, it is important to explain these benefits, for instance, in terms of superior survival rates.

Step 3: Structure your research paper with care

After determining the topic of your research and your target audience, your overflowing ideas and information need to be structured in a format generally accepted by journals.

Most academic journals conventionally accept original research articles in the following format: Abstract, followed by the Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion sections, also known as the IMRaD, which is a brilliant way of structuring a research paper outline in a simplified and layered format. In brief, these sections comprise the following information:

In closed-access journals, readers have access to the abstract/summary for them to decide if they wish to purchase the research paper. It's an extremely important representative of the entire manuscript.

All information provided in the abstract must be present in the manuscript, it should include a stand-alone summary of the research, the main findings, the abbreviations should be defined separately in this section, and this section should be clear, decluttered, and concise.

Introduction

This section should begin with a background of the study topic, i.e., what is already known, moving on to the knowledge gaps that exist, and finally, end with how the present study aims to fill these gaps, or any hypotheses that the authors may have proposed.

This section describes, with compelling details, the procedures that were followed to answer the research question.

The ultimate factor to consider while producing the methods section is reproducibility; this section should be detailed enough for other researchers to reproduce your study and validate your results. It should include ethical information (ethical board approval, informed consent, etc.) and must be written in the past tense.

This section typically presents the findings of the study, with no explanations or interpretations. Here, the findings are simply stated alongside figures or tables mentioned in the text in the correct sequential order. Because you are describing what you found, this section is also written in the past tense.

Discussion and conclusion

This section begins with a summary of your findings and is meant for you to interpret your results, compare them with previously published papers, and elaborate on whether your findings are comparable or contradictory to previous literature.

This section also contains the strengths and limitations of your study, and the latter can be used to suggest future research. End this section with a conclusion paragraph, briefly summarizing and highlighting the main findings and novelty of your study.

Step 4: Cite credible research sources

Now that you know who and what you are writing for, it's time to begin the writing process for your research paper. Another crucial factor that determines the quality of your manuscript is the detailed information within. The introduction and discussion sections, which make a massive portion of the manuscript, majorly rely on external sources of information that have already been published.

Therefore, it is absolutely indispensable to extract and cite these statements from appropriate, credible, recent, and relevant literature to support your claims. Here are a few pointers to consider while choosing the right sources:

Cite academic journals

These are the best sources to refer to while writing your research paper, because most articles submitted to top journals are rejected, resulting in high-quality articles being filtered-out. In particular, peer reviewed articles are of the highest quality because they undergo a rigorous process of editorial review, along with revisions until they are judged to be satisfactory.

But not just any book, ideally, the credibility of a book can be judged by whether it is published by an academic publisher, is written by multiple authors who are experts in the field of interest, and is carefully reviewed by multiple editors. It can be beneficial to review the background of the author(s) and check their previous publications.

Cite an official online source

Although it may be difficult to judge the trustworthiness of web content, a few factors may help determine its accuracy. These include demographic data obtained from government websites (.gov), educational resources (.edu), websites that cite other pertinent and trustworthy sources, content meant for education and not product promotion, unbiased sources, or sources with backlinks that are up to date. It is best to avoid referring to online sources such as blogs and Wikipedia.

Do not cite the following sources

While citing sources, you should steer clear from encyclopedias, citing review articles instead of directly citing the original work, referring to sources that you have not read, citing research papers solely from one country (be extensively diverse), anything that is not backed up by evidence, and material with considerable grammatical errors.

Although these sources are generally most appropriate and valid, it is your job to critically read and carefully evaluate all sources prior to citing them.

Step 5: Pick the correct journal

Selecting the correct journal is one of the most crucial steps toward getting published, as it not only determines the weightage of your research but also of your career as a researcher. The journals in which you choose to publish your research are part of your portfolio; it directly or indirectly determines many factors, such as funding, professional advancement, and future collaborations.

The best thing you can do for your work is to pick a peer-reviewed journal. Not only will your paper be polished to the highest quality for editors, but you will also be able to address certain gaps that you may have missed out.

Besides, it always helps to have another perspective, and what better than to have it from an experienced peer?

A common mistake that researchers tend to make is leave the task of choosing the target journal after they have written their paper.

Now, I understand that due to certain factors, it can be challenging to decide what journal you want to publish in before you start drafting your paper, therefore, the best time to make this decision is while you are working on writing your manuscript. Having a target journal in mind while writing your paper has a great deal of benefits.

• As the most basic benefit, you can know beforehand if your study meets the aims and scope of your desired journal. It will ensure you're not wasting valuable time for editors or yourself.
• While drafting your manuscript, you could keep in mind the requirements of your target journal, such as the word limit for the main article text and abstract, the maximum number of figures or tables that are allowed, or perhaps, the maximum number of references that you may include.
• Also, if you choose to submit to an open-access journal, you have ample amount of time to figure out the funding.
• Another major benefit is that, as mentioned in the previous section, the aims and scope of the journal will give you a fair idea on your target audience and will help you draft your manuscript appropriately.

It is definitely easier to know that your target journal requires the text to be within 3,500 words than spending weeks writing a manuscript that is around, say, 5,000 words, and then spending a substantial amount of time decluttering. Now, while not all journals have very specific requirements, it always helps to short-list a few journals, if not concretely choose one to publish your paper in.

AJE also offers journal recommendation services if you need professional help with finding a target journal.

Secret ingredient 4: Follow the journal guidelines

Perfectly written manuscripts may get rejected by the journal on account of not adhering to their formatting requirements. You can find the author guidelines/instructions on the home page of every journal. Ensure that as you write your manuscript, you follow the journal guidelines such as the word limit, British or American English, formatting references, line spacing, line/page numbering, and so on.

Our ultimate aim is to instill confidence in young researchers like you and help you become independent as you write and communicate your research. With the help of these easy steps and secret ingredients, you are now ready to prepare your flavorful manuscript and serve your research to editors and ultimately the journal readers with a side of impact and a dash of success.

Lubaina Koti, BS

Scientific Writer

See our "Privacy Policy"

Unfortunately we don't fully support your browser. If you have the option to, please upgrade to a newer version or use Mozilla Firefox , Microsoft Edge , Google Chrome , or Safari 14 or newer. If you are unable to, and need support, please send us your feedback .

We'd appreciate your feedback. Tell us what you think! opens in new tab/window

Publish with Elsevier

Learn about the publication process and how to submit your manuscript. This tutorial will help you find the right journal and maximize the chance to be published.

Your step-by-step guide to publishing with Elsevier

Every year, we accept and publish more than 470,000 journal articles so you are in safe hands. Publishing in an Elsevier journal starts with finding the right journal for your paper. We have tools, resources and services to help you at each stage of the publication journey to enable you to research, write, publish, promote and track your article. Let us help you make the most out of your next publication!

1. Find a journal

Find out the journals that could be best suited for publishing your research. For a comprehensive list of Elsevier journals check our Journal Catalog . You can also match your manuscript using the JournalFinder tool, then learn more about each journal. You can find information about how to log in to each journal’s editorial system here .

JournalFinder

Search the world's leading source of academic journals for a list of recommended journals that best match your research paper. You can search by using your abstract, or by using keywords and other details .

