research paper title journal

• Affiliate Program

• UNITED STATES
• 台灣 (TAIWAN)
• TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
• Academic Editing Services
• - Research Paper
• - Journal Manuscript
• - Dissertation
• - College & University Assignments
• Admissions Editing Services
• - Application Essay
• - Personal Statement
• - Recommendation Letter
• - Cover Letter
• - CV/Resume
• Business Editing Services
• - Business Documents
• - Report & Brochure
• - Website & Blog
• Writer Editing Services
• - Script & Screenplay
• Our Editors
• Client Reviews
• Editing & Proofreading Prices
• Wordvice Points
• Partner Discount
• Plagiarism Checker
• APA Citation Generator
• MLA Citation Generator
• Chicago Citation Generator
• Vancouver Citation Generator
• - APA Style
• - MLA Style
• - Chicago Style
• - Vancouver Style
• Writing & Editing Guide
• Academic Resources
• Admissions Resources

How to Make a Research Paper Title with Examples

What is a research paper title and why does it matter?

A research paper title summarizes the aim and purpose of your research study. Making a title for your research is one of the most important decisions when writing an article to publish in journals. The research title is the first thing that journal editors and reviewers see when they look at your paper and the only piece of information that fellow researchers will see in a database or search engine query. Good titles that are concise and contain all the relevant terms have been shown to increase citation counts and Altmetric scores .

Therefore, when you title research work, make sure it captures all of the relevant aspects of your study, including the specific topic and problem being investigated. It also should present these elements in a way that is accessible and will captivate readers. Follow these steps to learn how to make a good research title for your work.

How to Make a Research Paper Title in 5 Steps

You might wonder how you are supposed to pick a title from all the content that your manuscript contains—how are you supposed to choose? What will make your research paper title come up in search engines and what will make the people in your field read it? 

In a nutshell, your research title should accurately capture what you have done, it should sound interesting to the people who work on the same or a similar topic, and it should contain the important title keywords that other researchers use when looking for literature in databases. To make the title writing process as simple as possible, we have broken it down into 5 simple steps.

Step 1: Answer some key questions about your research paper

What does your paper seek to answer and what does it accomplish? Try to answer these questions as briefly as possible. You can create these questions by going through each section of your paper and finding the MOST relevant information to make a research title.

Step 2: Identify research study keywords

Now that you have answers to your research questions, find the most important parts of these responses and make these your study keywords. Note that you should only choose the most important terms for your keywords–journals usually request anywhere from 3 to 8 keywords maximum.

Step 3: Research title writing: use these keywords

“We employed a case study of 60 liver transplant patients around the US aged 20-50 years to assess how waiting list volume affects the outcomes of liver transplantation in patients; results indicate a positive correlation between increased waiting list volume and negative prognosis after the transplant procedure.”

The sentence above is clearly much too long for a research paper title. This is why you will trim and polish your title in the next two steps.

Step 4: Create a working research paper title

To create a working title, remove elements that make it a complete “sentence” but keep everything that is important to what the study is about. Delete all unnecessary and redundant words that are not central to the study or that researchers would most likely not use in a database search.

“ We employed a case study of 60 liver transplant patients around the US aged 20-50 years to assess how the waiting list volume affects the outcome of liver transplantation in patients ; results indicate a positive correlation between increased waiting list volume and a negative prognosis after transplant procedure ”

Now shift some words around for proper syntax and rephrase it a bit to shorten the length and make it leaner and more natural. What you are left with is:

“A case study of 60 liver transplant patients around the US aged 20-50 years assessing the impact of waiting list volume on outcome of transplantation and showing a positive correlation between increased waiting list volume and a negative prognosis” (Word Count: 38)

This text is getting closer to what we want in a research title, which is just the most important information. But note that the word count for this working title is still 38 words, whereas the average length of published journal article titles is 16 words or fewer. Therefore, we should eliminate some words and phrases that are not essential to this title.

Step 5: Remove any nonessential words and phrases from your title

Because the number of patients studied and the exact outcome are not the most essential parts of this paper, remove these elements first:

 “A case study of 60 liver transplant patients around the US aged 20-50 years assessing the impact of waiting list volume on outcomes of transplantation and showing a positive correlation between increased waiting list volume and a negative prognosis” (Word Count: 19)

In addition, the methods used in a study are not usually the most searched-for keywords in databases and represent additional details that you may want to remove to make your title leaner. So what is left is:

“Assessing the impact of waiting list volume on outcome and prognosis in liver transplantation patients” (Word Count: 15)

In this final version of the title, one can immediately recognize the subject and what objectives the study aims to achieve. Note that the most important terms appear at the beginning and end of the title: “Assessing,” which is the main action of the study, is placed at the beginning; and “liver transplantation patients,” the specific subject of the study, is placed at the end.

This will aid significantly in your research paper title being found in search engines and database queries, which means that a lot more researchers will be able to locate your article once it is published. In fact, a 2014 review of more than 150,000 papers submitted to the UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF) database found the style of a paper’s title impacted the number of citations it would typically receive. In most disciplines, articles with shorter, more concise titles yielded more citations.

Adding a Research Paper Subtitle

If your title might require a subtitle to provide more immediate details about your methodology or sample, you can do this by adding this information after a colon:

“ : a case study of US adult patients ages 20-25”

If we abide strictly by our word count rule this may not be necessary or recommended. But every journal has its own standard formatting and style guidelines for research paper titles, so it is a good idea to be aware of the specific journal author instructions , not just when you write the manuscript but also to decide how to create a good title for it.

Research Paper Title Examples

The title examples in the following table illustrate how a title can be interesting but incomplete, complete by uninteresting, complete and interesting but too informal in tone, or some other combination of these. A good research paper title should meet all the requirements in the four columns below.

Tips on Formulating a Good Research Paper Title

In addition to the steps given above, there are a few other important things you want to keep in mind when it comes to how to write a research paper title, regarding formatting, word count, and content:

• Write the title after you’ve written your paper and abstract
• Include all of the essential terms in your paper
• Keep it short and to the point (~16 words or fewer)
• Avoid unnecessary jargon and abbreviations
• Use keywords that capture the content of your paper
• Never include a period at the end—your title is NOT a sentence

Research Paper Writing Resources

We hope this article has been helpful in teaching you how to craft your research paper title. But you might still want to dig deeper into different journal title formats and categories that might be more suitable for specific article types or need help with writing a cover letter for your manuscript submission.

In addition to getting English proofreading services , including paper editing services , before submission to journals, be sure to visit our academic resources papers. Here you can find dozens of articles on manuscript writing, from drafting an outline to finding a target journal to submit to.

How to Write a Good Research Paper Title: Tips and Examples

Learn how to create good titles for research papers with our comprehensive guide. Discover tips, techniques, and examples to make your research stand out.

Kate Windsor

Jun 16, 2024

Writing a research paper is a crucial part of academic life, but crafting a compelling title can be just as important as the content itself. A good research paper title not only captures the essence of your work but also attracts potential readers and helps your paper stand out in a sea of academic literature. In this comprehensive guide, we'll explore the importance of good titles for research papers, provide tips on creating effective titles, and share examples to inspire your own title-writing process.

Understanding the Importance of a Research Paper Title

Why a good research paper title matters.

A suitable research paper title matters because:

a) It draws readers in and makes a research study stand out.

b) An effective research paper title is less likely to be overlooked.

c) It contributes to the professionalism and impact of the research.

According to a study by Jamali and Nikzad (2011), articles with shorter titles tend to be downloaded more often than those with longer titles. This highlights the importance of creating concise and engaging titles for your research papers.

Dr. John Smith, a renowned professor of psychology, states on research titles, "The title of a research paper is the first thing that readers, including peer reviewers and journal editors, will see. It's crucial to make a strong first impression with a clear, concise, and compelling title."

The role of a title in a research paper

A research title plays a critical role in the research process as it:

a) Facilitates the dissemination of knowledge.

b) Contributes to the professionalism and impact of the research.

c) Serves as a critical component of the overall research communication process.

Moreover, a well-crafted and good title or a good research title can increase the chances of your research paper being accepted for publication in your target journal or a reputable journal. Editors and reviewers often use the title as a first screening tool to determine the relevance and quality of the research.

Crafting a Compelling Research Paper Title

Identifying research study keywords for a strong title

Research titles matter. The best research paper title starts with:

a) Finding the most important parts of your research questions.

b) Choosing only the most important terms for your keywords.

c) Drawing 3 to 8 keywords maximum, avoiding very lengthy titles.

When selecting keywords for your research paper title, consider using tools like Google Keyword Planner or SEMrush to identify high-traffic, relevant keywords in your field of study.

Look at social science research papers or for example, looking at a research paper in the field of environmental science might have a title like: "The Impact of Deforestation on Biodiversity: A Meta-Analysis of Neotropical Rainforests." This title effectively uses keywords such as "deforestation," "biodiversity," and "Neotropical rainforests" to convey the main focus of the research.

Using keywords to create a working research paper title

Descriptive research titles draw keywords.

a) Use the identified keywords to create a research title

b) Ensure the title accurately captures what you have done

c) Keep the title concise and relevant

Easily pronounces technical words in any field

Characteristics of Effective Research Paper Titles

Key qualities of a good research paper title.

A good research title should have the elements below to make it stand out.

a) A good research title should be concise and to the point

b) Accurately reflects or the research title describes the content of the research paper.

c) Easy to understand and remember.

d) Unique and not easily confused with other research titles.

What makes a research paper title stand out

A good title should:

a. Predict the content of the research paper.

b. Be interesting to the reader.

c. Reflect the tone of the writing.

d. Contain important keywords for easier location during a keyword search.

Supporting Evidence:

A study by Habibzadeh and Yadollahie (2010) found that articles with questions in their titles are more likely to be cited than those without. Consider incorporating a question into your research paper title to pique readers' curiosity and encourage engagement.

For instance, a research paper in a particular academic journal like the field of psychology might have a title like: "Can Mindfulness Meditation Reduce Symptoms of Anxiety and Depression? A Randomized Controlled Trial." This title effectively uses a question to grab the reader's attention and clearly conveys the main focus of the research.

Writing a Research Paper Title that Grabs Attention

Techniques for crafting a compelling research paper title

a) Use a clear and concise format, such as [method] study of [topic] among [sample].

b) Use keywords from the research topic to make the title more discoverable.

c) Keep the title short and to the point, avoiding unnecessary words or phrases.

When writing your research paper title, consider the writing tips and best practices for writing scientific papers to ensure your title is effective and engaging.

Avoiding common mistakes in research paper titles

a) Avoid using abbreviations or acronyms unless they are commonly used in the field and are essential to convey the research focus.

b) Eliminate any nonessential words and phrases from your title.

c) Aim for a word count of 16 words or fewer.

The Role of Subtitles in Research Paper Titles

When to use a subtitle and how to write one effectively.

Add a subtitle after a colon to provide more immediate details about methodology or sample. Be aware of the specific journal author instructions for research paper titles.

If your research paper includes an annex , consider mentioning it in the subtitle to provide additional context for your readers.

Examples of Good Research Paper Titles

Analyzing effective research paper titles.

Titles can be interesting but incomplete, complete but uninteresting, or too informal in tone

Examples of research paper titles that work

Good titles that are concise and contain all relevant terms increase citation counts and Altmetric scores.

Here are a few examples of effective research paper titles:

• " The Impact of Social Media on Adolescent Mental Health: A Systematic Review ". This title effectively uses keywords such as "social media," "adolescent," and "mental health" to convey the main focus of the research. The use of "systematic review" indicates the comprehensive nature of the study.
• " Exploring the Relationship Between Exercise and Cognitive Function in Older Adults ". This title clearly states the main variables being investigated (exercise and cognitive function) and the specific population (older adults). It is concise and easy to understand.
• " Evaluating the Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction in Chronic Pain Management ". This title effectively communicates the intervention being studied (mindfulness-based stress reduction) and the specific application (chronic pain management). It is specific and informative.
• " The Role of Exosomes in Cancer Progression: A Comprehensive Review ". This title uses keywords such as "exosomes" and "cancer progression" to convey the main focus of the research. The use of "comprehensive review" indicates the depth and breadth of the study.
• " Machine Learning Approaches for Predicting Stock Market Trends: A Comparative Analysis ". This title effectively communicates the main techniques being investigated (machine learning approaches) and the specific application (predicting stock market trends). The use of "comparative analysis" suggests that different approaches will be evaluated and compared.

Refining Your Research Paper Title

Refining your title: removing nonessential words and phrases.

Eliminate any nonessential words and phrases from your title and keep the title concise and relevant. Aim for a word count of 16 words or fewer.

Getting feedback on your research paper title

Consider delegating your most complex tasks to skilled writers. Get feedback from peers, mentors, or editors to refine your title.

When refining your research paper title, consider the order of authors and how it may impact the perceived importance of each contributor.

It is crucial to seek feedback and guidance from your advisors and colleagues when refining your research paper title. They can provide valuable insights and help ensure that your title accurately represents your research and aligns with the requirements of your specific academic discipline. Don't hesitate to reach out to your network for support and advice throughout the title-writing process.

Final Tips for a Good Research Paper Title

Additional tips for writing a good research paper title.

Keep in mind the formatting, word count, and content when writing a research paper title and aim for a concise and relevant title. Use a good research paper title to make a significant difference in the success of a research study

In her book "Stylish Academic Writing," Helen Sword (2012) emphasizes the importance of crafting engaging and informative titles to capture readers' attention and effectively communicate the content of your research.

Best practices for research paper titles

A good research paper title should be concise, informative, and accurately represent the content and purpose of the study. Paperpal can help generate outstanding research titles in a click.

Consider the UK's Research Excellence Framework when crafting your title. The UK's Research Excellence Framework (REF) is a system for assessing the quality of research in UK higher education institutions.

When crafting your research paper title, consider how it aligns with the REF's criteria for research quality, which include originality, significance, and rigor. A well-crafted title that effectively communicates the value and impact of your research can contribute to a stronger REF submission.

Joshua Schimel's "Writing Science: How to Write Papers That Get Cited and Proposals That Get Funded" (2012) provides valuable insights into the art of scientific writing, including the importance of creating compelling research paper titles that accurately reflect the content and significance of your work.

Additional Resources for Crafting Effective Research Paper Titles:

1. The Academic Phrasebank - A useful resource for finding appropriate phrases and terminology for your research paper title.

2. Paperpal Title Generator - An online tool that helps generate effective research paper titles based on your keywords and research focus.

In conclusion, writing a good research paper title is a critical aspect of the research process, as it can significantly impact the visibility and success of your work. By understanding the importance of titles, following best practices, and refining your title based on feedback, you can create compelling titles that accurately represent your research and attract the attention of your target audience. Whether you're conducting theoretical research or applied research , a well-crafted title is essential for effectively communicating your findings to the scientific community.

As Michael Alley notes in his book "The Craft of Scientific Writing" (2018), a well-written research paper title not only captures the essence of your work but also serves as a critical tool for attracting readers and increasing the impact of your research.

Research Paper Optimization

Effective Research Titles

Research Paper Writing

Title Writing Tips

Academic Writing

Research Paper Titles

Recent articles

Student Loans for College: What You Need to Know

Jul 1, 2024

Financial Aid

Higher Education

College Financing

Student Loans

What's a Good SAT Score? 5 Tips to Ace the Test

Glice Martineau

Examination

11 Summer Activities for College Students

Scholarships

Internships

Professional Growth

Personal Development

College Students

Summer Activities

9 Educational Books for Adults and Lifelong Learners

Jul 2, 2024

Educational books

Lifelong Learning

View the latest institution tables

View the latest country/territory tables

How to write a good research paper title

“Unread science is lost science .”

Credit: Mykyta Dolmatov/Getty

“Unread science is lost science.”

28 July 2020

Mykyta Dolmatov/Getty

With the influx of publications brought on by the pandemic, it’s become more challenging than ever for researchers to attract attention to their work.

Understanding which elements of a title will attract readers – or turn them away – has been proven to increase a paper’s citations and Altmetric score .

“In the era of information overload, most students and researchers do not have time to browse the entire text of a paper,” says Patrick Pu , a librarian at the National University of Singapore.

“The title of a paper, together with its abstract, become very important to capture and sustain the attention of readers.”

1. A good title avoids technical language

Since the primary audience of a paper is likely to be researchers working in the same field, using technical language in the title seems to make sense.

But this alienates the wider lay audience, which can bring valuable attention to your work . It can also alienate inexperienced researchers, or those who have recently entered the field.

“A good title does not use unnecessary jargon,” says Elisa De Ranieri , editor-in-chief at the Nature Communications journal (published by Springer Nature, which also publishes Nature Index.) “It communicates the main results in the study in a way that is clear and accessible, ideally to non-specialists or researchers new to the field.”

How-to: When crafting a title, says De Ranieri, write down the main result of the manuscript in a short paragraph. Shorten the text to make it more concise, while still remaining descriptive. Repeat this process until you have a title of fewer than 15 words.

2. A good title is easily searchable

Most readers today are accessing e-journals, which are indexed in scholarly databases such as Scopus and Google Scholar.

“Although these databases usually index the full text of papers, retrieval weightage for ‘Title’ is usually higher than other fields, such as ‘Results’,” Pu explains.

At the National University of Singapore, Pu and his colleagues run information literacy programmes for editors and authors. They give advice for publishing best practice, such as how to identify the most commonly used keywords in literature searches in a given field.

“A professor once told us how he discovered that industry experts were using a different term or keyword to describe his research area,” says Pu.

“He had written a seminal paper that did not include this ‘industry keyword’. He believes his paper, which was highly cited by academics, would have a higher citation count if he had included this keyword in the title. As librarians, we try to highlight this example to our students so that they will consider all possible keywords to use in their searches and paper titles.”

How-to: Authors should speak to an academic librarian at their institution to gain an understanding of keyword and search trends in their field of research. This should inform how the paper title is written.

3. A good title is substantiated by data

Authors should be cautious to not make any claims in the title that can’t be backed up by evidence.

“For instance, if you make a discovery with potential therapeutic relevance, the title should specify whether it was tested or studied in animals or humans/human samples,” says Irene Jarchum , senior editor at the journal Nature Biotechnology (also published by Springer Nature, which publishes the Nature Index.)

Jarchum adds that titles can be contentious because different authors have different views on the use of specific words, such as acronyms, or more fundamentally, what the main message of the title should be.

Some authors may over-interpret the significance of their preliminary findings, and want to reflect this in the title.

How-to: If you know your paper will be contentious within the scientific community, have the data ready to defend your decisions .

4. A good title sparks curiosity

A one-liner that sparks a reader’s interest can be very effective.

“A title has to pique the interest of the person searching for literature in a split-second – enough that they click on the title to read the abstract. Unread science is lost science,” says Christine Mayer , editor-in-chief of the journal Advanced Therapeutics .

Paper titles such as, "White and wonderful? Microplastics prevail in snow from the Alps to the Arctic" ( 2019 Science ), and “Kids these days: Why the youth of today seem lacking” ( 2019 Science Advances ) are good examples of this principle. Both papers have high Altmetric Attention scores, indicating that they have been widely read and discussed online.

How-to: Take note of the characteristics of paper titles that spark your own interest. Keep a record of these and apply the same principles to your own paper titles.

