When deciding to submit a manuscript, most authors are concerned about a journal’s Impact Factor (IF) and reputation. Recent research has shown that submission choices are influenced by a variety of factors, including peer review experiences, editorial transparency, and some journals’ retraction histories. Understanding these influences can help researchers select journals that afford them the greatest opportunity for successful and respected publication.
Dr.Nancy | Clinical and Medical Research Expert
03 Apr, 2025
Dr.Nancy | Clinical and Medical Research Expert
03 Apr, 2025
Published on April, 2025
Submitting a manuscript to a journal requires extensive formatting network guidelines, which ensure the manuscript is intended such that clarity, consistency, and editorial policies are observed. Journals observe rigorous standards for scientific content, and they also uphold rigorous standards for presentation, structure and formatting of content. A properly formatted manuscript facilitates the review processes and develops the presentation of the work from a readable and professional standpoint, and by presenting the developed work in this way, it helps develop a positive first impression with those who will make the initial judgments on the document including editors and reviewers. From the title page to references and any supplementary materials; every aspect of an academic engagement requires precise formatting.
Medical journals expect a structure for case reports and review articles, with clear objectives and goals. Case reports should follow the CARE Guidelines. Review papers typically follow PRISMA for systematic reviews, and the other categories of review papers will be in a narrative format. Regardless of whether you are reporting a single rare case or synthesizing the literature based on a broader topic, organization, transparency, and standardized reporting are always important.[1],[2],[3]
Section | Content Example |
Introduction | A 32-year-old female presented with chest pain without risk factors. |
Case Presentation | ECG showed ST elevation. Angiography confirmed spontaneous coronary dissection. |
Discussion | SCAD is under-recognized and may present in young women without risk factors. |
Conclusion | High suspicion is needed in similar presentations. Early angiography is critical. |
Review articles are defined as narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Both systematic reviews and meta-analyses rely on PRISMA guidelines [5], whereas narrative reviews demand thematic clarity and analytical complexity.
Section | Description |
Title | Broad yet specific (e.g., “Advances in Immunotherapy for Lung Cancer”) |
Abstract | Structured: Background, Objective, Method, Results, Conclusion |
Keywords | 3–6 relevant MeSH terms |
Introduction | Topic significance and scope |
Main Body | Thematic or chronological organization (subheadings encouraged) |
Discussion | Summary of findings, implications, gaps |
Conclusion | Research needs or clinical recommendations |
References | 50–100, depending on journal scope |
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses should include:
Database | Search Terms | Results Found | Included |
PubMed | “lung cancer” AND “immunotherapy” | 1,250 | 18 |
Scopus | “non-small cell lung cancer” | 980 | 12 |
For both article types:
Understanding and adhering to the correct format for reporting cases and writing review articles greatly increases the chances of acceptance for manuscripts. Authors are to consider clarity, completeness, and compliance with journal formatting to improve their scientific communications.