Read the journal's aims and scope to make sure it is a match

Check whether you can submit — some journals are invitation only

Use journal metrics to understand the impact of a journal

If available, check the journal at Journal Insights opens in new tab/window for additional info about impact, speed and reach

2. Prepare your paper for submission

Download our  get published quick guide opens in new tab/window , which outlines the essential steps in preparing a paper. (This is also available in  Chinese opens in new tab/window ). It is very important that you stick to the specific "guide for authors" of the journal to which you are submitting. This can be found on the journal's home page.

You can find information about the publishing process in the understanding the publishing process opens in new tab/window guide. It covers topics such as authors' rights, ethics and plagiarism, and journal and article metrics.

If you have research data to share, make sure you read the guide for authors to find out which options the journal offers to share research data with your article.

Read about publishing in a special issue

Use an external editing service, such as Elsevier’s Author Services opens in new tab/window if you need assistance with language

Free e-learning modules on preparing your manuscript can be found on Researcher Academy opens in new tab/window

Mendeley opens in new tab/window makes your life easier by helping you organize your papers, citations and references, accessing them in the cloud on any device, wherever you are

3. Submit and revise

You can submit to most Elsevier journals using our online systems.  The system you use will depend on the journal to which you submit. You can access the relevant submission system via the "submit your paper" link on the Elsevier.com journal homepage of your chosen journal.

Alternatively, if you have been invited to submit to a journal, follow the instructions provided to you. Once submitted, your paper will be considered by the editor and if it passes initial screening, it will be sent for peer review by experts in your field. If deemed unsuitable for publication in your chosen journal, the editor may suggest you transfer your submission to a more suitable journal, via an article transfer service.

Check the open access options on the journal's homepage

Consider the options for sharing your research data

Be accurate and clear when checking your proofs

Inform yourself about copyright and licensing

4. Track your paper

Track your submitted paper.

You can track the status of your submitted paper online. The system you use to track your submission will be the same system to which you submitted. Use the reference number you received after submission to track your submission. Unsure about what the submission status means? Check out  this video opens in new tab/window .

In case of any problems, contact the Support Center opens in new tab/window .

Track your accepted paper

Once your paper is accepted for publication, you will receive a reference number and a direct link that lets you follow its publication status via Elsevier’s "Track Your Accepted Article" service.

Even without a notification you can track the status of your article by entering your article reference number and corresponding author surname in  Track your accepted article opens in new tab/window .

5. Share and promote

Now that your article is published, you can promote it to achieve a bigger impact for your research. Sharing research, accomplishments and ambitions with a wider audience makes you more visible in your field. This helps you get cited more, enabling you to cultivate a stronger reputation, promote your research and move forward in your career.

After publication, celebrate and  get noticed opens in new tab/window !

Unable to find the answer to your question? Visit our support center for more information on all Elsevier solutions.

Preparing Your Article | The Wiley Network

The process to move from research, to research paper, to article ready for submission doesn't have to be stressful. Use our resources below to help you cite your sources correctly, write the various components of your article concisely, and make it through peer review. Wiley also offers innovative authoring tools to help researchers preparing their manuscripts for submission.

Preparing Your Article | Research Publishing

Your Guide to Publishing

Wiley supports you throughout the manuscript preparation process,

3 article-level metrics to understand your work’s impact

Get a quick understanding of the metrics that matter for your research, what they can show you, and where to find them.

How to write a clinical case report

Editor-in-Chief of Clinical Case Reports, Charles Young, discusses what makes a good case report.

How to Write A Lay Summary for Your Research

Late with a review report? Find out how to handle the situation in this blog post from Andrew Moore, Editor-in-Chief of Bioessays.

Think. Check. Submit your way to the right journal

Find out more about "Think.Check.Submit", a cross-industry initiative designed to support researchers on the road to publication.

10 Ways to Reduce the Word Count of Your Research Paper

Do you need some guidance on writing concisely? This presentation, originally published on Editage Insights, offers some quick tips to help you keep to your desired word count in academic writing.

Writing for Publication- How Can a Structured Writing Retreat Help?

Professor Rowena Murray looks back on a recent writing retreat and discusses how such retreats can help overcome writer's block.

Infographic: 6 Steps for Writing a Literature Review

This infographic sets out six simple steps to set you on your way to writing a successful and well thought out literature review.

How to turn your dissertation into journal articles

Guidance for PhD students planning to turn dissertations into published journal articles.

How to Choose Effective SEO Keywords for Your Research Article | How to Write a Journal Article

Find 5 helpful tips about using keywords in your research article to help journals, and your article, be found more easily by researchers.

Helping authors to bypass article formatting headaches

Improving the author's experience with a simpler submission process and fewer formatting requirements. Release of the pilot program, free format submission.

Get Published: Your How-to Guide

Your how-to guide to get an in-depth understanding of the publishing journey.

Enabling Author Choice: Introducing Two New Transactional Permissions Services

Detailing two new permissions services launched in the UK and Australia

Early career researchers and the pressure to publish

Early career researcher Patricia Garcez discusses the challenges and opportunities facing ECRs in building an international reputation in the 21st Century.

Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics

Read this PDF for a comprehensive overview of best practice guidelines on publishing ethics.

8 Tips For Preparing Your Book Index

12 Habits of Highly Productive Writers: Infographic

This infographic lists some of the habits that highly productive writers adopt to get down to the business of writing.

Get Published: Structuring Your Article

In this video, former Wiley editor Martin Wells offers information and tips for authors on writing their research article.

Wiley Researcher Academy now available through R Upskill

Learn more about Wiley Researcher Academy’s new home

How to Write a Scientific Abstract for Your Research Article | Parts of a Research Article

Find helpful tips about how to write an abstract for a scientific research journal article.

New Online Proofing Means Fewer Headaches and Faster Publication

HTML-OPS is revolutionizing the way authors and editors proof manuscripts.

How to Perfect the Introduction for your Research Article

An easy-to-use guide on how to write an introduction for a research article.

How to Proofread Your Thesis

Discover practical tips on how to proof-read your thesis or research article.

Three Reasons to Time-Log, Even if You Don't have to

FOR INDIVIDUALS

FOR INSTITUTIONS & BUSINESSES

WILEY NETWORK

ABOUT WILEY

Corporate Responsibility

Corporate Governance

Leadership Team

Cookie Preferences

Copyright @ 2000-2024  by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., or related companies. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.

Rights & Permissions

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

• Insights blog

How to write and structure a journal article

Sharing your research data  can be hugely  beneficial to your career , as well as to the scholarly community and wider society. But before you do so, there are some important ethical considerations to remember.

What are the rules and guidance you should follow, when you begin to think about how to write and structure a journal article? Ruth First Prize winner Steven Rogers, PhD said the first thing is to be passionate about what you write.

Steven Nabieu Rogers, Ruth First Prize winner.

Let’s go through some of the best advice that will help you pinpoint the features of a journal article, and how to structure it into a compelling research paper.

Planning for your article

When planning to write your article, make sure it has a central message that you want to get across. This could be a novel aspect of methodology that you have in your PhD study, a new theory, or an interesting modification you have made to theory or a novel set of findings.

2018 NARST Award winner Marissa Rollnick advised that you should decide what this central focus is, then create a paper outline bearing in mind the need to:

Isolate a manageable size

Create a coherent story/argument

Make the argument self-standing

Target the journal readership

Change the writing conventions from that used in your thesis

Get familiar with the journal you want to submit to

It is a good idea to choose your target journal before you start to write your paper. Then you can tailor your writing to the journal’s requirements and readership, to increase your chances of acceptance.