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections
• How to Write a Great Title

Maximize search-ability and engage your readers from the very beginning

Your title is the first thing anyone who reads your article is going to see, and for many it will be where they stop reading. Learn how to write a title that helps readers find your article, draws your audience in and sets the stage for your research!

How your title impacts the success of your article

Researchers are busy and there will always be more articles to read than time to read them.  Good titles help readers find your research, and decide whether to keep reading. Search engines use titles to retrieve relevant articles based on users’ keyword searches. Once readers find your article, they’ll use the title as the first filter to decide whether your research is what they’re looking for. A strong and specific title is the first step toward citations, inclusion in meta-analyses, and influencing your field. 

What to include in a title

Include the most important information that will signal to your target audience that they should keep reading.

Key information about the study design

Important keywords

What you discovered

Writing tips

Getting the title right can be more difficult than it seems, and researchers refine their writing skills throughout their career. Some journals even help editors to re-write their titles during the publication process! 

• Keep it concise and informative What’s appropriate for titles varies greatly across disciplines. Take a look at some articles published in your field, and check the journal guidelines for character limits. Aim for fewer than 12 words, and check for journal specific word limits.
• Write for your audience Consider who your primary audience is: are they specialists in your specific field, are they cross-disciplinary, are they non-specialists?
• Entice the reader Find a way to pique your readers’ interest, give them enough information to keep them reading.
• Incorporate important keywords Consider what about your article will be most interesting to your audience: Most readers come to an article from a search engine, so take some time and include the important ones in your title!
• Write in sentence case In scientific writing, titles are given in sentence case. Capitalize only the first word of the text, proper nouns, and genus names. See our examples below.

Don’t

• Write your title as a question In most cases, you shouldn’t need to frame your title as a question. You have the answers, you know what you found. Writing your title as a question might draw your readers in, but it’s more likely to put them off.
• Sensationalize your research Be honest with yourself about what you truly discovered. A sensationalized or dramatic title might make a few extra people read a bit further into your article, but you don’t want them disappointed when they get to the results.

Examples…

Format: Prevalence of [disease] in [population] in [location]

Example: Prevalence of tuberculosis in homeless women in San Francisco

Format: Risk factors for [condition] among [population] in [location]

Example: Risk factors for preterm births among low-income women in Mexico City

Format (systematic review/meta-analysis): Effectiveness of [treatment] for [disease] in [population] for [outcome] : A systematic review and meta-analysis

Example: Effectiveness of Hepatitis B treatment in HIV-infected adolescents in the prevention of liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Format (clinical trial): [Intervention] improved [symptoms] of [disease] in [population] : A randomized controlled clinical trial

Example: Using a sleep app lessened insomnia in post-menopausal women in southwest United States: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Format  (general molecular studies): Characterization/identification/evaluation of [molecule name] in/from [organism/tissue] (b y [specific biological methods] ) 

Example: Identification of putative Type-I sex pheromone biosynthesis-related genes expressed in the female pheromone gland of Streltzoviella insularis

Format  (general molecular studies): [specific methods/analysis] of organism/tissue reveal insights into [function/role] of [molecule name] in [biological process]  

Example: Transcriptome landscape of Rafflesia cantleyi floral buds reveals insights into the roles of transcription factors and phytohormones in flower development

Format  (software/method papers): [tool/method/software] for [what purpose] in [what research area]

Example: CRISPR-based tools for targeted transcriptional and epigenetic regulation in plants

Tip: How to edit your work

Editing is challenging, especially if you are acting as both a writer and an editor. Read our guidelines for advice on how to refine your work, including useful tips for setting your intentions, re-review, and consultation with colleagues.

• How to Write an Abstract
• How to Write Your Methods
• How to Report Statistics
• How to Write Discussions and Conclusions
• How to Edit Your Work

The contents of the Peer Review Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

The contents of the Writing Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher…

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Paper Title – Writing Guide and Example

Research Paper Title – Writing Guide and Example

Table of Contents

Research Paper Title

Research Paper Title is the name or heading that summarizes the main theme or topic of a research paper . It serves as the first point of contact between the reader and the paper, providing an initial impression of the content, purpose, and scope of the research . A well-crafted research paper title should be concise, informative, and engaging, accurately reflecting the key elements of the study while also capturing the reader’s attention and interest. The title should be clear and easy to understand, and it should accurately convey the main focus and scope of the research paper.

Examples of Research Paper Title

Here are some Good Examples of Research Paper Title:

• “Investigating the Relationship Between Sleep Duration and Academic Performance Among College Students”
• “The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Employment: A Systematic Review”
• “The Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Anxiety: A Meta-Analysis”
• “Exploring the Effects of Social Support on Mental Health in Patients with Chronic Illness”
• “Assessing the Effectiveness of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial”
• “The Impact of Social Media Influencers on Consumer Behavior: A Systematic Review”
• “Investigating the Link Between Personality Traits and Leadership Effectiveness”
• “The Effect of Parental Incarceration on Child Development: A Longitudinal Study”
• “Exploring the Relationship Between Cultural Intelligence and Cross-Cultural Adaptation: A Meta-Analysis”
• “Assessing the Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction for Chronic Pain Management”.
• “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis”
• “The Impact of Climate Change on Global Crop Yields: A Longitudinal Study”
• “Exploring the Relationship between Parental Involvement and Academic Achievement in Elementary School Students”
• “The Ethics of Genetic Editing: A Review of Current Research and Implications for Society”
• “Understanding the Role of Gender in Leadership: A Comparative Study of Male and Female CEOs”
• “The Effect of Exercise on Cognitive Function in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial”
• “The Impacts of COVID-19 on Mental Health: A Cross-Cultural Comparison”
• “Assessing the Effectiveness of Online Learning Platforms: A Case Study of Coursera”
• “Exploring the Link between Employee Engagement and Organizational Performance”
• “The Effects of Income Inequality on Social Mobility: A Comparative Analysis of OECD Countries”
• “Exploring the Relationship Between Social Media Use and Mental Health in Adolescents”
• “The Impact of Climate Change on Crop Yield: A Case Study of Maize Production in Sub-Saharan Africa”
• “Examining the Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Anxiety Disorders: A Meta-Analysis”
• “An Analysis of the Relationship Between Employee Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment”
• “Assessing the Impacts of Wilderness Areas on Local Economies: A Case Study of Yellowstone National Park”
• “The Role of Parental Involvement in Early Childhood Education: A Review of the Literature”
• “Investigating the Effects of Technology on Learning in Higher Education”
• “The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Opportunities and Challenges”
• “A Study of the Relationship Between Personality Traits and Leadership Styles in Business Organizations”.

How to choose Research Paper Title

Choosing a research paper title is an important step in the research process. A good title can attract readers and convey the essence of your research in a concise and clear manner. Here are some tips on how to choose a research paper title:

• Be clear and concise: A good title should convey the main idea of your research in a clear and concise manner. Avoid using jargon or technical language that may be confusing to readers.
• Use keywords: Including keywords in your title can help readers find your paper when searching for related topics. Use specific, descriptive terms that accurately describe your research.
• Be descriptive: A descriptive title can help readers understand what your research is about. Use adjectives and adverbs to convey the main ideas of your research.
• Consider the audience : Think about the audience for your paper and choose a title that will appeal to them. If your paper is aimed at a specialized audience, you may want to use technical terms or jargon in your title.
• Avoid being too general or too specific : A title that is too general may not convey the specific focus of your research, while a title that is too specific may not be of interest to a broader audience. Strive for a title that accurately reflects the focus of your research without being too narrow or too broad.
• Make it interesting : A title that is interesting or provocative can capture the attention of readers and draw them into your research. Use humor, wordplay, or other creative techniques to make your title stand out.
• Seek feedback: Ask colleagues or advisors for feedback on your title. They may be able to offer suggestions or identify potential problems that you hadn’t considered.

Purpose of Research Paper Title

The research paper title serves several important purposes, including:

• Identifying the subject matter : The title of a research paper should clearly and accurately identify the topic or subject matter that the paper addresses. This helps readers quickly understand what the paper is about.
• Catching the reader’s attention : A well-crafted title can grab the reader’s attention and make them interested in reading the paper. This is particularly important in academic settings where there may be many papers on the same topic.
• Providing context: The title can provide important context for the research paper by indicating the specific area of study, the research methods used, or the key findings.
• Communicating the scope of the paper: A good title can give readers an idea of the scope and depth of the research paper. This can help them decide if the paper is relevant to their interests or research.
• Indicating the research question or hypothesis : The title can often indicate the research question or hypothesis that the paper addresses, which can help readers understand the focus of the research and the main argument or conclusion of the paper.

Advantages of Research Paper Title

The title of a research paper is an important component that can have several advantages, including:

• Capturing the reader’s attention : A well-crafted research paper title can grab the reader’s attention and encourage them to read further. A captivating title can also increase the visibility of the paper and attract more readers.
• Providing a clear indication of the paper’s focus: A well-written research paper title should clearly convey the main focus and purpose of the study. This helps potential readers quickly determine whether the paper is relevant to their interests.
• Improving discoverability: A descriptive title that includes relevant keywords can improve the discoverability of the research paper in search engines and academic databases, making it easier for other researchers to find and cite.
• Enhancing credibility : A clear and concise title can enhance the credibility of the research and the author. A title that accurately reflects the content of the paper can increase the confidence readers have in the research findings.
• Facilitating communication: A well-written research paper title can facilitate communication among researchers, enabling them to quickly and easily identify relevant studies and engage in discussions related to the topic.
• Making the paper easier to remember : An engaging and memorable research paper title can help readers remember the paper and its findings. This can be especially important in fields where researchers are constantly inundated with new information and need to quickly recall important studies.
• Setting expectations: A good research paper title can set expectations for the reader and help them understand what the paper will cover. This can be especially important for readers who are unfamiliar with the topic or the research area.
• Guiding research: A well-crafted research paper title can also guide future research by highlighting gaps in the current literature or suggesting new areas for investigation.
• Demonstrating creativity: A creative research paper title can demonstrate the author’s creativity and originality, which can be appealing to readers and other researchers.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Research Paper Title Page – Example and Making...

Informed Consent in Research – Types, Templates...

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and...

Future Research – Thesis Guide

• Translators
• Graphic Designers

Please enter the email address you used for your account. Your sign in information will be sent to your email address after it has been verified.

Writing Effective Research Paper Titles: Advice and Examples

Are you ready to submit your research paper for publication but haven't settled on a title yet? Do you have a title but aren't sure if it will be the right one for the journal editor or research database search engines? This article will help you fine tune or create an effective research paper title for your work.

Now that you have finished your research and analysis, and you're ready to take the final step before sending your work to journal editors and reviewers. The first thing journal editors and search engine results will see and show is your research paper title. Creating an effective research paper title is highly important to getting your paper in front of the right people. It is also going to be the only part of your paper that is available to everyone for free, and it will be what search engines use to index and show your work in search results. You therefore must design a clear and persuasive title that accurately represents your work.

When writing an effective research paper title, you want to ensure that the title includes all the relevant aspects of your work. Showcase those aspects in a way that entices the audience to read more. Be sure to use the nomenclature common in your field of study, because that will help your work show up in more search results and it will grab the attention of journal editors looking for articles that clearly represent the industry. If you are studying landslides, for example, you will want to include keywords relating to soil composition or grain size; if you are working on a study about organ transplants, then include the specific feature or procedure that affected successful transplants. Identify what parts of your research are going to interest your intended audience.

There are two key pieces of information that people will need to see in your paper title: the subject and the objective. Because you are already familiar with your study and its purpose, creating an effective research paper title is simply a matter of whittling down the words that describe the important aspects of your paper. The advice below will help you take steps to identify key areas of your research, organize the information, and trim it down to the right size for a title.

Develop a topic statement

To get started, consider a topic statement of your paper that includes the subject and scope of the study. The first step in building a topic statement is to ask yourself the following questions:

• What is your research paper about? "My paper is about gene therapy and how it can improve cognitive function in dementia patients."
• What was the subject of your study? "I used data from 40 dementia patients from 10 states in the US."
• What method did you use to perform your research? "I performed a randomized trial."
• What were the results? "My study showed that gene therapy improved cognitive function in those who received the treatment."

Once you have answered those questions (such as in the example answers above), make a list of the keywords you used. For this example, those keywords would include the following:

• gene therapy
• cognitive function
• 40 dementia patients
• improved cognitive function
• 10 states in the US
• randomized trial

Then, create your topic statement using those keywords. It might read something like this:

"This study is a randomized trial that investigates whether gene therapy improved cognitive function in 40 dementia patients from 10 states in the US. The results show improved cognitive function in those who received the treatment."

This statement has 36 words — too long for a title. However, it does contain the main required elements: the subject and the objective. It also includes a summary of the results, which can be used to increase the persuasive nature of the title. If you are writing this down on paper, it may be helpful to underline or circle the keywords you used in the statement, as this will help you visually see how the keywords work together in your statement.

Trim the statement

The next step is to remove all unnecessary words to create a working title. Unnecessary words include elements that make the sentences complete sentences. Also remove words that are not central to your study or that would not be used in a research database search.

" This study is a randomized trial that investigates whether gene therapy improved cognitive function in 40 dementia patients from 10 states in the US. The results show improved cognitive function in those who received the treatment ."

Next, take those words and move them around to form a new phrase. This may take a few tries to get it right, but it is worth the time.

"A randomized trial investigating whether gene therapy improved cognitive function in 40 dementia patients from 10 states in the US showed improved cognitive function."

This sample now has 24 words. We still need to get it down to the ideal 15 or fewer total words, with just the exact information journal editors will want. One way to do this is to use the keywords at the beginning and end of your title. Remove any irrelevant facts that other researchers will not be searching for. For example, the method you used is not usually the most searched-for keyword.

" A randomized trial investigating whether gene therapy improved cognitive function in 40 dementia patients from 10 states in the US showed improved cognitive function. "

The final result may be something like this:

"Investigating the impact of gene therapy on cognitive function in dementia patients"

The resulting title has 13 words, had the main action at the beginning, and the main subject of the study at the end. This is a good example of how to create an effective research paper title that will increase journal editors' and reviewers' interest, and it may even help your paper receive more citations down the road.

Main tips to remember

If you are working on your first research paper title, the process can seem intimidating. Even with the process outlined above, creating the best research paper title possible for your work can be difficult and time consuming. Be sure to set aside a good amount of time to developing your title so that you don't feel rushed. Some writers go through 20 or more iterations before they arrive at a title that achieves effectiveness, persuasiveness, and clarity of purpose all in one.

In addition to the above process, keep the following main tips in mind when writing an effective research paper title:

• Write your paper and abstract first, then work on your title. This will make the process much easier than trying to nail a title down without a full, finished paper to start from.
• Keep your title short! Do not include more than 15 words.
• Do not use a period at the end of your title.
• Be sure that the keywords you use truly represent the content of your paper.
• Do not use abbreviations in your title.
• Include all essential key terms from your paper. This ensures your paper will be indexed properly in research databases and search engines. If you are unsure of the best keywords to use, talk to an academic librarian at your institution. They can help you identify keyword and search trends in your research field.

Examples of research paper titles

The lists below illustrate what effective and ineffective research paper titles look like. Use these examples to help guide your research paper title.

Effective titles

• Nurses on the Move: A Quantitative Report on How Meditation Can Improve Nurse Performance
• Correction of the ion transport defect in cystic fibrosis transgenic mice by gene therapy
• Landslide mapping techniques and their use in the assessment of the landslide hazard
• HLA compatibility and organ transplant survival: Collaborative Transplant Study

Ineffective titles

• Meditation Gurus
• The landslide story
• Landslide hazard and risk assessment
• Pharmacodynamics of oral ganciclovir and valganciclovir in solid organ transplant recipients

No matter what kind of field you are doing research in, you have the opportunity to create an amazing and effective research paper title that will engage your readers and get your paper in front of the journal editors and reviewers you want. By taking the time to go through the title development process, you will finish your work with a title that matches the work outlined in your research paper.

Header photo by Stokkete .

• Academic Writing Advice
• All Blog Posts
• Writing Advice
• Admissions Writing Advice
• Book Writing Advice
• Short Story Advice
• Employment Writing Advice
• Business Writing Advice
• Web Content Advice
• Article Writing Advice
• Magazine Writing Advice
• Grammar Advice
• Dialect Advice
• Editing Advice
• Freelance Advice
• Legal Writing Advice
• Poetry Advice
• Graphic Design Advice
• Logo Design Advice
• Translation Advice
• Blog Reviews
• Short Story Award Winners
• Scholarship Winners

Elevate your research paper with expert editing services

• SpringerLink shop

Title, Abstract and Keywords

The importance of titles.

The title of your manuscript is usually the first introduction readers (and reviewers) have to your work. Therefore, you must select a title that grabs attention, accurately describes the contents of your manuscript, and makes people want to read further.

An effective title should:

• Convey the  main topics  of the study
• Highlight the  importance  of the research
• Be  concise
• Attract  readers

Writing a good title for your manuscript can be challenging. First, list the topics covered by the manuscript. Try to put all of the topics together in the title using as few words as possible. A title that is too long will seem clumsy, annoy readers, and probably not meet journal requirements.

Does Vaccinating Children and Adolescents with Inactivated Influenza Virus Inhibit the Spread of Influenza in Unimmunized Residents of Rural Communities?

This title has too many unnecessary words.

Influenza Vaccination of Children: A Randomized Trial

This title doesn’t give enough information about what makes the manuscript interesting.

Effect of Child Influenza Vaccination on Infection Rates in Rural Communities: A Randomized Trial This is an effective title. It is short, easy to understand, and conveys the important aspects of the research.

Think about why your research will be of interest to other scientists. This should be related to the reason you decided to study the topic. If your title makes this clear, it will likely attract more readers to your manuscript. TIP: Write down a few possible titles, and then select the best to refine further. Ask your colleagues their opinion. Spending the time needed to do this will result in a better title.

Abstract and Keywords

The Abstract is:

• A  summary  of the content of the journal manuscript
• A time-saving  shortcut  for busy researchers
• A guide to the most important parts of your manuscript’s written content

Many readers will only read the Abstract of your manuscript. Therefore, it has to be able to  stand alone . In most cases the abstract is the only part of your article that appears in indexing databases such as Web of Science or PubMed and so will be the most accessed part of your article; making a good impression will encourage researchers to read your full paper.

A well written abstract can also help speed up the peer-review process. During peer review, referees are usually only sent the abstract when invited to review the paper. Therefore, the abstract needs to contain enough information about the paper to allow referees to make a judgement as to whether they have enough expertise to review the paper and be engaging enough for them to want to review it.

Your Abstract should answer these questions about your manuscript:

• What was done?
• Why did you do it?
• What did you find?
• Why are these findings useful and important?

Answering these questions lets readers know the most important points about your study, and helps them decide whether they want to read the rest of the paper. Make sure you follow the proper journal manuscript formatting guidelines when preparing your abstract.

TIP: Journals often set a maximum word count for Abstracts, often 250 words, and no citations. This is to ensure that the full Abstract appears in indexing services.

Keywords  are a tool to help indexers and search engines find relevant papers. If database search engines can find your journal manuscript, readers will be able to find it too. This will increase the number of people reading your manuscript, and likely lead to more citations.

However, to be effective, Keywords must be chosen carefully. They should:

• Represent  the content of your manuscript
• Be  specific  to your field or sub-field

Manuscript title:  Direct observation of nonlinear optics in an isolated carbon nanotube

Poor keywords:  molecule, optics, lasers, energy lifetime

Better keywords:  single-molecule interaction, Kerr effect, carbon nanotubes, energy level structure

Manuscript title:  Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration Poor keywords:  neuron, brain, OA (an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, signaling

Better keywords:  neurodegenerative diseases; CA1 region, hippocampal; okadaic acid; neurotoxins; MAP kinase signaling system; cell death

Manuscript title:  Increases in levels of sediment transport at former glacial-interglacial transitions

Poor keywords:  climate change, erosion, plant effects Better keywords:  quaternary climate change, soil erosion, bioturbation

Back │ Next

6 Important Tips on Writing a Research Paper Title

When you are searching for a research study on a particular topic, you probably notice that articles with interesting, descriptive research titles draw you in. By contrast, research paper titles that are not descriptive are usually passed over, even though you may write a good research paper with interesting contents. This shows the importance of coming up with a good title for your research paper when drafting your own manuscript.

Importance of a Research Title

The research title plays a crucial role in the research process, and its importance can be summarized as follows:

Why do Research Titles Matter?

Before we look at how to title a research paper, let’s look at a research title example that illustrates why a good research paper should have a strong title.

Imagine that you are researching meditation and nursing, and you want to find out if any studies have shown that meditation makes nurses better communicators.  You conduct a keyword search using the keywords “nursing”, “communication”, and “meditation.” You come up with results that have the following titles:

• Benefits of Meditation for the Nursing Profession: A Quantitative Investigation
• Why Mindful Nurses Make the Best Communicators
• Meditation Gurus
• Nurses on the Move: A Quantitative Report on How Meditation Can Improve Nurse Performance

All four of these research paper titles may describe very similar studies—they could even be titles for the same study! As you can see, they give very different impressions.

• Title 1 describes the topic and the method of the study but is not particularly catchy.
• Title 2 partly describes the topic, but does not give any information about the method of the study—it could simply be a theoretical or opinion piece.
• Title 3 is somewhat catchier but gives almost no information at all about the article.
• Title 4 begins with a catchy main title and is followed by a subtitle that gives information about the content and method of the study.

As we will see, Title 4 has all the characteristics of a good research title.

Characteristics of a Good Research Title

According to rhetoric scholars Hairston and Keene, making a good title for a paper involves ensuring that the title of the research accomplishes four goals as mentioned below:

• It should predict the content of the research paper .
• It should be interesting to the reader .
• It should reflect the tone of the writing .
• It should contain important keywords that will make it easier to be located during a keyword search.

Let’s return to the examples in the previous section to see how to make a research title.

As you can see in the table above, only one of the four example titles fulfills all of the criteria of a suitable research paper title.

Related: You’ve chosen your study topic, but having trouble deciding where to publish it? Here’s a comprehensive course to help you identify the right journal .

Tips for Writing an Effective Research Paper Title

When writing a research title, you can use the four criteria listed above as a guide. Here are a few other tips you can use to make sure your title will be part of the recipe for an effective research paper :

• Make sure your research title describes (a) the topic, (b) the method, (c) the sample, and (d) the results of your study. You can use the following formula:

[ Result ]: A [ method ] study of [ topic ] among [ sample ] Example : Meditation makes nurses perform better: a qualitative study of mindfulness meditation among German nursing students

• Avoid unnecessary words and jargons. Keep the title statement as concise as possible. You want a title that will be comprehensible even to people who are not experts in your field. Check our article for a detailed list of things to avoid when writing an effective research title .
• Make sure your title is between 5 and 15 words in length.
• If you are writing a title for a university assignment or for a particular academic journal, verify that your title conforms to the standards and requirements for that outlet. For example, many journals require that titles fall under a character limit, including spaces. Many universities require that titles take a very specific form, limiting your creativity.
• Use a descriptive phrase to convey the purpose of your research efficiently.
• Most importantly, use critical keywords in the title to increase the discoverability of your article.

Resources for Further Reading

In addition to the tips above, there are many resources online that you can use to help write your research title. Here is a list of links that you may find useful as you work on creating an excellent research title:

• The University of Southern California has a guide specific to social science research papers: http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/title
• The Journal of European Psychology Students has a blog article focusing on APA-compliant research paper titles: http://blog.efpsa.org/2012/09/01/how-to-write-a-good-title-for-journal-articles/
• This article by Kristen Hamlin contains a step-by-step approach to writing titles: http://classroom.synonym.com/choose-title-research-paper-4332.html

Are there any tips or tricks you find useful in crafting research titles? Which tip did you find most useful in this article? Leave a comment to let us know!

• Hairston, M., & Keene, M. 2003. Successful writing . 5th ed. New York: Norton.
• University of Southern California. 2017. Organizing your social sciences research paper: choosing a title . [Online] Available at: http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/title

Thank you so much:) Have a nice day!

Thank you so much, it helped me.. God bless..

Thank you for the excellent article and tips for creating a research work, because I always forget about such an essential element as the keywords when forming topics. In particular, I have found a rapid help with the formation of informative and sound titles that also conforms to the standards and requirements.

I am doing a research work on sales girls or shop girls using qualititative method. Basicly I am from Pakistan and writing on the scenario of mycountry. I am really confused about my research title can you kindly give some suggestions and give me an approperaite tilte

Hi Zubair, Thank you for your question. However, the information you have provided is insufficient for drafting an appropriate title. Information on what exactly you intend to study would be needed in order to draft a meaningful title. Meanwhile, you can try drafting your own title after going through the following articles our website: https://www.enago.com/academy/top-10-tips-on-choosing-an-attractive-research-title/ , https://www.enago.com/academy/writing-a-good-research-title-things-to-avoid/ , https://www.enago.com/academy/write-irresistible-research-paper-title/ We would be happy to give you feedback and suggest changes if required. Did you get a chance to install our free Mobile App? https://www.enago.com/academy/mobile-app/ . Make sure you subscribe to our weekly newsletter https://www.enago.com/academy/subscribe-now/ .

thanks for helping me like this!!

Thank you for this. It helped me improve my research title. I just want to verify to you the title I have just made. “Ensuring the safety: A Quantitative Study of Radio Frequency Identification system among the selected students of ( school’s name ).

(I need your reply asap coz we will be doing the chap. 1 tomorrow. Thank u in advance. 🙂 )

I am actually doing a research paper title. I want to know more further in doing research title. Can you give me some tips on doing a research paper?

Hi Joan, Thank you for your question. We are glad to know that you found our resources useful. Your feedback is very valuable to us. You can try drafting your own title after going through the following articles on our website: https://www.enago.com/academy/top-10-tips-on-choosing-an-attractive-research-title/ , https://www.enago.com/academy/writing-a-good-research-title-things-to-avoid/ , https://www.enago.com/academy/write-irresistible-research-paper-title/

We would be happy to give you feedback and suggest changes if required. Did you get a chance to install our free Mobile App? https://www.enago.com/academy/mobile-app/ . Make sure you subscribe to our weekly newsletter https://www.enago.com/academy/subscribe-now/ .

That really helpful. Thanks alot

Thank you so much. It’s really help me.

Thanks for sharing this tips. Title matters a lot for any article because it contents Keywords of article. It should be eye-catchy. Your article is helpful to select title of any article.

nice blog that you have shared

This blog is very informative for me. Thanks for sharing.

nice information that you have shared

i’m found in selecting my ma thesis title ,so i’m going to do my final research after the proposal approved. Your post help me find good title.

I need help. I need a research title for my study about early mobilization of the mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU. Any suggestions would be highly appreciated.

Thank you for posting your query on the website. When writing manuscripts, too many scholars neglect the research title. This phrase, along with the abstract, is what people will mostly see and read online. Title research of publications shows that the research paper title does matter a lot. Both bibliometrics and altmetrics tracking of citations are now, for better or worse, used to gauge a paper’s “success” for its author(s) and the journal publishing it. Interesting research topics coupled with good or clever yet accurate research titles can draw more attention to your work from peers and the public alike. You can check through the following search results for titles on similar topics: https://www.google.com/search?q=early+mobilization+of+the+mechanically+ventilated+patients+in+the+icu&rlz=1C1GCEU_enIN907IN907&oq=&aqs=chrome.0.69i59.4920093j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 .

We hope this would be helpful in drafting an attractive title for your research paper.

Please let us know in case of any other queries.

I’ve been surfing online more than 3 hours these days, but I never found any interesting article like yours. It is lovely worth enough for me. In my opinion, if all website owners and bloggers made just right content material as you did, the internet will be much more helpful than ever before.

Wonderful article! We will bee linking to this particularly great post on our site. Keep up the good writing.

Wow that was odd. I just wrote an very long comment but after I clicked submit my comment didn’t show up. Grrrr… well I’m not writing all that over again. Anyhow, just wanted to say fantastic blog!

In case the topic is new research before you’re writing. And then to stand out, you end up being different.and be inclined to highlight yourself.

There are many free directories, and more paid lists.

To be honest your article is informative. I search many site to know about writing but I didn’t get the information I needed. I saw your site and I read it. I got some new information from here. I think some of your tips can be applied to those too! Thank you so very much for such informative and useful content.

Nice and well written content you have shared with us. thanks a lot!

Thanks for sharing these tips… Rockwide

Its helpful. a person can grab knowledge through it.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

• AI in Academia

Disclosing the Use of Generative AI: Best practices for authors in manuscript preparation

The rapid proliferation of generative and other AI-based tools in research writing has ignited an…

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right…

How to Design Effective Research Questionnaires for Robust Findings

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What would be most effective in reducing research misconduct?

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Choosing a Title
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

The title summarizes the main idea or ideas of your study. A good title contains the fewest possible words needed to adequately describe the content and/or purpose of your research paper.

Importance of Choosing a Good Title

The title is the part of a paper that is read the most, and it is usually read first . It is, therefore, the most important element that defines the research study. With this in mind, avoid the following when creating a title:

• If the title is too long, this usually indicates there are too many unnecessary words. Avoid language, such as, "A Study to Investigate the...," or "An Examination of the...." These phrases are obvious and generally superfluous unless they are necessary to covey the scope, intent, or type of a study.
• On the other hand, a title which is too short often uses words which are too broad and, thus, does not tell the reader what is being studied. For example, a paper with the title, "African Politics" is so non-specific the title could be the title of a book and so ambiguous that it could refer to anything associated with politics in Africa. A good title should provide information about the focus and/or scope of your research study.
• In academic writing, catchy phrases or non-specific language may be used, but only if it's within the context of the study [e.g., "Fair and Impartial Jury--Catch as Catch Can"]. However, in most cases, you should avoid including words or phrases that do not help the reader understand the purpose of your paper.
• Academic writing is a serious and deliberate endeavor. Avoid using humorous or clever journalistic styles of phrasing when creating the title to your paper. Journalistic headlines often use emotional adjectives [e.g., incredible, amazing, effortless] to highlight a problem experienced by the reader or use "trigger words" or interrogative words like how, what, when, or why to persuade people to read the article or click on a link. These approaches are viewed as counter-productive in academic writing. A reader does not need clever or humorous titles to catch their attention because the act of reading research is assumed to be deliberate based on a desire to learn and improve understanding of the problem. In addition, a humorous title can merely detract from the seriousness and authority of your research. 
• Unlike everywhere else in a college-level social sciences research paper [except when using direct quotes in the text], titles do not have to adhere to rigid grammatical or stylistic standards. For example, it could be appropriate to begin a title with a coordinating conjunction [i.e., and, but, or, nor, for, so, yet] if it makes sense to do so and does not detract from the purpose of the study [e.g., "Yet Another Look at Mutual Fund Tournaments"] or beginning the title with an inflected form of a verb such as those ending in -ing [e.g., "Assessing the Political Landscape: Structure, Cognition, and Power in Organizations"].

Appiah, Kingsley Richard et al. “Structural Organisation of Research Article Titles: A Comparative Study of Titles of Business, Gynaecology and Law.” Advances in Language and Literary Studies 10 (2019); Hartley James. “To Attract or to Inform: What are Titles for?” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 35 (2005): 203-213; Jaakkola, Maarit. “Journalistic Writing and Style.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication . Jon F. Nussbaum, editor. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018): https://oxfordre.com/communication.

Structure and Writing Style

The following parameters can be used to help you formulate a suitable research paper title:

• The purpose of the research
• The scope of the research
• The narrative tone of the paper [typically defined by the type of the research]
• The methods used to study the problem

The initial aim of a title is to capture the reader’s attention and to highlight the research problem under investigation.

Create a Working Title Typically, the final title you submit to your professor is created after the research is complete so that the title accurately captures what has been done . The working title should be developed early in the research process because it can help anchor the focus of the study in much the same way the research problem does. Referring back to the working title can help you reorient yourself back to the main purpose of the study if you find yourself drifting off on a tangent while writing. The Final Title Effective titles in research papers have several characteristics that reflect general principles of academic writing.

• Indicate accurately the subject and scope of the study,
• Rarely use abbreviations or acronyms unless they are commonly known,
• Use words that create a positive impression and stimulate reader interest,
• Use current nomenclature from the field of study,
• Identify key variables, both dependent and independent,
• Reveal how the paper will be organized,
• Suggest a relationship between variables which supports the major hypothesis,
• Is limited to 5 to 15 substantive words,
• Does not include redundant phrasing, such as, "A Study of," "An Analysis of" or similar constructions,
• Takes the form of a question or declarative statement,
• If you use a quote as part of the title, the source of the quote is cited [usually using an asterisk and footnote],
• Use correct grammar and capitalization with all first words and last words capitalized, including the first word of a subtitle. All nouns, pronouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs that appear between the first and last words of the title are also capitalized, and
• Rarely uses an exclamation mark at the end of the title.

The Subtitle Subtitles are frequently used in social sciences research papers because it helps the reader understand the scope of the study in relation to how it was designed to address the research problem. Think about what type of subtitle listed below reflects the overall approach to your study and whether you believe a subtitle is needed to emphasize the investigative parameters of your research.

1.  Explains or provides additional context , e.g., "Linguistic Ethnography and the Study of Welfare Institutions as a Flow of Social Practices: The Case of Residential Child Care Institutions as Paradoxical Institutions." [Palomares, Manuel and David Poveda.  Text & Talk: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse and Communication Studies 30 (January 2010): 193-212]

2.  Adds substance to a literary, provocative, or imaginative title or quote , e.g., "Listen to What I Say, Not How I Vote": Congressional Support for the President in Washington and at Home." [Grose, Christian R. and Keesha M. Middlemass. Social Science Quarterly 91 (March 2010): 143-167]

3.  Qualifies the geographic scope of the research , e.g., "The Geopolitics of the Eastern Border of the European Union: The Case of Romania-Moldova-Ukraine." [Marcu, Silvia. Geopolitics 14 (August 2009): 409-432]

4.  Qualifies the temporal scope of the research , e.g., "A Comparison of the Progressive Era and the Depression Years: Societal Influences on Predictions of the Future of the Library, 1895-1940." [Grossman, Hal B. Libraries & the Cultural Record 46 (2011): 102-128]

5.  Focuses on investigating the ideas, theories, or work of a particular individual , e.g., "A Deliberative Conception of Politics: How Francesco Saverio Merlino Related Anarchy and Democracy." [La Torre, Massimo. Sociologia del Diritto 28 (January 2001): 75 - 98]

6.  Identifies the methodology used , e.g. "Student Activism of the 1960s Revisited: A Multivariate Analysis Research Note." [Aron, William S. Social Forces 52 (March 1974): 408-414]

7.  Defines the overarching technique for analyzing the research problem , e.g., "Explaining Territorial Change in Federal Democracies: A Comparative Historical Institutionalist Approach." [ Tillin, Louise. Political Studies 63 (August 2015): 626-641.

With these examples in mind, think about what type of subtitle reflects the overall approach to your study. This will help the reader understand the scope of the study in relation to how it was designed to address the research problem.

Anstey, A. “Writing Style: What's in a Title?” British Journal of Dermatology 170 (May 2014): 1003-1004; Balch, Tucker. How to Compose a Title for Your Research Paper. Augmented Trader blog. School of Interactive Computing, Georgia Tech University; Bavdekar, Sandeep B. “Formulating the Right Title for a Research Article.” Journal of Association of Physicians of India 64 (February 2016); Choosing the Proper Research Paper Titles. AplusReports.com, 2007-2012; Eva, Kevin W. “Titles, Abstracts, and Authors.” In How to Write a Paper . George M. Hall, editor. 5th edition. (Oxford: John Wiley and Sons, 2013), pp. 33-41; Hartley James. “To Attract or to Inform: What are Titles for?” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 35 (2005): 203-213; General Format. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Kerkut G.A. “Choosing a Title for a Paper.” Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Physiology 74 (1983): 1; “Tempting Titles.” In Stylish Academic Writing . Helen Sword, editor. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2012), pp. 63-75; Nundy, Samiran, et al. “How to Choose a Title?” In How to Practice Academic Medicine and Publish from Developing Countries? A Practical Guide . Edited by Samiran Nundy, Atul Kakar, and Zulfiqar A. Bhutta. (Springer Singapore, 2022), pp. 185-192.

• << Previous: Applying Critical Thinking
• Next: Making an Outline >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 10:07 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• Search Search
• CN (Chinese)
• DE (German)
• ES (Spanish)
• FR (Français)
• JP (Japanese)
• Open Research
• Booksellers
• Peer Reviewers
• Springer Nature Group ↗
• Publish an article
• Roles and responsibilities
• Signing your contract
• Writing your manuscript
• Submitting your manuscript
• Producing your book
• Promoting your book
• Submit your book idea
• Manuscript guidelines
• Book author services
• Publish a book
• Publish conference proceedings

Titles, Abstracts & Keywords

The title of your manuscript is usually the first introduction readers (and reviewers) have to your work. Therefore, you must select a title that grabs attention, accurately describes the contents of your manuscript, and makes people want to read further.

Additionally, Most people rely on electronic search engines to find articles. Usually they search through databases that contain only the title, author list, and abstract of articles, excluding any keywords attached to the article by its authors. It is therefore important to include in the title and/or abstract the words that potential readers of the article are likely to use during a search.

An effective title should:

• Convey the main topics of the study
• Highlight the importance of the research
• Attract readers

Writing a good title for your manuscript can be challenging. First, list the topics covered by the manuscript. Try to put all of the topics together in the title using as few words as possible. A title that is too long will seem clumsy, annoy readers, and probably not meet journal requirements.

• This title has too many unnecessary words.
• This title doesn’t give enough information about what makes the manuscript interesting.
• This is an effective title. It is short, easy to understand, and conveys the important aspects of the research.

Think about why your research will be of interest to other researchers. This should be related to the reason you decided to study the topic. If your title makes this clear, it will likely attract more readers to your manuscript.

TIP: Write down a few possible titles, and then select the best to refine further. Ask your colleagues their opinion. Spending the time needed to do this will result in a better title.

Selecting the most important information

The abstract must outline the most important aspects of the study while providing only a limited amount of detail on its background, methodology and results. Authors need to critically assess the different aspects of the manuscript and choose those that are sufficiently important to deserve inclusion in the abstract.