When selecting your journal think about audience, purposes, what to write about and why. Decide the kind of article to write. Is it a report, position paper, critique or review? What makes your argument or research interesting? How might the paper add value to the field?

If you need more guidance on how to choose a journal,  here is our guide to narrow your focus.

Once you’ve chosen your target journal, take the time to read a selection of articles already published – particularly focus on those that are relevant to your own research.

This can help you get an understanding of what the editors may be looking for, then you can guide your writing efforts.

The  Think. Check. Submit.  initiative provides tools to help you evaluate whether the journal you’re planning to send your work to is trustworthy.

The journal’s  aims and scope  is also an important resource to refer back to as you write your paper – use it to make sure your article aligns with what the journal is trying to accomplish.

Keep your message focused

The next thing you need to consider when writing your article is your target audience. Are you writing for a more general audience or is your audience experts in the same field as you? The journal you have chosen will give you more information on the type of audience that will read your work.

When you know your audience, focus on your main message to keep the attention of your readers. A lack of focus is a common problem and can get in the way of effective communication.

Stick to the point. The strongest journal articles usually have one point to make. They make that point powerfully, back it up with evidence, and position it within the field.

How to format and structure a journal article

The format and structure of a journal article is just as important as the content itself, it helps to clearly guide the reader through.

How do I format a journal article?

Individual journals will have their own specific formatting requirements, which you can find in the  instructions for authors.

You can save time on formatting by downloading a template from our  library of templates  to apply to your article text. These templates are accepted by many of our journals. Also, a large number of our journals now offer  format-free submission,  which allows you to submit your paper without formatting your manuscript to meet that journal’s specific requirements.

General structure for writing an academic journal article

The title of your article is one of the first indicators readers will get of your research and concepts. It should be concise, accurate, and informative. You should include your most relevant keywords in your title, but avoid including abbreviations and formulae.

Keywords are an essential part of producing a journal article. When writing a journal article you must select keywords that you would like your article to rank for.

Keywords help potential readers to discover your article when conducting research using search engines.

The purpose of your abstract is to express the key points of your research, clearly and concisely. An abstract must always be well considered, as it is the primary element of your work that readers will come across.

An abstract should be a short paragraph (around 300 words) that summarizes the findings of your journal article. Ordinarily an abstract will be comprised of:

What your research is about

What methods have been used

What your main findings are

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements can appear to be a small aspect of your journal article, however it is still important. This is where you acknowledge the individuals who do not qualify for co-authorship, but contributed to your article intellectually, financially, or in some other manner.

When you acknowledge someone in your academic texts, it gives you more integrity as a writer as it shows that you are not claiming other academic’s ideas as your own intellectual property. It can also aid your readers in their own research journeys.

Introduction

An introduction is a pivotal part of the article writing process. An introduction not only introduces your topic and your stance on the topic, but it also (situates/contextualizes) your argument in the broader academic field.

The main body is where your main arguments and your evidence are located. Each paragraph will encapsulate a different notion and there will be clear linking between each paragraph.

Your conclusion should be an interpretation of your results, where you summarize all of the concepts that you introduced in the main body of the text in order of most to least important. No new concepts are to be introduced in this section.

References and citations

References and citations should be well balanced, current and relevant. Although every field is different, you should aim to cite references that are not more than 10 years old if possible. The studies you cite should be strongly related to your research question.

Clarity is key

Make your writing accessible by using clear language. Writing that is easy to read, is easier to understand too.

You may want to write for a global audience – to have your research reach the widest readership. Make sure you write in a way that will be understood by any reader regardless of their field or whether English is their first language.

Write your journal article with confidence, to give your reader certainty in your research. Make sure that you’ve described your methodology and approach; whilst it may seem obvious to you, it may not to your reader. And don’t forget to explain acronyms when they first appear.

Engage your audience. Go back to thinking about your audience; are they experts in your field who will easily follow technical language, or are they a lay audience who need the ideas presented in a simpler way?

Be aware of other literature in your field, and reference it

Make sure to tell your reader how your article relates to key work that’s already published. This doesn’t mean you have to review every piece of previous relevant literature, but show how you are building on previous work to avoid accidental plagiarism.

When you reference something, fully understand its relevance to your research so you can make it clear for your reader. Keep in mind that recent references highlight awareness of all the current developments in the literature that you are building on. This doesn’t mean you can’t include older references, just make sure it is clear why you’ve chosen to.

How old can my references be?

Your literature review should take into consideration the current state of the literature.

There is no specific timeline to consider. But note that your subject area may be a factor. Your colleagues may also be able to guide your decision.

Researcher’s view

Grasian Mkodzongi, Ruth First Prize Winner

Top tips to get you started

Communicate your unique point of view to stand out. You may be building on a concept already in existence, but you still need to have something new to say. Make sure you say it convincingly, and fully understand and reference what has gone before.

Editor’s view

Professor Len Barton, Founding Editor of Disability and Society

Be original

Now you know the features of a journal article and how to construct it. This video is an extra resource to use with this guide to help you know what to think about before you write your journal article.

Expert help for your manuscript

Taylor & Francis Editing Services  offers a full range of pre-submission manuscript preparation services to help you improve the quality of your manuscript and submit with confidence.

Related resources

How to write your title and abstract

Journal manuscript layout guide

Improve the quality of English of your article

How to edit your paper

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How To Write a Manuscript? Step-by-Step Guide to Research Manuscript Writing

Getting published for the first time is a crucial milestone for researchers, especially early career academics. However, the journey starting from how to write a manuscript for a journal to successfully submitting your scientific study and then getting it published can be a long and arduous one. Many find it impossible to break through the editorial and peer review barriers to get their first article published. In fact, the pressure to publish, the high rejection rates of prestigious journals, and the waiting period for a publication decision may often cause researchers to doubt themselves, which negatively impacts research productivity.

While there is no quick and easy way to getting published, there are some proven tips for writing a manuscript that can help get your work the attention it deserves. By ensuring that you’ve accounted for and ticked the checklist for manuscript writing in research you can significantly increase the chances of your manuscript being accepted.

In this step‐by‐step guide, we answer the question – ­­ how to write a manuscript for publication – by presenting some practical tips for the same.

As a first step, it is important that you spend time to identify and evaluate the journal you plan to submit your manuscript to. Data shows that 21% of manuscripts are desk rejected by journals, with another approximately 40% being rejected after peer review 1 , often because editors feel that the submission does not add to the “conversation” in their journal.  Therefore, even before you actually begin the process of manuscript writing, it is a good idea to find out how other similar studies have been presented. This will not only give you an understanding of where your research stands within the wider academic landscape, it will also provide valuable insights on how to present your study when writing a manuscript so that it addresses the gaps in knowledge and stands apart from current published literature.

The next step is to begin the manuscript writing process. This is the part that people find really daunting. Most early career academics feel overwhelmed at this point, and they often look for tips on how to write a manuscript to help them sort through all the research data and present it correctly. Experts suggest following the IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) structure that organizes research findings into logical sections and presents ideas and thoughts more coherently for readers.