Once the abstract is ready it can be helpful to ask a colleague who is not involved in the research to go through it to ensure that the descriptions are clear. After you have drafted the manuscript, you should go back to the abstract to check that it agrees with the contents of the final manuscript.

Abstracts should have a structured format, serving several purposes: it helps authors summarize the different aspects of their work; it makes the abstract more immediately clear; and it helps peer reviewers and readers assess the contents of the manuscript.

The abstract structure varies between journals and between types of articles. Authors should check that the abstract of their manuscript is consistent with the requirements of the article type and journal to which the manuscript will be submitted. 

Keywords are a tool to help indexers and search engines find relevant papers. If database search engines can find your journal manuscript, readers will be able to find it too. This will increase the number of people reading your manuscript, and likely lead to more citations.

However, to be effective, keywords must be chosen carefully. They should:

• Represent the content of your manuscript
• Be specific to your field or sub-field
• Poor keywords : molecule, optics, lasers, energy lifetime
• Better keywords : single-molecule interaction, Kerr effect, carbon nanotubes, energy level structure
• Poor keywords : neuron, brain, OA (an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, signaling
• Better keywords : neurodegenerative diseases; CA1 region, hippocampal; okadaic acid; neurotoxins; MAP kinase signaling system; cell death
• Poor keywords : climate change, erosion, plant effects
• Better keywords : quaternary climate change, soil erosion, bioturbation

Next : Introduction, Methods & Materials

For further support

We hope that with this tutorial you have a clearer idea of how the publication process works and feel confident in responding to editor and reviewers. Good luck with publishing your work!

If you feel that you would like some further support with writing your paper and understanding the peer review process, Springer Nature offer some services which may be of help.

• Nature Research Editing Service offers high quality  English language and scientific editing. During language editing , Editors will improve the English in your manuscript to ensure the meaning is clear and identify problems that require your review. With Scientific Editing experienced development editors will improve the scientific presentation of your research in your manuscript and cover letter, if supplied. They will also provide you with a report containing feedback on the most important issues identified during the edit, as well as journal recommendations.
• Our affiliates American Journal Experts also provide English language editing* as well as other author services that may support you in preparing your manuscript.
• We provide both online and face-to-face training for researchers on all aspects of the manuscript writing process.

* Please note, using an editing service is neither a requirement nor a guarantee of acceptance for publication. 

Stay up to date

Here to foster information exchange with the library community

Connect with us on LinkedIn and stay up to date with news and development.

• Tools & Services
• Account Development
• Sales and account contacts
• Professional
• Press office
• Locations & Contact

We are a world leading research, educational and professional publisher. Visit our main website for more information.

• © 2024 Springer Nature
• General terms and conditions
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Your Privacy Choices / Manage Cookies
• Accessibility
• Legal notice
• Help us to improve this site, send feedback.

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

How to Write a Research Paper Title

Knowing how to write a research paper title is an art that not every researcher possesses, and researchers often spend a lot of time skimming through articles to find the right research paper title.

According to an interesting estimate, researchers read more than 100 publications every year and spend long hours, weeks and months searching for and reading articles relevant to their field of study. 1 While open access publishing and online repositories have made it easier to find articles, researchers still need to browse through a sea of research, often using research paper titles, to find relevant information for their research study. Researchers also face the challenge of ensuring their work reaches a broader audience in order to get more citations. This is where the importance of a good title for a research paper becomes evident.

Your research paper title is one of the first things readers in your research paper and plays an important role in influencing whether they will actually go through the entire article. This makes it critical to have a good research paper title that captures the reader’s attention. In this article, we look at the key characteristics of a good research title and what to keep in mind to create a research title that works for you.

Generate outstanding research titles in a click with Paperpal. Try it now!  

What to keep in mind when writing a research paper title

• Convey the key research findings: Before writing a research paper title, list down what your study is about, what you have achieved or discovered, and the methodology used. Try and identify the one or two key elements that make your study novel or significant in your subject area. Combine these elements to create the best research title that showcases your article accurately and effectively.
• Choose a declarative research paper title : Declarative titles are more informative and help readers to quickly grasp what the body of the article may contain. Therefore, it is considered to be more impactful and more likely to attract the reader’s attention. Additionally, most editors agree that papers with declarative titles are more likely to be shared online, allowing researchers to reach a far wider audience. 2
• A good research title must pique reader interest : Researchers browsing through online platforms during their literature search often spend only a few seconds to read the title and evaluate an article’s relevance. This makes it important to create a catchy title for your research paper that will spark curiosity in the minds of your audience, which may prompt them pause, read, share, and discuss your research paper.
• Avoid making any unsubstantiated claims: This is an important aspect to keep in mind when creating research paper titles. While it may be tempting to write titles with claims that will immediately attract reader attention and get you more citations, your research should be able to back-up these claims with substantive, studied evidence. Failing to do so can create mistrust about the research and even hurt your reputation.
• Keep it simple and avoid jargon: It’s tempting to use technical words in a research paper title when you know that your primary audience is most likely to be other researchers working in the same field. However, this can prove counter-productive as readers who are not familiar with these complicated words may end up skipping your article. Some early career researchers might also give your paper a pass as they may feel that it is too technical for them so avoid using jargon.

Let Paperpal generate a suitable title for your content in minutes. Try it now!

• Use phrases to keep your research title concise: One mistake early career researchers make is using full sentences to write the research paper title. Avoid complex phrases and unnecessary details as it makes the title unnecessarily lengthy. Remember to ensure proper syntax when trying to rephrase the title to make it leaner. A good research paper title offers a concise summary of the paper’s content; keep your title to under 12 words as lengthy titles can be hard to understand and may seem unfocused and uninteresting.
• Include keywords to make your article discoverable: Today most researchers turn to online databases and search engines like Google Scholar to find the right research. This makes it critical to identify and use the best keywords for your research subject/topic when creating a research title. The best research paper title is one that is easily discoverable, making it easy for your readers to find and read your article.

A review of more than 150,000 papers  submitted to UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF) database found that the style of a research paper’s title impacted the number of citations it would typically receive. 3 Writing a good research paper title is worth the time and effort, and we’re sure the points listed above will help!

How to generate research paper titles with Paperpal?

A research paper title is the first impression for journal editors, reviewers, and readers to understand the aim and purpose of your research study. However, picking a research paper title that encapsulates your research’s content can be daunting. Your research paper title should accurately capture your work, contain highly searched keywords, and should also sound interesting to people who work on a similar topic.   

Paperpal’s secure generative AI helps you write research paper titles twice as fast, ensuring they align with your research topic. Follow these simple steps to create an impactful research paper title: 

• Sign Up or Log In: Start by creating an account or logging into Paperpal . 
• Paste your content: Once logged in, paste your research paper’s content or abstract onto the document. 
• Generate your title: Click on ‘Templates’ in the side navigation pane, go to Titles, and select ‘Generate’ . 

Paperpal will analyze your content and propose a fitting research paper title. If it doesn’t quite hit the mark, simply click regenerate to get additional title options until you find the perfect one. Remember, while Paperpal provides a solid starting point, personalizing the title to capture the essence of your research is key to making it stand out.  

• How Scientists Retrieve Publications: An Empirical Study of How the Internet Is Overtaking Paper Media. Journal of Electronic Publishing, December 2000. [Accessed November 3, 2022] Available at https://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0006.202?view=text;rgn=main
• Di Girolamo, N. Health care articles with simple and declarative titles were more likely to be in the Altmetric Top 100. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, December 2016. [Accessed November 3, 2022] Available at https://www.jclinepi.com/article/S0895-4356(16)30853-8/fulltext
• Hudson, J. An analysis of the titles of papers submitted to the UK REF in 2014: authors, disciplines, and stylistic details. Scientometrics, July 2016. [Accessed November 3, 2022] Available at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-016-2081-4

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

It is generally recommended to avoid using a question to write a good research paper title. Titles should be concise and informative, conveying the main focus of the study. While questions can be used in the introduction or research objectives, a clear and declarative title is preferred to accurately represent the content and purpose of the research.

A research paper title should be concise and to the point. Ideally, it should be around 10 to 12 words or less. A shorter title is more effective in grabbing readers’ attention and conveying the main idea succinctly. However, it’s important to ensure that the title still accurately represents the research and provides enough information for readers to understand the scope of the study.

Including specific keywords related to the research topic can be beneficial. Keywords help in indexing and searching for relevant papers. However, it is not necessary to include all keywords in the title. Instead, focus on incorporating essential and relevant keywords that reflect the core aspects of the study. Use keywords that are commonly used and recognized in the field to increase the discoverability and relevance of your research.

Abbreviations or acronyms should generally be avoided in the research paper title. The title should be clear and easily understandable to a broad audience. If an abbreviation is commonly used in the field and is essential to convey the research focus, it can be included, but it’s important to provide the full term upon its first mention in the paper for clarity.

Whether you can change the research paper title after submission depends on the specific guidelines and policies of the journal or conference. Some publications allow minor revisions, including title changes, during the review process. However, it is best to ensure that the title is carefully chosen and reviewed before submission. If a change is necessary, it is recommended to contact the editor or conference organizers for guidance on whether it’s permissible to modify the title.

The preferred formatting style for research paper titles varies depending on the specific guidelines of the target journal or conference. Generally, sentence case is commonly used, where only the first word and proper nouns are capitalized. However, some publications may prefer title case, where the first letter of each major word is capitalized. It is important to carefully review the submission guidelines or consult the specific style guide recommended by the publication to ensure consistency with their preferred formatting style.

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

How to write a research paper outline: simple steps for researchers.

• Manuscript Withdrawal: Reasons, Consequences, and How to Withdraw Submitted Manuscripts
• Supplementary Materials in Research: 5 Tips for Authors
• What is an Expository Essay and How to Write It

The Ethics of Using AI in Research and Scientific Writing

You may also like, how to write a high-quality conference paper, measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence, phd qualifying exam: tips for success , ai in education: it’s time to change the..., is it ethical to use ai-generated abstracts without..., what are journal guidelines on using generative ai..., should you use ai tools like chatgpt for..., 9 steps to publish a research paper, how to make translating academic papers less challenging, self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how....

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
• v.3(9); 2018 Sep

Creating effective titles for your scientific publications

Associated data.

You work for months, maybe years, to plan and conduct your study. You write it up carefully, reporting every piece of data accurately. You get the approval of your co-authors and double-check everyone’s conflicts of interest for the disclosure form. You are ready to submit it when you remember that your work needs a title. “No problem,” you say. “I’ll just throw something together.”

Hold on—that’s not a good idea. The title of a scholarly article really does matter, for several reasons ( Video 1 , available online at www.VideoGIE.org ). It is the first thing a reader will see, so it helps him or her decide whether to read the rest of the article ( Fig. 1 ). 1 If you are publishing in a subscription model, it helps the reader decide whether to buy the whole article. Later, when the reader is writing his own article and wants to cite yours, he can find it more easily if you have given it an effective title. If the article is cited more, it will help your H-Index and G-Index, building your reputation and credibility. Furthermore, if your article is highly cited, it helps the publishing journal’s Impact Factor. Journal editors know which authors’ articles are highly cited and will react with interest when they see another article submitted by that author in the future.

Example of a poor title. It has a problem with grammar (“Are” instead of “Is”), it attempts to be funny, it is in the form of a question, uses abbreviations, does not have clear keywords, and does not make the point of the article clear.

Several elements make up an effective title ( Table 1 ). Studies have shown that shorter titles receive more citations; most recommend 10 to 15 words or between 31 and 40 characters. 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 Punctuation is important: commas and colons have been shown to increase citations, but articles with question marks or exclamation points are cited less frequently. 7 Keywords that help researchers find your article when they use search algorithms are critical, so make sure that your title accurately reflects the key concepts of your article. 4 , 8 , 9

Table 1

Elements of a good title for a scholarly publication

Avoid abbreviations or jargon in your title. 3 , 4 , 9 People from other fields whose research intersects with yours might cite you if they can find your article, but if you use abbreviations or jargon specific to your field, their searches won’t uncover your article.

Some authors think attracting attention with humor or puns is a good idea, but that practice is actually counterproductive. 3 , 4 , 5 , 9 Your title should reflect the tone of the article and of the journal, and because we are dealing with scholarly publications, that means the title should be formal as well. If you are writing an editorial or opinion piece, you might get away with a less-formal title, but for the most part, making your readers laugh should not be a priority.

Poor grammar and incorrect spelling are jarring and irritating to many readers as well as to editors and reviewers, so check and double check that the title is grammatical and everything is spelled and punctuated correctly. If you are using an editing or translation service to assist you with the composition of your article, be sure to include the title in the content submitted for review to catch errors you may have overlooked.

Above all, remember that your title is a reader’s first impression of your article, so make sure that impression is effective. Do all you can to create a title that is professional and does justice to the article you have worked so hard to create.

All authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.

Supplementary data

Creating effective titles for scientific articles takes planning and knowledge. In this video, we discuss the elements of a good title.

Training videos   |   Faqs

How to Write Catchy Research Paper Titles with Examples

Hey there, fellow researchers! Have you ever felt the struggle of coming up with the perfect title for your paper? You’re not alone. The title is like the headline of your favorite news article – it’s got to be catchy yet informative. Let’s dive into some tips and tricks to ensure your title stands out in the academic crowd.

1. Why is the Research Paper Title Important?

Every word in your title is crucial. It’s the first thing a reviewer or reader will see, and it can determine whether your paper gets read or skipped.

✖ Title is too long, wordy, and confusing An In-depth Examination into The Overall Chance of Becoming a World-Renowned Athlete vs Getting an Executive Position in a Fortune 500 Company ✖ Title is written for a small group of readers Examining Humor in Asian Nations as Expressed in Instagram Videos ✔ Title is short and to the point Autonomous Cars: The Ethical Dilemma

A great title is a concise summary of your research and a sneak peek into your work’s unique aspects and main findings. It’s a balance between being specific and informative without overwhelming the reader with details.

2. Rules for Writing Good Titles

Rules for writing great titles are like rules for good writing in general. Let’s look at some basic rules to follow while crafting a fitting title for your research paper.

2.1 Be Specific and Avoid Being Generic

A generic title is broad, vague, and lacks specificity about the research findings. It does not highlight the research’s unique factors or the study’s contribution.

✖ Generic title An Analysis of Healthcare Data Privacy ✔ Improved title Assessing the Effectiveness of Encryption Techniques in Protecting User Data Privacy in a Healthcare Organization _ Focus of research _ Context _ Aspect being studied

2.2 Highlight Your Main Findings and Unique Aspects

Craft the perfect title using three steps.

2.3 Make it Concise and Short

While a five-word short title may seem ideal, when trying to include the specificity of focus, method, and context, you are likelier to have an 8-12 word title. This length is perfect for journal articles.

✖ Not concise A Comprehensive Examination of the Use and Impact of AI-Driven Predictive Analytics for Improving Patient Outcomes in Healthcare Settings Including Hospitals, Labs, Physician’s Offices and Primary Care Facilities ✔ Concise AI-Driven Predictive Analytics in Healthcare: Improving Patient Outcomes

2.4 Attract Attention to Your Work

You want people to be able to find your research article easily through a Google search. Specificity is essential. Using vague adjectives like novel or unique to describe a method doesn’t mean anything, and these words are not likely to be entered into a search bar. Ask yourself, what would the person likely type into the search bar?

✖ Title with poor searchability A Novel Technique for Learning Science ✔ Title with good searchability AI Driven Exercises for Elementary Science Classes

3. Common Questions

Many questions arise when writing an article title. We will answer some of the most common questions, starting with writing mechanics.

3.1 Should Titles be Grammatically Correct?

You might wonder if using prepositions (for, in, of, for, by) in a title is okay. The answer is yes. It is often necessary for the title to make sense and be grammatically correct. Using articles (the, a, an) correctly is also essential. Let’s look at some examples.

Please remember, a countable singular noun (factor, cause, risk) must be preceded by an article. Are verbs acceptable in titles?  Absolutely. Verbs make titles more dynamic.

Tip: Use the …ing form of verbs rather than vague nouns.

✖ Using abstract nouns The examination and categorization of educational software for high schools ✔ Replace abstract nouns with …ing form of verb Examining and categorizing educational software for high schools

Using verbs in the second example adds action words that depict the tasks performed in the study.

3.2 Can I Add Humor to My Title?

Humor can make a title more engaging and memorable, but it must be balanced with relevance to the research topic. The humor must not detract from the study’s credibility.

3.3 Can I Formulate My Paper Title as a Question?

Titles that ask questions are well-suited to abstracts submitted to conferences. Questioning titles are informal and catch the reader’s attention quickly.  The question must be aligned with the primary focus of the research.

Rule: A title can end with a question mark. However, no other punctuation is required at the end of a title.

3.4 What is the Difference Between Conference and Journal Titles?

When you submit an abstract to a conference, you want it noticed so it will be accepted as a presentation. However, you also hope it will be published in the conference proceedings. You want to attract attention, but the title can’t be too witty as to lose professionalism. Two-part titles work well to blend fun and professionalism.

3.5 When is a Two-Part Title a Good Idea

Two-part titles can pose a question in the first part to grab attention, with the second part providing a more academic description of the content. Two-part questions can also use the second part to explain the first part. Two-part questions must be specific, and the two parts must be connected.

✖ Poorly written two-part title : first and second parts don’t connect Advanced Algorithms in Machine Learning: Can They Really Improve Anything? ✔ Improved title Advanced Algorithms in Predictive Analytics: Are They Transforming Healthcare Outcomes?

The poorly written title does not strongly connect the first and second parts. “Can They Really Improve Anything?” isn’t specific enough to connect to the first part, which also lacks specificity.

Crafting an engaging and informative research article title is crucial for capturing attention and ensuring your work is read. You can create titles that stand out by being specific, highlighting unique findings, keeping titles concise, and ensuring grammatical correctness. Remember, a well-placed question or a bit of humor can enhance your title, but it must remain relevant and professional. Whether for journals or conferences, a well-crafted title can make a difference in the searchability and impact of your research. Happy titling!

If you have any questions, please drop a comment below, and we will answer as soon as possible. We also recommend you to refer to our other blogs on  academic writing tools ,   academic writing resources ,  academic writing phrases ,  research paper examples  and  research paper writing tips  which are relevant to the topic discussed in this blog. 

Similar Posts

Hedging Techniques in Academic Writing with Examples

Hedging in academic writing refers to using language that indicates uncertainty or caution. Hedging can boost your credibility in the scientific world.

Useful Phrases and Sentences for Academic & Research Paper Writing

In this blog, we explain various sections of a research paper and give you an overview of what these sections should contain.

Results Section Examples and Writing Tips

In this blog, we will go through many results section examples and understand how to write a great results section for your paper.

Writing a Medical Clinical Trial Research Paper – Example & Format

In this blog, we will teach you step-by-step how to write a clinical trial research paper for publication in a high quality scientific journal.

How to Make Your Study Limitations Sound Positive?

In this blog, we will look at some clever techniques to present the study limitations without reducing the impact of your work.

Writing a Questionnaire Survey Research Paper – Example & Format

In this blog, we will explain how to write a survey questionnaire paper and discuss all the important points to consider while writing the research paper.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• 10 Share Facebook
• 0 Share Twitter
• 0 Share LinkedIn
• 0 Share Email

• Discoveries
• Right Journal
• Journal Metrics
• Journal Fit
• Abbreviation
• In-Text Citations
• Bibliographies
• Writing an Article
• Peer Review Types
• Acknowledgements
• Withdrawing a Paper
• Form Letter
• ISO, ANSI, CFR
• Google Scholar
• Journal Manuscript Editing
• Research Manuscript Editing

Book Editing

• Manuscript Editing Services

Medical Editing

• Bioscience Editing
• Physical Science Editing
• PhD Thesis Editing Services
• PhD Editing
• Master’s Proofreading
• Bachelor’s Editing
• Dissertation Proofreading Services
• Best Dissertation Proofreaders
• Masters Dissertation Proofreading
• PhD Proofreaders
• Proofreading PhD Thesis Price
• Journal Article Editing
• Book Editing Service
• Editing and Proofreading Services
• Research Paper Editing
• Medical Manuscript Editing
• Academic Editing
• Social Sciences Editing
• Academic Proofreading
• PhD Theses Editing
• Dissertation Proofreading
• Proofreading Rates UK
• Medical Proofreading
• PhD Proofreading Services UK
• Academic Proofreading Services UK

Medical Editing Services

• Life Science Editing
• Biomedical Editing
• Environmental Science Editing
• Pharmaceutical Science Editing
• Economics Editing
• Psychology Editing
• Sociology Editing
• Archaeology Editing
• History Paper Editing
• Anthropology Editing
• Law Paper Editing
• Engineering Paper Editing
• Technical Paper Editing
• Philosophy Editing
• PhD Dissertation Proofreading
• Lektorat Englisch
• Akademisches Lektorat
• Lektorat Englisch Preise
• Wissenschaftliches Lektorat
• Lektorat Doktorarbeit

PhD Thesis Editing

• Thesis Proofreading Services
• PhD Thesis Proofreading
• Proofreading Thesis Cost
• Proofreading Thesis
• Thesis Editing Services
• Professional Thesis Editing
• Thesis Editing Cost
• Proofreading Dissertation
• Dissertation Proofreading Cost
• Dissertation Proofreader
• Correção de Artigos Científicos
• Correção de Trabalhos Academicos
• Serviços de Correção de Inglês
• Correção de Dissertação
• Correção de Textos Precos
• 定額 ネイティブチェック
• Copy Editing
• FREE Courses
• Revision en Ingles
• Revision de Textos en Ingles
• Revision de Tesis
• Revision Medica en Ingles
• Revision de Tesis Precio
• Revisão de Artigos Científicos
• Revisão de Trabalhos Academicos
• Serviços de Revisão de Inglês
• Revisão de Dissertação
• Revisão de Textos Precos
• Corrección de Textos en Ingles
• Corrección de Tesis
• Corrección de Tesis Precio
• Corrección Medica en Ingles
• Corrector ingles

Select Page

The Very Beginning: The Title

Table of Contents (Guide To Publication)

Part iii: communicating with journal editors: submission, acceptance, revision and rejection – chapter 6, 6.2 titles, abstracts and keywords: sound connections.

With the exception of your covering letter, the title, abstract and keywords of your paper are the first things encountered by the editor considering your submission (and the very first things if you’re not able to submit any sort of covering letter). So although all parts of your paper demand your careful attention if your submission is to be successful, extra time and care invested in these three elements of your paper can reap a bountiful harvest. Think of your paper as dinner and its title, abstract and keywords as appetisers. You want the editor and the reviewers who will hopefully follow to be tantalised by your appetisers – to enjoy the texture and flavour of these delicacies while building a hearty appetite, and on that basis to expect good things from the dinner (paper) to follow. You do not want them to feel glutted by too much nourishment too richly seasoned or repulsed by a dull product of so low a quality that they leave the table before dinner arrives. This is to say that your title, abstract and keywords should hook the editor and inspire him or her to read on to the rest of your article.

6.2.1 The Very Beginning: The Title

Very few elements of an academic or scientific paper have to accomplish as much in as few words as the title does. The title is the first part of your paper read by the specialists who will review your article if it passes muster with the editor, and by the readers (usually more specialists in your field) who encounter it in the journal if you’re fortunate enough to succeed in getting the paper published. According to the APA Manual, ‘a title should summarize the main idea of the manuscript simply and, if possible, with style.’[1] For one, then, it should concisely inform your readers about the research you did in the study, mentioning the variables or theoretical issues you investigated in your paper and the relationship between them (e.g., ‘Effect of Changing Weather Patterns on Home Insurance Policies’), and it can also hint at what you discovered (e.g., ‘Effect of Changing Weather Patterns on Home Insurance Policies: Clients Left Out in the Cold?’). Secondly, it should do both in an interesting and engaging way that allows the language you use to carry nuances and allusions (perhaps even a little word play) while providing the necessary details with precision: the word ‘Cold’ in the second example above, for instance, not only refers to the unpleasant physical reality of those who lose their homes due to natural disasters but also implies a certain lack of warmth on the part of insurance companies who do not provide support in such situations. The subtitle as a whole hints at the nature of the results, with the question mark leaving the matter uncertain and the reader whose sympathy or curiosity has been tweaked eager (one hopes) to discover the answer and thus well primed to read on.

[1] The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 6th ed. (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2010), 23.

However, titles are also best if they’re as short as possible, and many style manuals and journal guidelines set strict word or character limits on titles. The APA Manual , for instance, recommends limiting the title of an academic or scientific article to 12 words or less, which renders the second (and to my mind more engaging) of my two examples above too long at 15 words. There are, then, both practical and creative reasons for avoiding all unnecessary words in your title: adverbs and adjectives are rarely necessary and should be used sparingly and to maximum effect (‘Changing’ in my title above, for instance, alludes to changes in both the weather and the coverage provided by insurance policies), while words such as ‘study,’ ‘method’ and ‘results’ are almost always extraneous in that they serve no useful purpose and can simply burden a title and render it more awkward: ‘Results Suggest that Clients Might Be Left Out in the Cold’ says basically the same thing as the subtitle I have above, but it uses almost twice as many words and simply isn’t as catchy. Do check the journal guidelines on this, however, as some journals aren’t averse to longer titles and a few even ask that the type of study or methodology be identified in the title as a subtitle (or even a secondary subtitle, though to be honest, using two colons in a title isn’t an English style I’d recommend) along the lines of ‘A Study Protocol’ or ‘A Randomised Trial.’

It may be tempting to use abbreviations in your title – an acronym is counted as one word, after all, no matter how many words it abbreviates – but it’s better to avoid them, and many style manuals and journal guidelines will ask that you do. With some terms, however, the abbreviations are better known than the full version (IQ, for instance, and AIDS), so in such cases they are probably appropriate for the title: few publishers would expect you to use ‘intelligence quotient’ instead of IQ in your title. If you find that you absolutely have to use abbreviations in your title, be sure that they are relatively common and will be familiar to the journal’s audience: indeed, all terminology you use in your title should be appropriate to the audience you anticipate, because I can assure you that feeling lost before you’ve even made it through the title is a frustrating reading experience. Be sure to observe any patterns of capitalisation required by the journal to which you’re submitting your paper, and the same is the case with font style and size, the use of punctuation (a colon or a dash between title and subtitle, for example), the placement of the title in relation to other parts of the paper (on a separate page, at the top of the paper or both), and the format of any running heading that may be required. Your title contains only a few of the many words in your paper, but it’s right up at the top for the world (including editors) to see, so you want to make it perfect in terms of language and format, and keep it short and interesting as well.

This article is part of a book called Guide to Academic and Scientific Publication: How To Get Your Writing Published in Scholarly Journals . It provides practical advice on planning, preparing and submitting articles for publication in scholarly journals.

Whether you are looking for information on designing an academic or scientific article, constructing a scholarly argument, targeting the right journal, following journal guidelines with precision, providing accurate and complete references, writing correct and elegant scholarly English, communicating with journal editors or revising your paper in light of that communication, you will find guidance, tips and examples in this manual.

This book is focusing on sound scholarly principles and practices as well as the expectations and requirements of academic and scientific journals, this guide is suitable for use in a wide variety of disciplines, including Economics, Engineering, the Humanities, Law, Management, Mathematics, Medicine and the Social, Physical and Biological Sciences .

You might be interested in Services offered by Proof-Reading-Service.com

Journal editing.

Journal article editing services

PhD thesis editing services

Scientific Editing

Manuscript editing.

Manuscript editing services

Expert Editing

Expert editing for all papers

Research Editing

Research paper editing services

Professional book editing services

6 tips for writing a great title for your research article

Title is the first thing the reader sees from your research article. Based on the title the reader decides to have a look at the article — or not. So a better title will attract more readers and quite possibly increase the impact of your research. If you wonder what makes a good title, and how you can formulate one for your paper as well, then check out our six tips for writing a great research article title.

Goal: catch the attention of the *right* reader

A good title helps the reader quickly recognize whether this paper is relevant for them. The title should give the reader an accurate picture of the article — and motivate the *right* reader to go on and read the article.

Additionally, an ideal title is memorable : researchers are reading many papers, some will be inevitably forgotten. A good title ensures that your paper will stick in your reader’s mind.

Case study: Important paper missed because of its title

Let me tell you an example from my own research, about an important paper that we missed because of its title.

Article entitled Distinct contributions of Na V 1.6 and Na V 1.2 in action potential initiation and backpropagation has been published in July 2009 in the prestigious journal Nature Neuroscience .

A couple of months later I started to work on a project that later became my PhD thesis. And the above mentioned article turned out to be the most important study on which my whole work was based.

Yet when I started, I didn’t know about the paper. My supervisor and another professor working on similar topics didn’t know about it either.

They had surely seen the title since they were following the journal’s publications. But they didn’t recognize that this might be a relevant paper.

Eventually we learned about the paper from a collaborator from a different institute. Later when I was presenting my work at conferences, I encountered many other researchers who missed this paper, even though it was clearly relevant to them.

So, what’s the issue with this title? Read on my tips on how to write a great title , and learn along the way what is problematic with this title and how we can fix it.

1. Headline the main result, not the main effort

If your paper has a clear main finding that can be summarized in a sentence , put it in the title. Such a title is much more interesting (and informative) than a title describing your approach.

Prof. Kevin Plaxco gives the following examples in his commentary article The art of writing science :

• Main effort (not optimal): A phylogenetic analysis of humans and chimps
• Main result (preferred): Phylogenetic evidence indicates an exceptionally close relationship between humans and chimps

Here is another example:

• Main result missing: Cognitive-behavioural stress management skills and quality of life in stress-related disorders
• Main result in the title: Cognitive-behavioural stress management skills improve quality of life in stress-related disorders

Concerning our case study example, the title Distinct contributions of Na V 1.6 and Na V 1.2 in action potential initiation and backpropagation does (kind of) contain the main result, albeit it is not formulated as a full sentence. We’ll see later how we can improve it.

Do you need to revise & polish your manuscript or thesis but don’t know where to begin?

Get your Revision Checklist

Click here for an efficient step-by-step revision of your scientific texts.

2. Adapt the level of detail to your target audience

If your article is intended for a broader audience (that is, you want to publish it in a general journal), your title should be more general , so that it is understandable to this broader audience.

On the other hand, if your article is intended for a specialized audience and a specialized journal, you can include more details and jargon in the title.

• article published in the broad journal Nature: The hippocampus is crucial for forming non-hippocampal long-term memory during sleep
• article on a similar topic published in the specialized journal Neurobiology of Learning and Memory: Sleep enhances memory consolidation in the hippocampus-dependent object-place recognition task in rats

However, be careful with short and general titles . Such titles are typical for review articles , because they suggest a broad scope of the article. So your readers might mistaken your original research article for a review article.

For example, the title Axon Initial Segment–Associated Microglia sounds like it’s a review, but it is an original research article. Such a title is misleading for the readers, so it’s better to avoid it.

Not every neuroscientist knows what is “Na V 1.6″ and “Na V 1.2″. My supervisor didn’t know either — and it turns out that this was one of the reasons why he and the other professor missed this article. “Na V 1.6″ and “Na V 1.2″ are sodium channels — and every neuroscientist knows what are those. So the keyword “sodium channels” should definitely be included in an article title published in such a general journal as Nature Neuroscience .

3. Avoid “fluff” at the beginning of the title

Beginning of the title is especially salient , especially visible to the reader. And often this is your only chance to convince your potential reader that this paper is relevant to them.

So it’s a mistake to start the title with “fluff”, that is, a phrase that doesn’t carry much content and can be safely omitted. Instead, begin your title with an important keyword .

For example:

• Aspects of ​immune dysfunction in end-stage renal disease
• Revisiting the role of xanthophylls in nonphotochemical quenching

Our case-study title Distinct contributions of Na V 1.6 and Na V 1.2 in action potential initiation and backpropagation does not start with a meaningless phrase that can be simply deleted. However, it also doesn’t start with an important keyword. Let’s see in the next point what would be a better beginning of the title.

4. Use the Context – Emphasis structure

A great title follows the optimal sentence structure : The beginning of the title acts as context for the rest of the title while the end of the title is naturally emphasized (if the reader gets this far).

So a good strategy is to include at the beginning of the title a keyword that will be recognized by all of your target readers and at the end of the title a keyword that is specific to your paper and its contribution.

However, what is a general keyword and what is a specific contribution might depend on your audience .

For example, the title Selective Adsorption to Particular Crystal Faces of ZnO suggests that this article primarily targets researchers interested in adsorption processes: “selective adsorption” is the general process, which is examined in this paper for the particular case of ZnO. However, if the paper targets researchers working on ZnO (zinc oxide), then it would be better to mention “ZnO” at beginning of the title.

Now let’s consider our case study : Distinct contributions of Na V 1.6 and Na V 1.2 in action potential initiation and backpropagation .

Then, what is a specific keyword related to the contribution of this paper? I would say it could be “Na V 1.6 and Na V 1.2 sodium channels”: although there are some previous studies investigating these two channel types, this paper put all the puzzle pieces together and provided a coherent picture about the interplay of these two channel types in — you guessed it — action potential initiation and backpropagation.

So, let’s improve this title by putting “Action potential initiation and backpropagation” at the beginning and “Na V 1.6 and Na V 1.2 sodium channels” at the end. Then we can rearrange the rest such that it makes sense — and reveals the main message of the paper:

Action potential initiation and backpropagation is differentially regulated by Na V 1.6 and Na V 1.2 sodium channels

A much better title, don’t you think?

5. “Context: Details” structure also works

But what to do with papers that have no single take-home message that can be summarized in a sentence?

For explorative papers that cover several problems or aspects of a topic, the “Context: Details” structure is often suitable. Here, you start with the general contextual keyword(s) that grab the attention of the reader, and then supplement relevant details after the colon.

• UCB revisited: Improved regret bounds for the stochastic multi-armed bandit problem
• Single Cell Assay for Molecular Diagnostics and Medicine: Monitoring Intracellular Concentrations of Macromolecules by Two-photon Fluorescence Lifetime Imaging

Here are some examples that don’t work very well:

• Noise statistics identification for Kalman filtering of the electron radiation belt observations: 2. Filtration and smoothing
• A better oscillation detection method robustly extracts EEG rhythms across brain state changes: The human alpha rhythm as a test case

In these cases, the first part before the colon is too long, it provides much more information than just the context, and therefore the whole title becomes harder to understand and remember.

So for an effective “Context: Details” type of title, make sure that the first part before the colon is short and memorable . Then the second part after the colon can be longer and detailed, and the title will still create a clear image in reader’s mind.

6. Title as a question or catchy title? It depends…

Now you might ask yourself: can’t we write more interesting titles than those that accurately reflect the content of the paper? These can be pretty boring… What about titles formulated as questions? And “catchy” titles?

Well, the general rule is to follow the conventions of your field . If some of the research articles you are reading have catchy titles, then it’s most probably OK for you to do this as well.

For example, questions and catchy titles are quite common in research articles from psychology:

• How often is p rep close to the true replication probability?
• Must interesting things be pleasant? A test of competing appraisal structures.

On the other hand, I have rarely seen a question as a title in a research article from neuroscience.

However, in most fields catchy and even funny titles are appreciated in commentary and opinion articles . For example, the “news & views” commentary article introducing our case-study paper Distinct contributions of Na V 1.6 and Na V 1.2 in action potential initiation and backpropagation is entitled Who let the spikes out?

Also the titles of review articles might be less formal. Which brings us to the next point…

Titles of review articles

Titles of review articles tend to be more general and broad than titles of original research articles. This, of course, reflects the broader scope and content of review articles. For example:

• Carbohydrate inhibitors of cholera toxin
• Neural circuits underlying thirst and fluid homeostasis

These titles don’t consist of a full sentence — because there is rarely a main take-home message in a review article. However, what is helpful here is to follow the Context-Emphasis structure introduced in point 4.

Titles of review articles often include the word “review” in the title, for example:

• Gap junctions in developing neocortex: a review
• A systematic review of COVID-19 epidemiology based on current evidence

And as we said in the previous point, titles of review articles may be less formal and more catchy even in fields where such titles are not used for original research articles:

• Spooky sodium balance
• Remembering the past to imagine the future: the prospective brain

How to find the perfect title for your article

Now you have learned all the rules for good titles, but one question remains: How to proceed? How to come up with a great title for your article?

Then I recommend the following procedure :

• First, generate 10 possible titles . These 10 titles don’t have to be unique: some of them might only differ in one or two words or in the word order.
• Next, select the best title . You can do this together with your co-authors. Or each co-author picks one or two favorites and then you discuss and select the final title together.

With this procedure it’s much easier to find the most suitable title for your paper than if you would create just one title and then try to improve it.

So that was quite some theory about how to write a great title. Now if you want to practice this new knowledge, here is a little exercise for you.

What is good and what is not optimal about these titles? How would you improve them?

• Analysis of processes leading to localized electron enhancements in the outer radiation belt
• Wild-type and cancer-related p53 proteins are preferentially degraded by MDM2 as dimers rather than tetramers
• A New Murine Model to Define the Critical Pathologic and Therapeutic Mediators of Polymyositis

If you are currently writing a manuscript and would like to get feedback and suggestions for your title: please, feel free to post it as a comment . Alternatively, you can also ask for feedback in our Facebook group Academic writing — peer feedback .

Do you need to revise & polish your manuscript or thesis but don’t know where to begin? Is your text a mess and you don't know how to improve it?

Click here for an efficient step-by-step revision of your scientific texts. You will be guided through each step with concrete tips for execution.

3 thoughts on “ 6 tips for writing a great title for your research article ”

Dear Martina,

Thank you very much for another portion of valuable information! It’s really helpful!

I’d be very greatful if you could comment on a title for a review article I’m writting now. Which of the two title you think is better:

Novel approaches to epigenetic therapies Novel approaches to epigenetic therapies: from drug combinations to epigenetic editing

Thank you for your suggestion, Kind regards, Aleksandra

Dear Aleksandra,

I am happy to hear that you found the article helpful!