• The introduction  should state the research problem addressed in your study and highlight its significance in your research domain. A well-crafted introduction is a key element that will compel readers to delve further into the body of your manuscript.
• The materials and methods  section should include what you did and how you conducted your research – the tools, techniques, and instruments used, the data collection methods, and details about the lab environment. Ensuring clarity in this section when writing a manuscript is critical for success.
• The results  section must include complete details of the most significant findings in your study and indicate whether you were able to solve the problem outlined in the introduction. In your manuscript writing process, remember that using tables and figures will help to simplify complex data and results for readers.
• The discussion  section is where you evaluate your results in the context of existing published literature, analyze the implications and meaning of your findings, draw conclusions, and discuss the impact of your research.

You can learn more about the IMRaD structure and master the art of crafting a well-structured manuscript that impresses journal editors and readers in this  in-depth course for researchers , which is available free with a Researcher.Life subscription.

When writing a manuscript and putting the structure together, more often than not, researchers end up spending a lot of time writing the “meat” of the article (i.e., the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections). Consequently, little thought goes into the title and abstract, while keywords get even lesser attention.

The key purpose of the abstract and title is to provide readers with information about whether or not the results of your study are relevant to them. One of my top tips on how to write a manuscript would be to spend some time ensuring that the title is clear and unambiguous, since it is typically the first element a reader encounters. This makes it one of the most important steps to writing a manuscript. Moreover, in addition to attracting potential readers, your research paper’s title is your first chance to make a good impression on reviewers and journal editors.  A descriptive title and abstract will also make your paper stand out for the reader, who will be drawn in if they know exactly what you are presenting. In manuscript writing, remember that the more specific and accurate the title, the more chances of the manuscript being found and cited. Learn the dos and don’ts of drafting an effective title with the help of  this comprehensive handbook for authors , which is also available on the Researcher.Life platform.

The title and the abstract together provide readers with a quick summary of the manuscript and offer a brief glimpse into your research and its scientific implications. The abstract must contain the main premise of your research and the questions you seek to answer. Often, the abstract might be the only part of the manuscript that is read by busy editors, therefore, it should represent a concise version of your complete manuscript. The practice of placing published research papers behind a paywall means many of the database searching software programs will only scan the abstract and titles of the article to determine if the document is relevant to the search keywords the reader is using. Therefore, when writing a manuscript, it is important to write the abstract in a way that ensures both the readers and search engines will be able to find and decide if your research is relevant to their study 2 .

It would not be wrong to say that the title, abstract and keywords operate in a manner comparable to a chain reaction. Once the keywords have helped people find the research paper and an effective title has successfully captured and drawn the readers’ attention, it is up to the abstract of the research paper to further trigger the readers’ interest and maintain their curiosity. This functional advantage alone serves to make an abstract an indispensable component within the research paper format 3 that deserves your complete attention when writing a manuscript.

As you proceed with the steps to writing a manuscript, keep in mind the recommended paper length and mould the structure of your manuscript taking into account the specific guidelines of the journal you are submitting to. Most scientific journals have evolved a distinctive style, structure, and organization. One of the top tips for writing a manuscript would be to use concise sentences and simple straightforward language in a consistent manner throughout the manuscript to convey the details of your research.

Once all the material necessary for submission has been put together, go through the manuscript with a fresh mind so that you can identify errors and gaps. According to Peter Thrower, Editor-in-Chief of  Carbon , one of the top reasons for manuscript rejection is poor language comprehension. Incorrect usage of words, grammar and spelling errors, and flaws in sentence construction are certain to lead to rejection. Authors also often overlook checks to ensure a coherent transition between sections when writing a manuscript. Proofreading is, therefore, a must before submitting your manuscript for publication. Double-check the data and figures and read the manuscript out loud – this helps to weed out possible grammatical errors.

You could request colleagues or fellow researchers to go through your manuscript before submission but, if they are not experts in the same field, they may miss out on errors. In such cases, you may want to consider using professional academic editing services to help you improve sentence structure, grammar, word choice, style, logic and flow to create a polished manuscript that has a 24% greater chance of journal acceptance 4.

Once you are done writing a manuscript as per your target journal, we recommend doing a  comprehensive set of submission readiness checks  to ensure your paper is structurally sound, complete with all the relevant sections, and is devoid of language errors. Most importantly, you need to check for any accidental or unintentional plagiarism – i.e., not correctly citing, paraphrasing or quoting another’s work – which is considered a copyright infringement by the journal, can not only lead to rejection, but also stir up trouble for you and cause irreversible damage to your reputation and career. Also make sure you have all the ethical declarations in place when writing a manuscript, such as conflicts of interest and compliance approvals for studies involving human or animal participants.

To conclude, whenever you find yourself wondering – how to write a manuscript for publication – make sure you check the following points:

• Is your research paper complete, optimized and submission ready?
• Have all authors agreed the content of the submitted manuscript?
• Is your paper aligned with your target journals publication policies?
• Have you created a winning submission package, with all the necessary details?
• Does it include a persuasive cover letter that showcases your research?

Writing a manuscript and getting your work published is an important step in your career as it introduces your research to a wide audience. If you follow our simple manuscript writing guide, you will have the base to create a winning manuscript, with a great chance at acceptance. If you face any hurdles or need support along the way, be sure to explore these  bite-sized learning modules on research writing , designed by researchers, for researchers. And once you have mastered the tips for writing a research paper, and crafting a great submission package, use the comprehensive AI-assisted manuscript evaluation  to avoid errors that lead to desk rejection and optimize your paper for submission to your target journal.

• Helen Eassom, 5 Options to Consider After Article Rejection. The Wiley Network. Retrieved from  https://www.wiley.com/network/researchers/submission-and-navigating-peer-review/5-options-to-consider-after-article-rejection
• Jeremy Dean Chapnick, The abstract and title page. AME Medical Journal, Vol 4, 2019. Retrieved from  http://amj.amegroups.com/article/view/4965/html
• Velany Rodrigues, How to write an effective title and abstract and choose appropriate keywords. Editage Insights, 2013. Retrieved from  https://www.editage.com/insights/how-to-write-an-effective-title-and-abstract-and-choose-appropriate-keywords
• New Editage Report Shows That Pre-Submission Language Editing Can Improve Acceptance Rates of Manuscripts Written by Non-Native English-Speaking Researchers. PR Newswire, 2019. Retrieved from  https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-editage-report-shows-that-pre-submission-language-editing-can-improve-acceptance-rates-of-manuscripts-written-by-non-native-english-speaking-researchers-300833765.html#https%3A%2F%2Fwww.prnewswire.com%3A443

Editage All Access is a subscription-based platform that unifies the best AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline every step of a researcher’s journey. The Editage All Access Pack is a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI writing assistant, literature recommender, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional publication services from Editage.  

Based on 22+ years of experience in academia, Editage All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $14 a month !    

Related Posts

Back to School – Lock-in All Access Pack for a Year at the Best Price

Journal Turnaround Time: Researcher.Life and Scholarly Intelligence Join Hands to Empower Researchers with Publication Time Insights 

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Author Biographies
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Research on the influence of a magnesium-based carbon dioxide battery system on co 2 storage performance.