Concerning your question: I prefer the second, longer title. It gives the reader a much better idea of what your review article is about. “Novel approaches to epigenetic therapies” alone is rather unspecific…

All the best, Martina

That was my choice as well! Thank you for ensuring me about it!

All the best, Aleksandra

Comments are closed.

Diese Webseite verwendet Cookies, um Ihnen ein besseres Nutzererlebnis zu bieten. Wenn Sie die Seite weiternutzen, stimmen Sie der Cookie-Nutzung zu.

How to Write a Good Research Paper Title

Table of contents

• 1 Characteristics of a Good Title
• 2.1 Start with a Working Title
• 2.2 Prioritize Important Terms
• 2.3 Use Active Verbs
• 2.4 Avoid Clickbait Techniques
• 2.5 Keep It Short But Informative
• 2.6 Limit Vague Statements
• 2.7 Mention the Study Design
• 2.8 Avoid Abbreviations
• 2.9 Check for Similiar Titles
• 2.10 Don’t Be Too Technical and Forgetting Your Audience
• 3.1 Good and Bad Titles for a Research Paper
• 3.2 How to Title Research Paper in Your Field
• 4 Our Take on Crafting Research Paper Titles

While working on a scientific academic paper, writing a good research paper title is probably the least of your concerns. However, it becomes an “issue” down the drain when it comes to combining all the necessary elements of a great-sounding title in one heading.

The PapersOwl team wanted to help you figure it out, so we’ve created this guide on writing a catchy, topic-relevant title. Here’s what you’ll learn after going through this guide:

• We will delve into the essential attributes that make a research paper title effective and attention-grabbing, helping you understand what constitutes a good title.
• Give you practical tips on how to optimize your research paper heading in alignment with established academic guidelines.
• We will walk you through a process outlining the steps you should take to create a heading.
• Real-world examples of research paper headings will show how you can successfully encapsulate the essence of their respective papers.
• Here, you will find strategies and considerations for phrasing your paper title to resonate with a specific research discipline.

Let’s take it one step at a time, so we’ll dive into the elements of a great heading to show you what your heading should sound like first.

Characteristics of a Good Title

To write a perfect research paper title, you’ll need to know about the different types of headings first:

• Interrogative
• Humorous or colloquial

The key point for all these types is to make a catchy title that captures the tone and the essence of the topic with relevant keywords . If you decide to name a research paper with the interrogative approach, you can use the phrasing of a question-type heading to entice the readers to look for an answer.

Suggestive headings are a bit different as they indicate that a reader will have to keep reading to get an answer to the outlined thesis, only without phrasing it as a question. This is where things get interesting and start depending on the topic more because a humorous or colloquial title can’t always be used.

You should use these only if the title of the research topic allows it to be phrased in a common language and colloquial. Finally, the combined approach takes something from all these types and often makes the best option for general topics. You can take a look at our list to see what we mean by these characteristics:

Tips for Crafting the Perfect Title

If you are wondering about how to write a title for a research paper, you’ll find a lot of common knowledge tips for writing research paper titles. You may hear that it needs to be on-point, short, yet catchy and that it has to be interesting enough without compromising on keywords.

We also recommend that you keep in mind the formatting guidelines, including the APA format or another requested format. Still, we think it’s better to give you a more detailed set of tips to follow, so here’s our list of the most useful steps to take:

Start with a Working Title

The first tip we’ll give you is not to waste too much time wondering how to title a research paper. You should start with a working title that can be edited, revised and changed afterward.

Make sure to finish writing your paper first, and only then can you truly dedicate your time to creating a perfect title. By that time, you’ll already get a few ideas along the way, so try to think about how each new chapter may contribute as inspiration for the final title of the research project.

Prioritize Important Terms

It’s no secret that good research paper tiles simply need to include important and relevant terms in the paper. Since you won’t be able to make it a mile-long heading, it’s important to start with those terms first and try to build the rest around them.

We recommend writing down a few key terms for your research and topic in the heading first and then brainstorming ideas on how to make it sound catchy and fill up the gaps afterward.

Use Active Verbs

If you look at the good research paper title examples, you’ll notice a common denominator. Most of these headings have active verbs, which means you shouldn’t use verbs like “Study on” or “Analysis of”.

Instead, you can use active verbs like “Evaluating”, “Examining”, “Establishing”, “Interpreting”, and so on.

Avoid Clickbait Techniques

One of the most important things is not to make the title of the research paper sound like clickbait. Sure, it’s important to make it sound catchy and enticing, but avoid using the same format as clickbait news or journals.

The biggest difference between these two types of headings is that clickbait often doesn’t contain that much information on what seems to be the key thesis of the topic. It only serves to attract more readers and clicks.

However, your scientific paper’s title has to be on point with relevant topic keywords.

Keep It Short But Informative

This one is worth its weight in gold since there’s usually a certain word count limit for the research paper title. It may not be enforced strictly, but it’s still important to make the title short and concise to avoid topic confusion for the readers.

You can aim for around 10 to 12 words, just like with our example of a good title listed in the table above. Make sure to use a few relevant terms about your research first, and then fill in the gaps to create a title.

Limit Vague Statements

As we dive into the research paper title format more and more, you’ll notice that some titles feature vague statements. These are among the worst mistakes you can make, even though it initially may seem like vague titles are more enticing.

In reality, these are not news articles, so you’ll have to make a title catchy in another way and keep the heading specifically related to your research.

Mention the Study Design

If you have enough room in your title, you can also mention the study design. This means you can lay out a few details about the nature of your research methodology or variables used to explain certain scientific occurrences.

There’s no need to overdo it; you can simply create a catchy title and add something like “Using the (method name) method”, so it reveals something topic-related and represents your research.

Avoid Abbreviations

When coming up with the research paper name, it’s crucial to avoid abbreviations. Of course, this doesn’t reflect on the measurement units or similar pieces of data, but it’s better to steer away from these titles for research papers altogether.

Things can get a bit complex here since abbreviations may not be considered wrong if previously defined, but that would also consume too much space. So, make it simple and avoid using any acronyms or abbreviations within the title itself, but rather in the content sections.

Check for Similiar Titles

Sadly, this happens a lot more often than you would imagine, especially if you are a student working on research that’s commonly used as a subject. You may run into a problem if previous generations of students have used too similar or possibly even the same titles.

So, it’s best to check all this beforehand, and it goes the same way for scientific studies outside the academic frame. Also, when looking for custom research papers for sale , it’s important to make sure that the headings aren’t copied in any way.

Don’t Be Too Technical and Forgetting Your Audience

Finally, we have to encourage you to always keep in mind the tone of your research when naming a research paper. If the tone allows, you can get into the technical details, but make sure not to overdo it if that doesn’t suit the tone of the paper.

Try to think about the audience and who will read the research. This is the best way to not only create catchy research paper titles but also to ensure the use of the right voice. It’s also important to use the right style, depending on whether you are required to use the MLA guidelines or another format.

Examples of Research Paper Titles

After going through the technicalities, it’s time to give you a sample of title headings to show you what we mean in practice. We’ll also be giving you good and bad research title examples with a focus on the mentioned tips and steps for crafting a great title.

Good and Bad Titles for a Research Paper

We know it’s difficult to come up with a title for a research paper at first, but looking at the examples might help differentiate between good titles for research papers and bad ones. For instance, differentiating between vague and solid titles gets easier when you look at these few examples:

Vague: “A Study On Birds”

Improved: “Analyzing Migration Patterns of North American Sparrows”

Here’s another example of a vague title – “A Study on Facebook,” so you can see it’s pretty vague and short. An improved version would be “The Effects of Social Media on Psychological Health and Well-Being.”

It also comes in handy to differentiate between overly technical titles and acceptable titles with a glimpse of technical details. For example, the title “The Effect of 2,4-Dinitrophenol on ATP Synthase Activity in Mitochondria” can be simplified for wider audiences if needed.

You can use something like “Understanding the Impact of 2,4-Dinitrophenol on Cellular Energy Production” to make the title a bit catchier and acceptable for a wider audience.

How to Title Research Paper in Your Field

If you are still having some doubts even after going through all these tips, we completely get you. It’s not so easy to form a title for a research paper in practice, so we’ll put some of our skills to use to give you a few creative examples to lean on when figuring out your heading:

Titles for psychology research papers:

• Natural Methods For Fighting Stress Quickly and Effectively
• How to Make People Do What You Want: 5 Most Effective Methods
• A Full Guide on How Not to Be Influenced by Society
• Correlation Between Aggressive Adult Behaviour And An Unhappy Childhood
• How to Change Your Attitude to Life: Natural Methods That Really Work

Education and related topics:

• How to Get As and Work at the Same Time: Time-Management Tips for Students
• A Guide on How to Craft a Good Essay if You Have Only 1 Hour
• You Mean Nothing to Society if You Don’t Have a Degree
• Steps that Should be Taken to Improve the System of Education
• Great Tricks for Motivating Students

Heading examples for business papers:

• How to Start Your Own Business Without a Large Investment
• Benefits of Being Self-Employed You Have Never Thought Of
• 10 Great Business Ideas for Those Who Have No Money
• The Most Common Mistakes Beginning Businessmen Do
• The Secret Behind a Successful Business

Ideas for papers from the technology sphere:

• The Greatest Innovations in Technology in the Last 5 Years
• The Most Useful Technologies in Medicine
• Original Technologies that Will Change the Future
• The Role of Information Technology in Everyday Life
• The Benefits of Living in a Highly-Technological World

You can also rely on a research paper proofreading service to help out with some minor details that could make a change both for the title and the paper itself.

If you are facing issues with the research paper title ideas, we recommend that you save it for last and finish your work first before crafting a title.

This usually helps as you’ll have more inspiration after you’ve gone in-depth with the topic, and the heading may come naturally to you. If not, you can always refer to the PapersOwl team and have it crafted by our experts.

Our Take on Crafting Research Paper Titles

To summarize, everyone can tell you how it is to make a title for a research paper by making it sound catchy and topic-relevant. However, we have outlined all the necessary details in-depth through this guide so you can truly craft an admirable title for a research project.

The key is to know your audience, avoid vague titles and short word forms, and keep an active voice with a focus on relevant terms. So, we hope that this guide will serve as a pathway toward a perfect scientific title for your project.

Readers also enjoyed

WHY WAIT? PLACE AN ORDER RIGHT NOW!

Just fill out the form, press the button, and have no worries!

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy.

• Get new issue alerts Get alerts
• Submit a Manuscript

Secondary Logo

Journal logo.

Colleague's E-mail is Invalid

Your message has been successfully sent to your colleague.

Save my selection

Writing the title and abstract for a research paper

Being concise, precise, and meticulous is the key.

Tullu, Milind S.

Department of Pediatrics, Seth G.S. Medical College and KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Address for correspondence: Dr. Milind Tullu, “Sankalp Siddhi,“ Block No. 1, Ground Floor, Kher Nagar, Service Road, Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051, Maharashtra, India. E-mail: [email protected]

This article deals with formulating a suitable title and an appropriate abstract for an original research paper. The “title” and the “abstract” are the “initial impressions” of a research article, and hence they need to be drafted correctly, accurately, carefully, and meticulously. Often both of these are drafted after the full manuscript is ready. Most readers read only the title and the abstract of a research paper and very few will go on to read the full paper. The title and the abstract are the most important parts of a research paper and should be pleasant to read. The “title” should be descriptive, direct, accurate, appropriate, interesting, concise, precise, unique, and should not be misleading. The “abstract” needs to be simple, specific, clear, unbiased, honest, concise, precise, stand-alone, complete, scholarly, (preferably) structured, and should not be misrepresentative. The abstract should be consistent with the main text of the paper, especially after a revision is made to the paper and should include the key message prominently. It is very important to include the most important words and terms (the “keywords”) in the title and the abstract for appropriate indexing purpose and for retrieval from the search engines and scientific databases. Such keywords should be listed after the abstract. One must adhere to the instructions laid down by the target journal with regard to the style and number of words permitted for the title and the abstract.

Introduction

This article deals with drafting a suitable “title” and an appropriate “abstract” for an original research paper. Because the “title” and the “abstract” are the “initial impressions” or the “face” of a research article, they need to be drafted correctly, accurately, carefully, meticulously, and consume time and energy.[ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ] Often, these are drafted after the complete manuscript draft is ready.[ 2 3 4 5 9 10 11 ] Most readers will read only the title and the abstract of a published research paper, and very few “interested ones” (especially, if the paper is of use to them) will go on to read the full paper.[ 1 2 ] One must remember to adhere to the instructions laid down by the “target journal” (the journal for which the author is writing) regarding the style and number of words permitted for the title and the abstract.[ 2 4 5 7 8 9 12 ] Both the title and the abstract are the most important parts of a research paper – for editors (to decide whether to process the paper for further review), for reviewers (to get an initial impression of the paper), and for the readers (as these may be the only parts of the paper available freely and hence, read widely).[ 4 8 12 ] It may be worth for the novice author to browse through titles and abstracts of several prominent journals (and their target journal as well) to learn more about the wording and styles of the titles and abstracts, as well as the aims and scope of the particular journal.[ 5 7 9 13 ]

The details of the title are discussed under the subheadings of importance, types, drafting, and checklist.

Importance of the title

When a reader browses through the table of contents of a journal issue (hard copy or on website), the title is the “ first detail” or “face” of the paper that is read.[ 2 3 4 5 6 13 ] Hence, it needs to be simple, direct, accurate, appropriate, specific, functional, interesting, attractive/appealing, concise/brief, precise/focused, unambiguous, memorable, captivating, informative (enough to encourage the reader to read further), unique, catchy, and it should not be misleading.[ 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 12 ] It should have “just enough details” to arouse the interest and curiosity of the reader so that the reader then goes ahead with studying the abstract and then (if still interested) the full paper.[ 1 2 4 13 ] Journal websites, electronic databases, and search engines use the words in the title and abstract (the “keywords”) to retrieve a particular paper during a search; hence, the importance of these words in accessing the paper by the readers has been emphasized.[ 3 4 5 6 12 14 ] Such important words (or keywords) should be arranged in appropriate order of importance as per the context of the paper and should be placed at the beginning of the title (rather than the later part of the title, as some search engines like Google may just display only the first six to seven words of the title).[ 3 5 12 ] Whimsical, amusing, or clever titles, though initially appealing, may be missed or misread by the busy reader and very short titles may miss the essential scientific words (the “keywords”) used by the indexing agencies to catch and categorize the paper.[ 1 3 4 9 ] Also, amusing or hilarious titles may be taken less seriously by the readers and may be cited less often.[ 4 15 ] An excessively long or complicated title may put off the readers.[ 3 9 ] It may be a good idea to draft the title after the main body of the text and the abstract are drafted.[ 2 3 4 5 ]

Types of titles

Titles can be descriptive, declarative, or interrogative. They can also be classified as nominal, compound, or full-sentence titles.

Descriptive or neutral title

This has the essential elements of the research theme, that is, the patients/subjects, design, interventions, comparisons/control, and outcome, but does not reveal the main result or the conclusion.[ 3 4 12 16 ] Such a title allows the reader to interpret the findings of the research paper in an impartial manner and with an open mind.[ 3 ] These titles also give complete information about the contents of the article, have several keywords (thus increasing the visibility of the article in search engines), and have increased chances of being read and (then) being cited as well.[ 4 ] Hence, such descriptive titles giving a glimpse of the paper are generally preferred.[ 4 16 ]

Declarative title

This title states the main finding of the study in the title itself; it reduces the curiosity of the reader, may point toward a bias on the part of the author, and hence is best avoided.[ 3 4 12 16 ]

Interrogative title

This is the one which has a query or the research question in the title.[ 3 4 16 ] Though a query in the title has the ability to sensationalize the topic, and has more downloads (but less citations), it can be distracting to the reader and is again best avoided for a research article (but can, at times, be used for a review article).[ 3 6 16 17 ]

From a sentence construct point of view, titles may be nominal (capturing only the main theme of the study), compound (with subtitles to provide additional relevant information such as context, design, location/country, temporal aspect, sample size, importance, and a provocative or a literary; for example, see the title of this review), or full-sentence titles (which are longer and indicate an added degree of certainty of the results).[ 4 6 9 16 ] Any of these constructs may be used depending on the type of article, the key message, and the author's preference or judgement.[ 4 ]

Drafting a suitable title

A stepwise process can be followed to draft the appropriate title. The author should describe the paper in about three sentences, avoiding the results and ensuring that these sentences contain important scientific words/keywords that describe the main contents and subject of the paper.[ 1 4 6 12 ] Then the author should join the sentences to form a single sentence, shorten the length (by removing redundant words or adjectives or phrases), and finally edit the title (thus drafted) to make it more accurate, concise (about 10–15 words), and precise.[ 1 3 4 5 9 ] Some journals require that the study design be included in the title, and this may be placed (using a colon) after the primary title.[ 2 3 4 14 ] The title should try to incorporate the Patients, Interventions, Comparisons and Outcome (PICO).[ 3 ] The place of the study may be included in the title (if absolutely necessary), that is, if the patient characteristics (such as study population, socioeconomic conditions, or cultural practices) are expected to vary as per the country (or the place of the study) and have a bearing on the possible outcomes.[ 3 6 ] Lengthy titles can be boring and appear unfocused, whereas very short titles may not be representative of the contents of the article; hence, optimum length is required to ensure that the title explains the main theme and content of the manuscript.[ 4 5 9 ] Abbreviations (except the standard or commonly interpreted ones such as HIV, AIDS, DNA, RNA, CDC, FDA, ECG, and EEG) or acronyms should be avoided in the title, as a reader not familiar with them may skip such an article and nonstandard abbreviations may create problems in indexing the article.[ 3 4 5 6 9 12 ] Also, too much of technical jargon or chemical formulas in the title may confuse the readers and the article may be skipped by them.[ 4 9 ] Numerical values of various parameters (stating study period or sample size) should also be avoided in the titles (unless deemed extremely essential).[ 4 ] It may be worthwhile to take an opinion from a impartial colleague before finalizing the title.[ 4 5 6 ] Thus, multiple factors (which are, at times, a bit conflicting or contrasting) need to be considered while formulating a title, and hence this should not be done in a hurry.[ 4 6 ] Many journals ask the authors to draft a “short title” or “running head” or “running title” for printing in the header or footer of the printed paper.[ 3 12 ] This is an abridged version of the main title of up to 40–50 characters, may have standard abbreviations, and helps the reader to navigate through the paper.[ 3 12 14 ]

Checklist for a good title

Table 1 gives a checklist/useful tips for drafting a good title for a research paper.[ 1 2 3 4 5 6 12 ] Table 2 presents some of the titles used by the author of this article in his earlier research papers, and the appropriateness of the titles has been commented upon. As an individual exercise, the reader may try to improvise upon the titles (further) after reading the corresponding abstract and full paper.

The Abstract

The details of the abstract are discussed under the subheadings of importance, types, drafting, and checklist.

Importance of the abstract

The abstract is a summary or synopsis of the full research paper and also needs to have similar characteristics like the title. It needs to be simple, direct, specific, functional, clear, unbiased, honest, concise, precise, self-sufficient, complete, comprehensive, scholarly, balanced, and should not be misleading.[ 1 2 3 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 ] Writing an abstract is to extract and summarize (AB – absolutely, STR – straightforward, ACT – actual data presentation and interpretation).[ 17 ] The title and abstracts are the only sections of the research paper that are often freely available to the readers on the journal websites, search engines, and in many abstracting agencies/databases, whereas the full paper may attract a payment per view or a fee for downloading the pdf copy.[ 1 2 3 7 8 10 11 13 14 ] The abstract is an independent and stand-alone (that is, well understood without reading the full paper) section of the manuscript and is used by the editor to decide the fate of the article and to choose appropriate reviewers.[ 2 7 10 12 13 ] Even the reviewers are initially supplied only with the title and the abstract before they agree to review the full manuscript.[ 7 13 ] This is the second most commonly read part of the manuscript, and therefore it should reflect the contents of the main text of the paper accurately and thus act as a “real trailer” of the full article.[ 2 7 11 ] The readers will go through the full paper only if they find the abstract interesting and relevant to their practice; else they may skip the paper if the abstract is unimpressive.[ 7 8 9 10 13 ] The abstract needs to highlight the selling point of the manuscript and succeed in luring the reader to read the complete paper.[ 3 7 ] The title and the abstract should be constructed using keywords (key terms/important words) from all the sections of the main text.[ 12 ] Abstracts are also used for submitting research papers to a conference for consideration for presentation (as oral paper or poster).[ 9 13 17 ] Grammatical and typographic errors reflect poorly on the quality of the abstract, may indicate carelessness/casual attitude on part of the author, and hence should be avoided at all times.[ 9 ]

Types of abstracts

The abstracts can be structured or unstructured. They can also be classified as descriptive or informative abstracts.

Structured and unstructured abstracts

Structured abstracts are followed by most journals, are more informative, and include specific subheadings/subsections under which the abstract needs to be composed.[ 1 7 8 9 10 11 13 17 18 ] These subheadings usually include context/background, objectives, design, setting, participants, interventions, main outcome measures, results, and conclusions.[ 1 ] Some journals stick to the standard IMRAD format for the structure of the abstracts, and the subheadings would include Introduction/Background, Methods, Results, And (instead of Discussion) the Conclusion/s.[ 1 2 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 17 18 ] Structured abstracts are more elaborate, informative, easy to read, recall, and peer-review, and hence are preferred; however, they consume more space and can have same limitations as an unstructured abstract.[ 7 9 18 ] The structured abstracts are (possibly) better understood by the reviewers and readers. Anyway, the choice of the type of the abstract and the subheadings of a structured abstract depend on the particular journal style and is not left to the author's wish.[ 7 10 12 ] Separate subheadings may be necessary for reporting meta-analysis, educational research, quality improvement work, review, or case study.[ 1 ] Clinical trial abstracts need to include the essential items mentioned in the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials) guidelines.[ 7 9 14 19 ] Similar guidelines exist for various other types of studies, including observational studies and for studies of diagnostic accuracy.[ 20 21 ] A useful resource for the above guidelines is available at www.equator-network.org (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research). Unstructured (or non-structured) abstracts are free-flowing, do not have predefined subheadings, and are commonly used for papers that (usually) do not describe original research.[ 1 7 9 10 ]

The four-point structured abstract: This has the following elements which need to be properly balanced with regard to the content/matter under each subheading:[ 9 ]

Background and/or Objectives: This states why the work was undertaken and is usually written in just a couple of sentences.[ 3 7 8 9 10 12 13 ] The hypothesis/study question and the major objectives are also stated under this subheading.[ 3 7 8 9 10 12 13 ]

Methods: This subsection is the longest, states what was done, and gives essential details of the study design, setting, participants, blinding, sample size, sampling method, intervention/s, duration and follow-up, research instruments, main outcome measures, parameters evaluated, and how the outcomes were assessed or analyzed.[ 3 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 17 ]

Results/Observations/Findings: This subheading states what was found, is longer, is difficult to draft, and needs to mention important details including the number of study participants, results of analysis (of primary and secondary objectives), and include actual data (numbers, mean, median, standard deviation, “P” values, 95% confidence intervals, effect sizes, relative risks, odds ratio, etc.).[ 3 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 17 ]

Conclusions: The take-home message (the “so what” of the paper) and other significant/important findings should be stated here, considering the interpretation of the research question/hypothesis and results put together (without overinterpreting the findings) and may also include the author's views on the implications of the study.[ 3 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 17 ]

The eight-point structured abstract: This has the following eight subheadings – Objectives, Study Design, Study Setting, Participants/Patients, Methods/Intervention, Outcome Measures, Results, and Conclusions.[ 3 9 18 ] The instructions to authors given by the particular journal state whether they use the four- or eight-point abstract or variants thereof.[ 3 14 ]

Descriptive and Informative abstracts

Descriptive abstracts are short (75–150 words), only portray what the paper contains without providing any more details; the reader has to read the full paper to know about its contents and are rarely used for original research papers.[ 7 10 ] These are used for case reports, reviews, opinions, and so on.[ 7 10 ] Informative abstracts (which may be structured or unstructured as described above) give a complete detailed summary of the article contents and truly reflect the actual research done.[ 7 10 ]

Drafting a suitable abstract

It is important to religiously stick to the instructions to authors (format, word limit, font size/style, and subheadings) provided by the journal for which the abstract and the paper are being written.[ 7 8 9 10 13 ] Most journals allow 200–300 words for formulating the abstract and it is wise to restrict oneself to this word limit.[ 1 2 3 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 22 ] Though some authors prefer to draft the abstract initially, followed by the main text of the paper, it is recommended to draft the abstract in the end to maintain accuracy and conformity with the main text of the paper (thus maintaining an easy linkage/alignment with title, on one hand, and the introduction section of the main text, on the other hand).[ 2 7 9 10 11 ] The authors should check the subheadings (of the structured abstract) permitted by the target journal, use phrases rather than sentences to draft the content of the abstract, and avoid passive voice.[ 1 7 9 12 ] Next, the authors need to get rid of redundant words and edit the abstract (extensively) to the correct word count permitted (every word in the abstract “counts”!).[ 7 8 9 10 13 ] It is important to ensure that the key message, focus, and novelty of the paper are not compromised; the rationale of the study and the basis of the conclusions are clear; and that the abstract is consistent with the main text of the paper.[ 1 2 3 7 9 11 12 13 14 17 22 ] This is especially important while submitting a revision of the paper (modified after addressing the reviewer's comments), as the changes made in the main (revised) text of the paper need to be reflected in the (revised) abstract as well.[ 2 10 12 14 22 ] Abbreviations should be avoided in an abstract, unless they are conventionally accepted or standard; references, tables, or figures should not be cited in the abstract.[ 7 9 10 11 13 ] It may be worthwhile not to rush with the abstract and to get an opinion by an impartial colleague on the content of the abstract; and if possible, the full paper (an “informal” peer-review).[ 1 7 8 9 11 17 ] Appropriate “Keywords” (three to ten words or phrases) should follow the abstract and should be preferably chosen from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) list of the U.S. National Library of Medicine ( https://meshb.nlm.nih.gov/search ) and are used for indexing purposes.[ 2 3 11 12 ] These keywords need to be different from the words in the main title (the title words are automatically used for indexing the article) and can be variants of the terms/phrases used in the title, or words from the abstract and the main text.[ 3 12 ] The ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors; http://www.icmje.org/ ) also recommends publishing the clinical trial registration number at the end of the abstract.[ 7 14 ]

Checklist for a good abstract

Table 3 gives a checklist/useful tips for formulating a good abstract for a research paper.[ 1 2 3 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 17 22 ]

Concluding Remarks

This review article has given a detailed account of the importance and types of titles and abstracts. It has also attempted to give useful hints for drafting an appropriate title and a complete abstract for a research paper. It is hoped that this review will help the authors in their career in medical writing.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgement

The author thanks Dr. Hemant Deshmukh - Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College & KEM Hospital, for granting permission to publish this manuscript.

• Cited Here |
• PubMed | CrossRef |
• Google Scholar
• View Full Text | PubMed | CrossRef |

Abbreviations; aims; article; author; conclusions; database; indexing; keywords; manuscript; medical writing; message; methods; paper; research; results; summary

• + Favorites
• View in Gallery

Readers Of this Article Also Read

Geriatric anesthesia: demographics, epidemiology, state of the art at..., special issue on “geriatric anesthesia”, saudi journal of anesthesia and the first journal impact factor (jif), fragmentation of airway tube exchange catheter: a dangerous situation, statistical significance or clinical significance a researcher's dilemma for....

Research Title

Ai generator.

A research title is a succinct, informative phrase that encapsulates a study’s essence. It gives readers a clear indication of the research’s focus, scope, and significance. An effective research title is concise, specific, and engaging, incorporating key terms related to the primary subject matter. Crafting a well-thought-out research title is crucial as it influences first impressions and impacts the study’s visibility and accessibility. Additionally, a strong research title enhances the title page and ensures the research paper cover letter accurately reflects the study’s content.

What is Research Title?

A research title is a concise statement that clearly and precisely encapsulates the main topic, scope, and objective of a research study. It serves as the first point of contact for readers and should effectively communicate the essence of the research in a way that is both engaging and informative. A well-crafted research title is specific, descriptive, and reflective of the study’s core focus, helping to attract interest and provide a clear understanding of the research subject at a glance.

Research Title Format

A well-crafted research title follows a specific format to ensure clarity and precision. Here’s a structured approach:

[Main Topic]: [Specific Aspect or Focus]

Example: “The Impact of Social Media on Teen Mental Health: A Comprehensive Analysis of Behavioral Changes”

Examples of Research Titles

Here are some examples of well-crafted research titles across various fields:

• “The Effects of Bilingual Education on Cognitive Development in Early Childhood”
• “Assessing the Impact of Technology Integration on Student Engagement in High School Classrooms”
• “The Role of Genetics in the Development of Alzheimer’s Disease: A Meta-Analysis”
• “Evaluating the Efficacy of Telemedicine in Managing Chronic Diseases During the COVID-19 Pandemic”
• “The Impact of Urbanization on Local Wildlife Populations: A Case Study of Central Park”
• “Assessing the Effectiveness of Renewable Energy Policies in Reducing Carbon Emissions”
• “The Influence of Social Media on Political Participation Among Millennials”
• “Exploring the Relationship Between Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement in Urban Schools”
• “Analyzing the Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility on Consumer Behavior”
• “The Role of Microfinance in Alleviating Poverty in Developing Countries”
• “The Development and Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Workforce Automation”
• “Assessing the Safety and Efficiency of Autonomous Vehicles in Urban Areas”
• “The Representation of Gender Roles in 21st Century Cinema”
• “Exploring the Influence of Renaissance Art on Modern Aesthetic Values”
• “The Impact of Childhood Trauma on Adult Relationships: A Longitudinal Study”
• “Exploring the Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Treating Anxiety Disorders”
• “The Effectiveness of Vaccination Campaigns in Reducing the Spread of Infectious Diseases: A Global Perspective”
• “Sustainable Farming Practices and Their Impact on Soil Health: A Comparative Study of Organic and Conventional Methods”

Research Titles for Students

• The Impact of Online Learning on Student Performance in High School
• Exploring the Relationship Between Sleep Patterns and Academic Achievement Among College Students
• The Effects of Extracurricular Activities on Student Social Skills Development
• The Influence of Peer Pressure on High School Students’ Academic Choices
• Assessing the Benefits of Early Childhood Education Programs on Later Academic Success
• The Role of Nutrition and Diet in Enhancing Student Concentration and Memory
• Examining the Effectiveness of Study Groups in Improving Academic Performance in University Settings
• The Impact of Part-Time Employment on High School Students’ Academic Achievement and Time Management
• Exploring the Relationship Between Physical Activity and Mental Health Among College Students
• The Effects of School Uniform Policies on Student Behavior and Academic Outcomes

Qualitative Research Titles

• Exploring Student Perceptions of Remote Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic
• The Lived Experiences of First-Generation College Students: Challenges and Triumphs
• Understanding Teacher Attitudes Towards Inclusive Education in Mainstream Classrooms
• The Impact of Parental Involvement on Student Motivation and Academic Success
• Exploring the Cultural Adaptation Experiences of International Students in American Universities
• The Role of Peer Support in Coping with Academic Stress Among High School Students
• Investigating the Influence of School Climate on Teacher Job Satisfaction and Retention
• The Effects of Community-Based Learning on Student Engagement and Civic Responsibility
• Understanding the Barriers to STEM Education for Female Students in Rural Areas
• Exploring the Experiences of Students with Learning Disabilities in Higher Education
• The Impact of School Leadership Styles on Teacher Morale and Performance
• The Role of Mentorship Programs in Supporting Minority Students in STEM Fields
• Exploring the Emotional and Social Impacts of Bullying on Middle School Students
• The Influence of Extracurricular Activities on Identity Development in Adolescents
• Understanding the Perspectives of Parents on Bilingual Education Programs

Quantitative Research Titles

• The Impact of Class Size on Student Academic Achievement in Elementary Schools
• Analyzing the Correlation Between Homework Frequency and Student Performance in Mathematics
• The Effects of School Funding on Standardized Test Scores in Public Schools
• Assessing the Relationship Between Attendance Rates and Graduation Rates in High Schools
• Evaluating the Effectiveness of Flipped Classrooms on Student Learning Outcomes
• The Influence of Parental Education Levels on Children’s Academic Success
• The Impact of Early Childhood Education on Literacy Rates in Primary School Students
• Comparing Academic Performance Between Students in Single-Sex and Coeducational Schools
• The Role of Technology in Enhancing Student Engagement in STEM Subjects
• Analyzing the Impact of Nutrition Programs on Student Health and Academic Performance
• The Relationship Between Physical Activity and Academic Achievement in High School Students
• Evaluating the Success of Mentorship Programs on College Retention Rates
• The Effects of Sleep Patterns on Academic Performance Among University Students
• Assessing the Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Access to Higher Education
• The Influence of Teacher Qualifications on Student Achievement in Science

Importance of a Research Title

A research title is a critical component of any research study or academic paper. It serves multiple important functions that contribute to the overall success and impact of the research. Here are key reasons why a research title is important:

1. First Impression

The research title is often the first element a reader encounters. A well-crafted title can create a strong first impression, attracting the reader’s attention and encouraging them to explore the study further.

2. Clarity and Focus

A good research title clearly and succinctly communicates the main topic and scope of the study. It helps the reader quickly understand what the research is about and what specific aspect is being addressed.

3. Guidance

The title provides guidance to the reader about the content and direction of the research. It sets expectations and helps readers decide if the paper is relevant to their interests or research needs.

4. Searchability

In the digital age, research titles are crucial for searchability. A precise and descriptive title improves the chances of the paper being found in online searches, databases, and academic journals, increasing its visibility and accessibility.

5. Academic and Professional Recognition

A well-formulated research title contributes to the academic and professional recognition of the work. It reflects the researcher’s ability to clearly define and articulate their study, which can enhance credibility and reputation within the academic community.

Characteristics of a Good Research Title

A good research title is essential for effectively communicating the main focus and scope of your study. Here are the key characteristics that make a research title effective:

• Clear and Understandable : The title should be easily understood by a broad audience, avoiding jargon or overly complex language.
• Direct : It should convey the main topic and scope of the research without ambiguity.

2. Conciseness

• Brevity : A good title is concise and to the point, typically no longer than 10-15 words.
• Essential Information : It includes only the most relevant information, omitting unnecessary words.

3. Specificity

• Focused : The title should clearly reflect the specific aspect or focus of the research.
• Detailed : It provides enough detail to give a clear sense of what the study entails.

4. Descriptiveness

• Informative : It accurately describes the content and scope of the study.
• Comprehensive : The title should give readers a good understanding of the research without needing to read the entire paper.

5. Keywords

• Relevant Keywords : Including key terms that are central to the research topic helps with searchability and indexing.
• SEO-Friendly : Using keywords that align with what potential readers might search for increases the paper’s visibility.

6. Engagement

• Interest : The title should be engaging and interesting, encouraging readers to want to learn more about the study.
• Appeal : It should appeal to the target audience, whether they are academics, practitioners, or the general public.

How to Write a Research Title?

A well-crafted research title is crucial as it provides the first impression of your study. It should be concise, informative, and engaging to capture the reader’s attention while conveying the essence of your research. Here’s a step-by-step guide on how to write an effective research title.

1. Understand the Purpose of the Title

The title should:

• Summarize the main topic of the research.
• Indicate the scope and focus of the study.
• Reflect the methodology used (if applicable).
• Attract the target audience’s interest.

2. Identify the Key Components

To create a comprehensive title, identify the following components of your research:

• Main topic : The primary subject or focus.
• Variables : Key elements or factors studied.
• Population/sample : The group or sample studied.
• Methodology : The approach or techniques used in the research.

3. Be Clear and Specific

Avoid vague and ambiguous terms. Be precise in describing your research. For example, instead of “Study of Education Methods,” use “Effectiveness of Interactive Learning Techniques in High School Biology.”

4. Keep It Concise

A good title is typically between 10 to 15 words. It should be long enough to include essential information but short enough to be easily readable.

5. Use Descriptive Words

Use words that describe the content and aim of your research effectively. Descriptive words help in making the title informative and engaging. Examples include “effects,” “analysis,” “evaluation,” “comparison,” etc.

6. Avoid Jargon and Abbreviations

Ensure that your title is accessible to a broad audience by avoiding technical jargon and abbreviations that might not be widely understood.

7. Consider the Audience

Think about who will be reading your research. Tailor your title to meet the expectations and interests of your target audience, whether they are academic peers, professionals, or the general public.

8. Reflect the Type of Study

Indicate whether the research is a review, case study, experiment, or theoretical analysis. This helps set the context for the reader. For example, “A Case Study on Renewable Energy Adoption in Urban Areas.”

9. Include Keywords

Incorporate relevant keywords that reflect the main themes of your research. This not only helps in search engine optimization but also makes your research easily discoverable.

10. Revise and Refine

Review your title for clarity, conciseness, and accuracy. Ask for feedback from peers or mentors to ensure it effectively represents your research.

FAQ’s

How should a research title be structured.

A research title should be clear, concise, and informative, often including the main variables, methods, and context of the study.

What are the key elements of a good research title?

Key elements include relevance, clarity, specificity, and the inclusion of main keywords related to the research topic.

Can a research title be a question?

Yes, a research title can be a question if it effectively conveys the research’s focus and intrigues the reader.

How long should a research title be?

A research title should be brief but descriptive, typically between 10 to 15 words, avoiding unnecessary jargon or overly complex terms.

Should a research title include keywords?

Yes, including keywords helps in indexing and searching, making it easier for others to find your research.

Can a research title change during the research process?

Yes, it can be refined or adjusted as the research progresses to better reflect the study’s findings and scope.

Should the research title reflect the research methodology?

It can, especially if the methodology is central to the study’s uniqueness or understanding, but it’s not always necessary.

How specific should a research title be?

A research title should be specific enough to give a clear idea of the study’s focus but not so detailed that it becomes cumbersome.

What makes a research title catchy?

A catchy research title is engaging, piques curiosity, and uses intriguing language while still being clear and informative.

Can humor be used in a research title?

Humor can be used if appropriate for the subject matter and audience, but it should not compromise clarity or professionalism.

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

13.1 Formatting a Research Paper

Learning objectives.