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 2.1. the reaction mechanism of the mg-co 2 battery, 2.2. preparation of co 2 battery materials, 2.3. characterization, 3. results and discussion, 3.1. the effect of the catalytic electrode on the conversion efficiency of mg-co 2 batteries with molecules, 3.2. the effect of the electrolyte concentration on the conversion efficiency of the co 2 molecules, 3.3. the effect of co 2 flow change on the conversion efficiency of co 2 molecules, 3.4. co 2 battery system performance analysis, 3.5. characterization of catalyst structure, 4. conclusions, supplementary materials, author contributions, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• BP. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2022 ; BP p.l.c.: London, UK, 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Marbán, G.; Valdés-Solís, T. Towards the hydrogen economy? Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2007 , 32 , 1625–1637. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mao, Z.; Ma, A.; Zhang, Z. Towards carbon neutrality in shipping: Impact of European Union’s emissions trading system for shipping and China’s response. Ocean. Coast. Manag. 2024 , 249 , 107006. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• IPCC. Climate Change 2021—The Physical Science Basis. Chem. Int. 2021 , 43 , 22–23. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xie, Z.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Z. Metal–CO 2 batteries on the road: CO 2 from contamination gas to energy source. Adv. Mater. 2017 , 29 , 1605891. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Folger, P. Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) in the United States ; Congressional Research Service: Washington, DA, USA, 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Czernichowski-Lauriol, I.; Berenblyum, R.; Bigi, S.; Car, M.; Liebscher, A.; Persoglia, S.; Poulsen, N.; Stead, R.; Vercelli, S.; Vincent, C.J.; et al. CO 2 GeoNet Perspective on CO 2 Capture and Storage: A Vital Technology for Completing the Climate Change Mitigation Portfolio. Energy Procedia 2017 , 114 , 7480–7491. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hua, W.; Sha, Y.; Zhang, X.; Cao, H. Research Progress of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Technology Based on the Shipping Industry. Ocean. Eng. 2023 , 281 , 114929. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Abanades, J.C.; Rubin, E.S.; Mazzotti, M. On the climate change mitigation potential of CO 2 conversion to fuels. Energy Environ. Sci. 2017 , 10 , 2491–2499. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vega, F.; Baena-Moreno, F.M.; Fernández, L.M.G.; Portillo, E.; Navarrete, B.; Zhang, Z. Current Status of CO 2 Chemical Absorption Research Applied to CCS: Towards Full Deployment at Industrial Scale. Appl. Energy 2020 , 260 , 114313. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xie, J.; Wang, X.; Lv, J.; Huang, Y.; Wu, M.; Wang, Y.; Yao, J.Q. Frontispiece: Reversible Aqueous Zinc–CO 2 Batteries Based on CO 2 –HCOOH Interconversion. Angew. Chem. 2018 , 57 , 16996–17001. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kim, C.; Kim, J.; Joo, S.; Bu, Y.; Liu, M.; Cho, J.; Kim, G. Efficient CO 2 Utilization via a Hybrid Na-CO 2 System Based on CO 2 Dissolution. iScience 2018 , 9 , 278–285. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, J.; Seong, A.; Yang, Y.; Joo, S.; Kim, C.; Jeon, D.H.; Dai, L.; Kim, G. Indirect surpassing CO 2 utilization in membrane-free CO 2 battery. Nano Energy 2021 , 82 , 105741. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Takechi, K.; Shiga, T.; Asaoka, T. A Li–O 2 /CO 2 battery. Chem. Commun. 2011 , 47 , 3463–3465. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Subbaraman, R.; Tripkovic, D.; Strmcnik, D.; Chang, K.C.; Uchimura, M.; Paulikas, A.P.; Stamenkovic, V.; Markovic, N.M. Enhancing Hydrogen Evolution Activity in Water Splitting by Tailoring Li + -Ni(OH) 2 -Pt Interfaces. Science 2011 , 334 , 1256–1260. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Morales-Guio, C.G.; Stern, L.-A.; Hu, X. Nanostructured hydrotreating catalysts for electrochemical hydrogen evolution. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014 , 43 , 6555–6569. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Green, T.; Britz, D. Kinetics of the deuterium and hydrogen evolution reactions at palladium in alkaline solution. J. Electroanal. Chem. 1996 , 412 , 59–66. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Andonoglou, P.P.; Jannakoudakis, A.D. Palladium deposition on activated carbon fibre supports and electrocatalytic activity of the modified electrodes towards the hydrogen evolution reaction. Electrochim. Acta 1997 , 42 , 1905–1913. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, J.; Zhou, P.; Li, F.; Ren, R.; Liu, Y.; Niu, J.; Ma, J.; Zhang, X.; Tian, M.; Jin, J.; et al. Ni@Pd/PEI–rGO stack structures with controllable Pd shell thickness as advanced electrodes for efficient hydrogen evolution. J. Mater. Chem. A 2015 , 3 , 11261–11268. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kukunuri, S.; Austeria, P.M.; Sampath, S. Electrically conducting palladium selenide (Pd 4 Se, Pd 17 Se 15 , Pd 7 Se 4 ) phases: Synthesis and activity towards hydrogen evolution reaction. Chem. Commun. 2016 , 52 , 206–209. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cargnello, M.; Doan-Nguyen, V.V.T.; Gordon, T.R.; Diaz, R.E.; Stach, E.A.; Gorte, R.J.; Fornasiero, P.; Murray, C.B. Control of Metal Nanocrystal Size Reveals Metal-Support Interface Role for Ceria Catalysts. Science 2013 , 341 , 771–773. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lewera, A.; Timperman, L.; Roguska, A. Metal–support interactions between nanosized Pt and metal oxides (WO 3 and TiO 2 ) studied using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. J. Phys. Chem. C 2011 , 115 , 20153–20159. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Z.Y.; Liu, Z.; Liang, J.C. Facile synthesis of Pd–Mn 3 O 4 /C as high-efficient electrocatalyst for oxygen evolution reaction. J. Materials Chem. A 2014 , 2 , 18236–18240. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pradhan, D.; Su, Z.; Sindhwani, S.; Honek, J.F.; Leung, K.T. Electrochemical growth of ZnO nanobelt-like structures at 0 C: Synthesis, characterization, and in-situ glucose oxidase embedment. J. Phys. Chem. C 2011 , 115 , 18149–18156. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Titkov, A.I.; Salanov, A.N.; Koscheev, S.V. Mechanisms of Pd(1 1 0) surface reconstruction and oxidation: XPS, LEED and TDS study. Surf. Sci. 2006 , 600 , 4119–4125. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Spiel, C.; Blaha, P.; Suchorski, Y. CeO 2 /Pt(111) interface studied using first-principles density functional theory calculations. Phys. Rev. B 2011 , 84 , 045412. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Peng, C.; Xue, L.; Zhao, Z.; Guo, L.; Zhang, C.; Wang, A.; Mao, J.; Dou, S.X.; Guo, Z. Boosted Mg−CO 2 Batteries by Amide-Mediated CO 2 Capture Chemistry and Mg 2+ -Conducting Solid-Electrolyte Interphases. Angew. Chemie 2023 , 136 , e202313264. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, C.; Wang, A.; Guo, L.; Yi, J.; Luo, J. A Moisture-Assisted Rechargeable Mg-CO 2 Battery. Angew. Chem. 2022 , 61 , e202200181. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wei, S.; Shi, H.; Li, X.; Hu, X.; Xu, C.; Wang, X. A Green and Efficient Method for Preparing Graphene Using CO 2 @Mg In-Situ Reaction and Its Application in High-Performance Lithium-Ion Batteries. J. Alloys Compd. 2022 , 902 , 163700. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Miller, H.A.; Lavacchi, A.; Vizza, F. A Pd/C-CeO 2 Anode Catalyst for High-Performance Platinum-Free Anion Exchange Membrane Fuel Cells. Angew. Chemie 2016 , 55 , 6004–6007. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Miller, H.A.; Vizza, F.; Marelli, M.; Zadick, A.; Dubau, L.; Chatenet, M.; Geiger, S.; Cherevko, S.; Doan, H.; Pavlicek, R.K.; et al. Highly active nanostructured palladium-ceria electrocatalysts for the hydrogen oxidation reaction in alkaline medium. Nano Energy 2017 , 33 , 293–305. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wright, S.E. Comparison of the Theoretical Performance Potential of Fuel Cells and Heat Engines. Renew. Energy 2004 , 29 , 179–195. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cabello, M.; Medina, A.; Alcántara, R.; Nacimiento, F.; Pérez-Vicente, C.; Tirado, J.L. A Theoretical and Experimental Study of Hexagonal Molybdenum Trioxide as Dual-Ion Electrode for Rechargeable Magnesium Battery. J. Alloys Compd. 2020 , 831 , 154795. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yamada, Y.; Wang, J.; Ko, S.; Watanabe, E.; Yamada, A. Advances and Issues in Developing Salt-Concentrated Battery Electrolytes. Nat. Energy 2019 , 4 , 269–280. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guo, X.; Li, Y.; Chen, N.; Wang, X.; Xie, Q. Construction of Sustainable Release Antimicrobial Microspheres Loaded with Potassium Diformate. J. Inorg. Mater. 2021 , 36 , 181–187. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Duan, J.; Chen, S.; Zhao, C. Ultrathin Metal-Organic Framework Array for Efficient Electrocatalytic Water Splitting. Nat. Commun. 2017 , 8 , 15341. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ikäläinen, S.; Lantto, P.; Vaara, J. Fully Relativistic Calculations of Faraday and Nuclear Spin-Induced Optical Rotation in Xenon. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2011 , 8 , 91–98. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ciuparu, D.; Lyubovsky, M.R.; Altman, E.; Pfefferle, L.D.; Datye, A. CATALYTIC COMBUSTION OF METHANE OVER PALLADIUM-BASED CATALYSTS. Catal. Rev. 2002 , 44 , 593–649. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, X.; Shuai, K.; Xu, B. Review on Copper and Palladium Based Catalysts for Methanol Steam Reforming to Produce Hydrogen. Catalysts 2017 , 7 , 183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, Y.; Zhou, R.J.; Mo, A.C.; Chen, Z.Q.; Wu, H.K. Synthesis and Characterization of Yttrium/Hydroxyapatite Nanoparticles. Key Eng. Mater. 2007 , 330–332 , 295–298. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yan, L.-G.; Yang, K.; Shan, R.-R.; Yan, T.; Wei, J.; Yu, S.-J.; Yu, H.-Q.; Du, B. Kinetic, Isotherm and Thermodynamic Investigations of Phosphate Adsorption onto Core–Shell Fe 3 O 4 @LDHs Composites with Easy Magnetic Separation Assistance. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2015 , 448 , 508–516. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chalgin, A.; Song, C.; Tao, P.; Shang, W.; Deng, T.; Wu, J. Effect of Supporting Materials on the Electrocatalytic Activity, Stability and Selectivity of Noble Metal-Based Catalysts for Oxygen Reduction and Hydrogen Evolution Reactions. Prog. Nat. Sci. 2020 , 30 , 289–297. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Yang, H.; Wei, M.; Wang, B.; Wang, L.; Chen, Q.; Su, C.; Feng, Y.; Wang, X.; Li, K. Research on the Influence of a Magnesium-Based Carbon Dioxide Battery System on CO 2 Storage Performance. Processes 2024 , 12 , 1896. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091896

Yang H, Wei M, Wang B, Wang L, Chen Q, Su C, Feng Y, Wang X, Li K. Research on the Influence of a Magnesium-Based Carbon Dioxide Battery System on CO 2 Storage Performance. Processes . 2024; 12(9):1896. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091896

Yang, Haoran, Mian Wei, Baodong Wang, Leqi Wang, Qiuyan Chen, Chang Su, Yongcheng Feng, Xing Wang, and Ke Li. 2024. "Research on the Influence of a Magnesium-Based Carbon Dioxide Battery System on CO 2 Storage Performance" Processes 12, no. 9: 1896. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr12091896

Article Metrics

Supplementary material.

ZIP-Document (ZIP, 153 KiB)

Further Information

Mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

We couldn’t find any results matching your search.

Please try using other words for your search or explore other sections of the website for relevant information.

We’re sorry, we are currently experiencing some issues, please try again later.

Our team is working diligently to resolve the issue. Thank you for your patience and understanding.

News & Insights

Immunic CEO Says "Right Time" to Buy the Stock is Now – Part 2

September 02, 2024 — 05:28 am EDT

Written by Sheryl Sheth for TipRanks  ->

In our previous article on Immunic (IMUX) , we highlighted some of the important insights from the interview hosted by TipRanks with the company’s President and CEO Dr. Daniel Vitt . The CEO shed light on how Immunic’s “risk profile got very attractive over time” and why this could possibly be the right opportunity to consider investing in the stock.

Until now, we have focused on why Immunic was formed, some of the key milestones, and Immunic’s positioning versus some of the well-established pharma companies.

In this article, we will look at some important aspects that could drive Immunic stock’s trajectory. Dr. Vitt discussed some notable catalysts and risks that could impact both the company and the stock’s performance. Let’s look at each of them in brief.

Significant Catalysts for Immunic Stock

• Strong Pipeline of Drugs – Immunic is striving to develop an oral, small-molecule drug for treating chronic diseases such as Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and Celiac Disease . The company’s lead candidate, Vidofludimus Calcium , has even shown significant statistical relevance in clinical trials.  
• Addition of Jason Tardio as COO and President – On July 12, 2024, Jason Tardio, a pharma sector veteran, joined Immunic as COO and President. Dr. Vitt said that Jason brings along meaningful experience in the commercialization of successful MS drugs for major pharma companies such as Novartis (NVS) and Biogen (BIIB) . Dr. Vitt is optimistic that Jason’s strong background will help Immunic in preparing for the potential launch of Vidofludimus Calcium (IMU-838) as an oral drug for treating MS. Also, Jason could help boost Immunic’s chances of securing commercial partnerships for the drugs.
• Phase 2 CALLIPER Trial Readout – Dr. Vitt and the whole Immunic team eagerly await the readout of the Phase 2 CALLIPER trial in Progressive MS in April 2025. This will then be followed by the Phase 3 CALLIPER trial and its expected reading in 2026.
• Commercialization Stage Transformative Event – Once all clinical trials display the required statistical relevance for treating the targeted diseases, Immunic will be able to apply for the U.S. FDA’s (Food and Drug Administration) approval for drug commercialization. Dr. Vitt is highly encouraged by the indications presented so far in both the ENSURE trials for MS and CALLIPER trials for Celiac Disease. Immunic expects the readouts from the final trials in 2026, which if successful, will lead to a transformational event for both the company and IMUX stock.

Potential Risks for Immunic Stock

From a larger perspective, we can break down Immunic’s risks into three main factors:

• Macro Risks – Dr. Vitt says that although the healthcare sector is believed to be a defensive play in times of macro uncertainty for investors, economic factors do impact a company’s internal functioning. For instance, a persistent high interest rate environment impacts a pharma company’s ability to invest in research and development (R&D) activities. Once interest rates start easing, drug companies can enhance their R&D expenses and proceed with their drug development initiatives.
• Funding Risk – Access to adequate funding plays an important role for any clinical-stage pharmaceutical company. Interestingly, Immunic raised new funding of up to $240 million through a three-tranche private placement offering of its common shares (or pre-funded warrants) in January this year. This ensures enough liquidity to conduct its clinical trials and support its operating expenses and capital expenditures. Dr. Vitt noted that Immunic need not raise more capital at least until the readout of the Phase 2 CALLIPER Study, expected in April 2025.
• Delisting Risk – A small cap or penny stock often carries the risk of receiving delisting notifications from the stock exchange on which it is listed. This is mostly because the stock does not meet the minimum bid price requirement. When asked about any risk related to delisting, Dr. Vitt replied that there is absolutely no delisting risk associated with IMUX stock as of now or going forward.

Is Immunic a Good Stock to Buy?

On TipRanks, IMUX stock has a Moderate Buy consensus rating based on two Buys and one Hold recommendation. The average Immunic Therapeutics price target of $13 implies 760.9% upside potential from current levels. Meanwhile, IMUX shares have lost 1.3% in the past six months.

See more IMUX analyst ratings

This article was written in partnership with Immunic. TipRanks may be compensated for its publication.

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.

Stocks mentioned

More related articles.

This data feed is not available at this time.

Sign up for the TradeTalks newsletter to receive your weekly dose of trading news, trends and education. Delivered Wednesdays.

To add symbols:

• Type a symbol or company name. When the symbol you want to add appears, add it to My Quotes by selecting it and pressing Enter/Return.
• Copy and paste multiple symbols separated by spaces.

These symbols will be available throughout the site during your session.

Your symbols have been updated

Edit watchlist.

• Type a symbol or company name. When the symbol you want to add appears, add it to Watchlist by selecting it and pressing Enter/Return.

Opt in to Smart Portfolio

Smart Portfolio is supported by our partner TipRanks. By connecting my portfolio to TipRanks Smart Portfolio I agree to their Terms of Use .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Indian J Anaesth
• v.60(9); 2016 Sep

Preparing manuscript: Scientific writing for publication

Sukhminder jit singh bajwa.

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Gian Sagar Medical College and Hospital, Banur, Patiala, Punjab, India

Chhavi Sawhney

1 Department of Anaesthesia, JPNATC, AIIMS, New Delhi, India

Publication has become a burning issue among Indian medical fraternity owing to certain academic and professional necessities. The large number of submissions to the anaesthesia journals has resulted in accumulation of too much below average scientific material. A properly written manuscript is the dream of every editor and reviewer. The art of preparing a manuscript can be acquired only by following certain basic rules and technical aspects, besides knowledge and skills. Before preparing the manuscript, a target journal should be considered. All the instructions to the authors pertaining to that particular journal should be followed meticulously before preparing the manuscript for submission. The basic structure of the manuscript to be followed can be summarised by the acronym IMRaD (introduction, methods, results and discussion). The current review article aims to highlight all those mandatory and desirable features which should be kept in consideration while preparing a scientific manuscript for publication.

INTRODUCTION

Publication of a research work is the last step in the field of medical academics. A lot of efforts are made to accomplish medical research; however, when it comes to publishing this hard work, most of the researchers either lose the steam or get disinterested. Poorly prepared manuscripts and multiple rejections by various journals further dampen their spirits. Lack of novelty in research, poor research design, inappropriate methodology, errors in selecting proper statistical tools and techniques, inadequate training of scientific writing, grammatical and syntax errors and various other flaws are major contributory factors leading to the preparation of a poor manuscript. The enthusiasm and the joy of writing diminish with repeated rejection of manuscripts even in authors with good potential.[ 1 , 2 , 3 ] This narrative review emphasises on the basic mandatory and desirable aspects which should be taken into consideration while preparing a manuscript for publication.

CURRENT SCENARIO IN INDIA

Scientific writing in India especially in medical field has for long remained in a plateau phase but has gained importance in recent times. Performance pressure and obligation to publish for promotions has created a rat race for rapid publication and acceptance. ‘Publish or perish’ has become the necessary evil for medical scientific literature in our nation. Besides the flaws in the research methodology and poor study designs, the scientific writing and publication are also not up to the academic, scientific and ethical standards. With more emphasis on thesis completion, old topics are being presented in a new package. Although such thesis topics may help the post-graduate understand the steps of methodological research, for the scientific community, this is like garbage in and garbage out leading to accumulation of poor or below average literature. Ignoring the cultural and academic aspects of research is leading to plagiarism, misconduct and conflicts. An acute need is felt among academicians to resolve these issues by adopting appropriate measures to boost the ethical and scientific research in our nation. The current narrative review is part of such measures adopted by the Indian Society of Anaesthesiologists (ISA) including development of ‘Research methodology and publication module’ to guide the anaesthesiologists towards better scientific writing approach. The aim of this module is to inculcate the ethical and scientific approach towards the medical writing for publication among the anaesthesiologists.

PRE-REQUISITES TO MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION

Scientific writing for publication is a process that involves various steps such as planning, writing, revising and then, submission to the journal. There are a few prerequisites before one begins to write. A review of literature for originality of the idea and lacunae in the current knowledge is helpful. It is imperative to have a clear understanding of research hypothesis, data and anticipated key results. Identification of target readers helps in selecting the right journal for submission of manuscript. The manuscript should be prepared according to the specifications of the journal, and a statistician should be involved from the beginning. As the author guidelines for journals are subjected to change with time, it is advisable to review the latest author guidelines of the journal while preparing the manuscript.[ 4 ] The International Committee of Medical Journals Editors (ICMJE) provides guidelines for authorship issues and these should be followed universally while preparing a manuscript.[ 5 ] There are other research reporting guidelines to ensure accurate reporting such as Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) for clinical trials, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology for observational studies (STROBE) and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA).[ 6 ] Discussing the skeleton and empty tables and figures with co-authors helps in creating a clear and concise storyline. This should be done at the beginning of writing the manuscript after collection and analysis of data and making only relevant tables and figures.[ 7 ] Methods and results sections are easier to write, and one can write them before writing introduction and discussion.[ 8 ]

Title and abstract

Abstracts of various manuscripts are freely available online, and the readers rely on these to search relevant literature. The abstract is the single most important part of the manuscript and yet often neglected and poorly written. A concise and standalone abstract serves as a resume for the manuscript and helps the readers decide whether it is relevant to their work.[ 9 ] Abstract should be written according to the journal's guidelines, but it is preferable to restrict the word limit to <250. No reference should be cited in the abstract part of the manuscript. The abstract includes:

• Background and aims which should convey the need for the study
• Materials and methods should briefly describe the settings, design, parameters to be observed and statistical analysis
• Results should be brief with emphasis on significant findings
• Conclusions should be short and strong.

The abstract outline may be developed early and can be revised later to include the highlights of manuscript. Usually, 3–10 keywords are required along with the abstract that reveal the main topic of the study. These should be the words registered under Medical Subject Heading of National Library of Medicine databases.[ 10 ]

After writing the abstract, the author should be able to answer fundamental questions on writing: Why did we start? What did we do? What did we find? What does it mean? These form the basis of introduction, methods, results and discussion format used for scientific writing.[ 11 ]

Introduction section

It is the section where the author states the purpose or rationale for carrying out the research. Information about the background of the problem (what is known) and its current state (what is unknown) is included in the introduction. Authors have to highlight the gaps in the literature that the study is going to fill and state the relevance of research question. Research hypothesis and study outcomes (primary and secondary) are integral parts of introduction. This creates a strong background on which the aims and objectives of the study are built. Important statements need to be backed by pertinent references, but too many references should be avoided as they dilute the novelty of the study. There are no maximum word limits for introduction, but it is preferable to restrict it to <10%–15% of total word count of the paper.[ 12 ]

Material and Methods

This section provides adequate information about the design, methodology and feasibility to replicate the study. Editors judge the study on whether the methods used are adequate to answer the specific aims and research question. This section should begin with a mention of ethical clearance from the institute review board or pharmacovigilance committee clearance as well as patient's consent. Authors and institutional identity should never be disclosed in the main manuscript as majority of the journals follow a double-blinded, peer-reviewed process. Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be clearly defined on scientific and clinical basis. If scoring sheets or scales are used, one should ensure that they are properly validated and should have scientific support. Authors should describe the procedures and statistical tests used in detail and the rationale for choosing these. It is better to avoid the method which the authors do not have expertise with. Rather the presentation of methodology should be in clear, plain English for a general reader to understand. Other essentials of materials and methods section include but are not limited to following aspects [ Table 1 ].

Essentials of materials and methods

Result section forms the heart of the manuscript. It should always be written in the past tense. Results confirm or reject the hypothesis which was built initially during planning of the study, but they do not prove anything. It is a good practice to present a flowchart of the recruitment procedure and response of the subjects to interventions.[ 13 ] While mentioning these procedures, the CONSORT statement should be strictly followed for all the research studies. It is better to write the result section after figures and tables are constructed and including them in the outline. Analyse the data critically and use logical headers and subheadings while writing the results. The observations should be presented in the order listed in the methods, preferably from general to specific. All the findings whether significant or not should be stated without bias or interpretation. The results determine whether the original research question has been answered and it forms the base for direction for future studies.

In this section, the results are discussed but not repeated or summarised. One should begin with a summary of the main findings or by answering the research question in the first paragraph itself. This is followed by a literary comparison with other studies and implications in clinical practice or research.[ 14 ] When comparing with other studies, the most recent articles from the highest impact journals must be selected. In case of contrasting results, scientific and clinical explanation must be provided if possible with a valid reference. The strengths and limitations of the study should be acknowledged, and means for improvement should be suggested along with future direction for such studies.[ 15 ] ‘Do not try to fill River Ganga in a small bowl’ by getting too verbose or with overstatements as only a few studies can make discoveries and innovations that can change the course of anaesthesia practice. In doing so, authors most often:

• Attempt to overstate the importance of their findings
• Come to erroneous or statistically unsupported conclusions
• Uncritically accept statistical results, which results in excessive length, a common problem.

Authors should let the data speak for themselves. The discussion section should end after appropriately mentioning the conclusions in brief.

Conclusion section

Conclusion part should contain the key message that has been discussed in the manuscript. It should be brief, succinct and should not mention anything which has not been discussed earlier in the text. Similar to abstract, no reference should be cited in this part of the manuscript.

Methodology of Referencing

References should strictly be written and quoted according to journal's instructions which are easily available on the website of the journal. The references should be entered in Vancouver style in the text part of the manuscript; that is they should appear in the same consecutive numerical order as they appear in the final references section. Journal articles, book references, monographs, articles from electronic databases and books should be written strictly according to the prescribed format by Indian Journal Of Anaesthesia (IJA). Use of et al . should appear after six authors if there are more than six authors in the reference as per the recommendations of ICMJE. More information regarding precise method of reference writing can be searched from http://www.icmje.org or http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/uniform_requirements.html .

Tables and figures

Tables and figure are critical to a paper as the editors and readers look at these before reading the manuscript. Editors can judge the entire manuscript on how well these are constructed. They help in eliminating numerical data and unnecessary long explanations in the text. Any ambiguity in the data becomes immediately clear. Figures display important trends and procedures, simplify detailed data and show basic methodologies. Journals, (such as the Indian Journal of Anaesthesia), do not routinely publish coloured figures and graphs for economical reasons, unless they are extremely necessary for understanding the content. The journal permits colour printing at fixed costs, as per journal's policy. Moreover, maximum permissible number of tables and figures should not exceed six and it should be ensured that the content of the tables and figures is not repeated unnecessarily in the text. The editorial board can allow more numbers to be published as per their assessment of the article content and importance and impact on anaesthesia practice.

Contents of the title page

Besides the title and type of manuscript, the title page should also contain the information regarding authors including their institutional affiliation, current designation, contribution of each author and contact details. It should also contain the registered trial number of the research. Running title should also be mentioned in the title page file. Copyright form signed by all authors should be uploaded during submission of the manuscript

An editor's perspective

Incorrect style irritates editors and reviewers, and invariably, the chances of acceptance get diminished. A careful evaluation again including elimination of spelling errors, punctuation mistakes, grammatical and syntax errors should be done before finally submitting it to the journal [ Table 2 ]. This practice can be improved by writing, rewriting and rewriting. Incorrect citations and inaccuracy of references put everyone in the editorial board in an inconvenient state before acceptance and are a disservice to the reader after publication. Numerical data, figures and tables legends must be checked multiple times for their consistency and accuracy [ Table 2 ]. Repetition should be avoided such as repeating some sentences of introduction in the discussion section or repeating figure legends, table titles or contents of the tables in the text. Abbreviations, definitions, symbols in figures and tables must be explained in legends and footnotes and never refer a reader back to text for such information [ Table 2 ].

Editor and reviewer's expectation of a good manuscript

Selection of a wrong journal or format, poorly presented abstract and title, flawed study design, inappropriate research question and hypothesis, poor selection of statistical tests, being too verbose about study results, disorganised writing style with grammatical and syntax errors and poor presentation of tables and figures are some of the main flaws which are responsible for rejection of the manuscript.

Submission and showing patience

Pressure to publish quickly may lead to rejection as all the editors and reviewers devote their precious time to evaluate the manuscripts. They do the honorary work without any emoluments and do expect good conduct from authors. It is therefore suggested to the authors that after they finish writing, they should put the manuscript away for a few days. Then, read it again for finding potential mistakes by reading it aloud in front of any co-author. While revising and editing, one should not be hesitant in getting useful inputs even from the junior colleagues. One should develop their own style of writing as it will help immensely in the long run of academic life.

The manuscript to be submitted should strictly adhere to the journal's guidelines. After submission of the manuscript, authors should show some patience for the review process and decision. After the peer-review stage, the manuscript sent for revision should be duly attended on point to point basis as per the reviewer's and editor's comments. Casually attended comments and incomplete revisions are mainly responsible for rejection even though the manuscript may be scientifically good. It takes a minimum of 3-6 months for the completion of review process and final decision, but articles which are not suitable for publication are rejected in quicker time.

This narrative review has covered almost everything which is essential and desirable towards writing and preparing a good scientific manuscript for publication. Whatever has been discussed in this review is a very basic process of scientific writing which is mandatory for submission to any journal. However, certain areas may have been described in a very brief manner, but the scope of this article covers only the basics of research writing and advanced aspects can be downloaded from the ICMJE website ( www.icmje.org ). We do hope that this article proves very helpful for our anaesthesiologist fraternity in future for writing for any scientific medical journal.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.