• Identify the major components of a research paper written using American Psychological Association (APA) style.
• Apply general APA style and formatting conventions in a research paper.

In this chapter, you will learn how to use APA style , the documentation and formatting style followed by the American Psychological Association, as well as MLA style , from the Modern Language Association. There are a few major formatting styles used in academic texts, including AMA, Chicago, and Turabian:

• AMA (American Medical Association) for medicine, health, and biological sciences
• APA (American Psychological Association) for education, psychology, and the social sciences
• Chicago—a common style used in everyday publications like magazines, newspapers, and books
• MLA (Modern Language Association) for English, literature, arts, and humanities
• Turabian—another common style designed for its universal application across all subjects and disciplines

While all the formatting and citation styles have their own use and applications, in this chapter we focus our attention on the two styles you are most likely to use in your academic studies: APA and MLA.

If you find that the rules of proper source documentation are difficult to keep straight, you are not alone. Writing a good research paper is, in and of itself, a major intellectual challenge. Having to follow detailed citation and formatting guidelines as well may seem like just one more task to add to an already-too-long list of requirements.

Following these guidelines, however, serves several important purposes. First, it signals to your readers that your paper should be taken seriously as a student’s contribution to a given academic or professional field; it is the literary equivalent of wearing a tailored suit to a job interview. Second, it shows that you respect other people’s work enough to give them proper credit for it. Finally, it helps your reader find additional materials if he or she wishes to learn more about your topic.

Furthermore, producing a letter-perfect APA-style paper need not be burdensome. Yes, it requires careful attention to detail. However, you can simplify the process if you keep these broad guidelines in mind:

• Work ahead whenever you can. Chapter 11 “Writing from Research: What Will I Learn?” includes tips for keeping track of your sources early in the research process, which will save time later on.
• Get it right the first time. Apply APA guidelines as you write, so you will not have much to correct during the editing stage. Again, putting in a little extra time early on can save time later.
• Use the resources available to you. In addition to the guidelines provided in this chapter, you may wish to consult the APA website at http://www.apa.org or the Purdue University Online Writing lab at http://owl.english.purdue.edu , which regularly updates its online style guidelines.

General Formatting Guidelines

This chapter provides detailed guidelines for using the citation and formatting conventions developed by the American Psychological Association, or APA. Writers in disciplines as diverse as astrophysics, biology, psychology, and education follow APA style. The major components of a paper written in APA style are listed in the following box.

These are the major components of an APA-style paper:

Body, which includes the following:

• Headings and, if necessary, subheadings to organize the content
• In-text citations of research sources
• References page

All these components must be saved in one document, not as separate documents.

The title page of your paper includes the following information:

• Title of the paper
• Author’s name
• Name of the institution with which the author is affiliated
• Header at the top of the page with the paper title (in capital letters) and the page number (If the title is lengthy, you may use a shortened form of it in the header.)

List the first three elements in the order given in the previous list, centered about one third of the way down from the top of the page. Use the headers and footers tool of your word-processing program to add the header, with the title text at the left and the page number in the upper-right corner. Your title page should look like the following example.

The next page of your paper provides an abstract , or brief summary of your findings. An abstract does not need to be provided in every paper, but an abstract should be used in papers that include a hypothesis. A good abstract is concise—about one hundred fifty to two hundred fifty words—and is written in an objective, impersonal style. Your writing voice will not be as apparent here as in the body of your paper. When writing the abstract, take a just-the-facts approach, and summarize your research question and your findings in a few sentences.

In Chapter 12 “Writing a Research Paper” , you read a paper written by a student named Jorge, who researched the effectiveness of low-carbohydrate diets. Read Jorge’s abstract. Note how it sums up the major ideas in his paper without going into excessive detail.

Write an abstract summarizing your paper. Briefly introduce the topic, state your findings, and sum up what conclusions you can draw from your research. Use the word count feature of your word-processing program to make sure your abstract does not exceed one hundred fifty words.

Depending on your field of study, you may sometimes write research papers that present extensive primary research, such as your own experiment or survey. In your abstract, summarize your research question and your findings, and briefly indicate how your study relates to prior research in the field.

Margins, Pagination, and Headings

APA style requirements also address specific formatting concerns, such as margins, pagination, and heading styles, within the body of the paper. Review the following APA guidelines.

Use these general guidelines to format the paper:

• Set the top, bottom, and side margins of your paper at 1 inch.
• Use double-spaced text throughout your paper.
• Use a standard font, such as Times New Roman or Arial, in a legible size (10- to 12-point).
• Use continuous pagination throughout the paper, including the title page and the references section. Page numbers appear flush right within your header.
• Section headings and subsection headings within the body of your paper use different types of formatting depending on the level of information you are presenting. Additional details from Jorge’s paper are provided.

Begin formatting the final draft of your paper according to APA guidelines. You may work with an existing document or set up a new document if you choose. Include the following:

• Your title page
• The abstract you created in Note 13.8 “Exercise 1”
• Correct headers and page numbers for your title page and abstract

APA style uses section headings to organize information, making it easy for the reader to follow the writer’s train of thought and to know immediately what major topics are covered. Depending on the length and complexity of the paper, its major sections may also be divided into subsections, sub-subsections, and so on. These smaller sections, in turn, use different heading styles to indicate different levels of information. In essence, you are using headings to create a hierarchy of information.

The following heading styles used in APA formatting are listed in order of greatest to least importance:

• Section headings use centered, boldface type. Headings use title case, with important words in the heading capitalized.
• Subsection headings use left-aligned, boldface type. Headings use title case.
• The third level uses left-aligned, indented, boldface type. Headings use a capital letter only for the first word, and they end in a period.
• The fourth level follows the same style used for the previous level, but the headings are boldfaced and italicized.
• The fifth level follows the same style used for the previous level, but the headings are italicized and not boldfaced.

Visually, the hierarchy of information is organized as indicated in Table 13.1 “Section Headings” .

Table 13.1 Section Headings

A college research paper may not use all the heading levels shown in Table 13.1 “Section Headings” , but you are likely to encounter them in academic journal articles that use APA style. For a brief paper, you may find that level 1 headings suffice. Longer or more complex papers may need level 2 headings or other lower-level headings to organize information clearly. Use your outline to craft your major section headings and determine whether any subtopics are substantial enough to require additional levels of headings.

Working with the document you developed in Note 13.11 “Exercise 2” , begin setting up the heading structure of the final draft of your research paper according to APA guidelines. Include your title and at least two to three major section headings, and follow the formatting guidelines provided above. If your major sections should be broken into subsections, add those headings as well. Use your outline to help you.

Because Jorge used only level 1 headings, his Exercise 3 would look like the following:

Citation Guidelines

In-text citations.

Throughout the body of your paper, include a citation whenever you quote or paraphrase material from your research sources. As you learned in Chapter 11 “Writing from Research: What Will I Learn?” , the purpose of citations is twofold: to give credit to others for their ideas and to allow your reader to follow up and learn more about the topic if desired. Your in-text citations provide basic information about your source; each source you cite will have a longer entry in the references section that provides more detailed information.

In-text citations must provide the name of the author or authors and the year the source was published. (When a given source does not list an individual author, you may provide the source title or the name of the organization that published the material instead.) When directly quoting a source, it is also required that you include the page number where the quote appears in your citation.

This information may be included within the sentence or in a parenthetical reference at the end of the sentence, as in these examples.

Epstein (2010) points out that “junk food cannot be considered addictive in the same way that we think of psychoactive drugs as addictive” (p. 137).

Here, the writer names the source author when introducing the quote and provides the publication date in parentheses after the author’s name. The page number appears in parentheses after the closing quotation marks and before the period that ends the sentence.

Addiction researchers caution that “junk food cannot be considered addictive in the same way that we think of psychoactive drugs as addictive” (Epstein, 2010, p. 137).

Here, the writer provides a parenthetical citation at the end of the sentence that includes the author’s name, the year of publication, and the page number separated by commas. Again, the parenthetical citation is placed after the closing quotation marks and before the period at the end of the sentence.

As noted in the book Junk Food, Junk Science (Epstein, 2010, p. 137), “junk food cannot be considered addictive in the same way that we think of psychoactive drugs as addictive.”

Here, the writer chose to mention the source title in the sentence (an optional piece of information to include) and followed the title with a parenthetical citation. Note that the parenthetical citation is placed before the comma that signals the end of the introductory phrase.

David Epstein’s book Junk Food, Junk Science (2010) pointed out that “junk food cannot be considered addictive in the same way that we think of psychoactive drugs as addictive” (p. 137).

Another variation is to introduce the author and the source title in your sentence and include the publication date and page number in parentheses within the sentence or at the end of the sentence. As long as you have included the essential information, you can choose the option that works best for that particular sentence and source.

Citing a book with a single author is usually a straightforward task. Of course, your research may require that you cite many other types of sources, such as books or articles with more than one author or sources with no individual author listed. You may also need to cite sources available in both print and online and nonprint sources, such as websites and personal interviews. Chapter 13 “APA and MLA Documentation and Formatting” , Section 13.2 “Citing and Referencing Techniques” and Section 13.3 “Creating a References Section” provide extensive guidelines for citing a variety of source types.

Writing at Work

APA is just one of several different styles with its own guidelines for documentation, formatting, and language usage. Depending on your field of interest, you may be exposed to additional styles, such as the following:

• MLA style. Determined by the Modern Languages Association and used for papers in literature, languages, and other disciplines in the humanities.
• Chicago style. Outlined in the Chicago Manual of Style and sometimes used for papers in the humanities and the sciences; many professional organizations use this style for publications as well.
• Associated Press (AP) style. Used by professional journalists.

References List

The brief citations included in the body of your paper correspond to the more detailed citations provided at the end of the paper in the references section. In-text citations provide basic information—the author’s name, the publication date, and the page number if necessary—while the references section provides more extensive bibliographical information. Again, this information allows your reader to follow up on the sources you cited and do additional reading about the topic if desired.

The specific format of entries in the list of references varies slightly for different source types, but the entries generally include the following information:

• The name(s) of the author(s) or institution that wrote the source
• The year of publication and, where applicable, the exact date of publication
• The full title of the source
• For books, the city of publication
• For articles or essays, the name of the periodical or book in which the article or essay appears
• For magazine and journal articles, the volume number, issue number, and pages where the article appears
• For sources on the web, the URL where the source is located

The references page is double spaced and lists entries in alphabetical order by the author’s last name. If an entry continues for more than one line, the second line and each subsequent line are indented five spaces. Review the following example. ( Chapter 13 “APA and MLA Documentation and Formatting” , Section 13.3 “Creating a References Section” provides extensive guidelines for formatting reference entries for different types of sources.)

In APA style, book and article titles are formatted in sentence case, not title case. Sentence case means that only the first word is capitalized, along with any proper nouns.

Key Takeaways

• Following proper citation and formatting guidelines helps writers ensure that their work will be taken seriously, give proper credit to other authors for their work, and provide valuable information to readers.
• Working ahead and taking care to cite sources correctly the first time are ways writers can save time during the editing stage of writing a research paper.
• APA papers usually include an abstract that concisely summarizes the paper.
• APA papers use a specific headings structure to provide a clear hierarchy of information.
• In APA papers, in-text citations usually include the name(s) of the author(s) and the year of publication.
• In-text citations correspond to entries in the references section, which provide detailed bibliographical information about a source.

Writing for Success Copyright © 2015 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Instructions for Authors

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

Original Investigation

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

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

Meta-analysis

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

Manuscript Submission

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

What to Expect

Editorial and Peer Review

The jama network advantage.

• JAMA-Express

Authorship Form and Publishing Agreement

Publication.

• Postpublication Online Commenting

Reprints/e-Prints

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

Editorial Policies for Authors

Authorship and Disclosures

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

Journal Policies, Forms, Resources

Decisions and Management of Editorial Conflicts of Interest

Publishing agreement, unauthorized use.

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

Contact Information

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

Determine My Article Type

Categories of articles.

Original Investigation full info

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

• ≤5 tables and/or figures
• Structured abstract

Data Sharing Statement

Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines

Caring for the Critically Ill Patient full info

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

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

Brief Report full info

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

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

• 15 references
• ≤3 tables and/or figures

Research Letter full info

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

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

Back to top

Clinical Review and Education

Systematic Review (without meta-analysis) full info

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

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

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

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

Narrative Review full info

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

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

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

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

Special Communication full info

This journal publishes very few of these types of articles.

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

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

Clinical Challenge full info

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

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

Diagnostic Test Interpretation full info

This article requires a presubmission inquiry.

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

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

Viewpoint full info

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

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

A Piece of My Mind full info

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

• ≤1600 words
• Patient permission may be needed

Poetry full info

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

• No longer than 44 lines

Correspondence

Letter to the Editor full info

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

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

Letter in Reply full info

Replies by authors of original articles to letters from readers.

Determine My Study Type

Randomized Clinical Trial full info

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

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

Parallel-Design Double-blind Trial full info

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

Crossover Trial full info

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

Equivalence and Noninferiority Trial full info

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

Cluster Trial full info

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

Nonrandomized Controlled Trial full info

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

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

Meta-analysis full info

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

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

Cohort Study full info

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

• Follow STROBE Reporting Guidelines

Case-Control Study full info

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

Cross-sectional Study full info

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

Case Series full info

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

• Follow Reporting Guidelines

Economic Evaluation full info

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

• Follow CHEERS Reporting Guidelines

Decision Analytical Model full info

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

Comparative Effectiveness Research full info

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

• Follow ISPOR Reporting Guidelines

Genetic Association Study full info

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

• Follow STREGA Reporting Guidelines

Diagnostic/Prognostic Study full info

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

• Follow STARD Reporting Guidelines or TRIPOD Reporting Guidelines

Quality Improvement Study full info

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

• Follow SQUIRE Reporting Guidelines

Survey Study full info

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

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

Qualitative Study full info

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

• Follow SRQR Reporting Guidelines or COREQ Reporting Guidelines

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

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

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

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

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

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

The journal will consider 2 types of review articles:

Systematic Reviews

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

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

Behavioral Treatment of Obesity: A Systematic Review

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

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

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

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

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

Specific Components of a Systematic Review

Key Points (75-100 words)

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

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

Abstract (350 words)

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

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

Introduction (150-250 words)

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

Methods/Literature Search (150-250 words)

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

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

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

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

Results (1000-1250 words)

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

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

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

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

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

Conclusions

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

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

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

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

Follow additional instructions for preparation and submission of Tables .

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

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

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

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

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

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

Specific Components of a Narrative Review

Abstract (300 words)

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

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

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

Methods (150-250 words)

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

Discussion/Observations (1000-1250 words)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Manuscripts not meeting these guidelines will not be considered.

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

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

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

Manuscripts for Diagnostic Test Interpretation should have the following sections:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Clinical Trial

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trial Registration:

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

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

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

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

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

CONSORT Flow Diagram and Checklist:

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

Figure. Profile of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Trial Protocol

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

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

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

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

Other Observational Studies

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

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

Format My Manuscript

Manuscript preparation and submission requirements.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Abstracts for Reports of Original Data:

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

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

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

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

Abstracts for Meta-analysis:

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

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

Abstracts for Systematic Reviews or Special Communications:

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

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

Abstracts for Narrative Reviews or Special Communications:

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

Ratings of the quality of the evidence

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

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

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

To read more about units of measure, click here .

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

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

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

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

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

Examples of reference style:

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

For more examples of electronic references, click here .

Tables and Figures

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

See also Tables and Figures .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table Creation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table 1. Baseline Values in the Editors' Health Study

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

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

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

Table 2. Blood Pressure Values Stratified by Age

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

Table 3. Patient Data by Study Group

Table 4. Patient Data by Study Group

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

Table Footnotes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Image Integrity

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

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

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

Acceptable Figure Files for Initial Submission and Review

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

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

Figure File Requirements for Publication

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

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

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

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

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

Figure Titles and Legends (Captions)

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

Figures With Labels, Arrows, or Other Markers

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

Number of Figures

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

General Figure Guidelines

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

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

Table of Figure Requirements

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Flow diagram

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

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

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

Survival plot

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

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

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

Box-and-whisker plot (box plot)

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

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

Forest plot

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

The data are presented both tabularly and graphically.

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

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

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

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

Scatterplot

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

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

Illustration

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

Required minimum resolution for publication: ≥350 ppi

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

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

Photographs and other clinical images

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

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

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

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

Line drawings

To illustrate anatomy or procedures.

Line drawings are almost always black and white.

Required minimum resolution for publication: ≥600 ppi

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

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

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

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

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

Online-Only Text

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

Online-Only References

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

Online-Only Tables

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

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

Online-Only Figures

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Guidelines for Optimal Video Quality

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

Additional Considerations for Filming Surgical Procedures

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

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

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

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

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

After Submission

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

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

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

JAMA -EXPRESS

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

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

After Revision/Acceptance

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

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

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

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

After Publication

Postpublication correspondence.

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

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

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

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

About Previous Release of Information, Embargo, and Access

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The journal makes all JAMA research articles free public access 6 months after publication on the journal website.

Authors of research articles may deposit the accepted version (ie, the peer-reviewed manuscript that you submitted on which this decision is based) of the manuscript in a repository of your choice on or after the date of publication provided that it links to the final published version on the journal website. You may not deposit the published article (version of record), which is the final copyedited, formatted, and proofed version published by the journal. The journal will deposit a copy of the published research article into PubMed Central (PMC) at the time of publication, where it will be publicly available 6 months after publication. A few weeks after publication, you may obtain your PMCID on the PMC site at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/pmctopmid/ . These options apply only to research articles. Non-research articles may not be deposited into repositories.

In addition, the journal will add metadata to all articles to ensure web-based search engine discoverability and will provide publicly discoverable information about your article to PubMed/Medline and numerous other bibliographic databases on the day of publication.

Author Responsibilities

Most of the JAMA Network journals' editorial policies for authors are summarized in these instructions. Citations and links to the AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors 2 and other publications with additional information are also provided.

Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. 2 One or more authors should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article. According to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), 4 authorship credit should be based on the following 4 criteria:

• substantial contributions to conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; and
• drafting of the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; and
• final approval of the version to be published; and
• agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Each author should be accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done. In addition, each author should be able to identify which coauthors are responsible for specific other parts of the work and should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of any coauthors.

All those designated as authors should meet all 4 criteria for authorship, and all who meet the 4 criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all 4 criteria should be acknowledged (see Acknowledgment Section ).

All authors (ie, the corresponding author and each coauthor) must read, complete, and submit an electronic Authorship Form with required statements on Authorship Responsibility, Criteria, and Contributions; Confirmation of Reporting Conflicts of Interest and Funding; and Publishing Agreement. 2(pp128-133) In addition, authors are required to identify their specific contributions to the work described in the manuscript. Requests by authors to designate equal contributions or shared authorship positions (eg, co-first authorship) may be considered if justified and within reason. 6 An email with links to the Authorship Form will be sent to authors for completion after manuscripts have been submitted.

For reports of original data, authors' specific contributions will be published in the Acknowledgment section (see Manuscript Preparation and Submission Requirements , Acknowledgment section ). 2 All other persons who have made substantial contributions to the work reported in this manuscript (eg, data collection, analysis, or writing or editing assistance) but who do not fulfill the authorship criteria should be named with their specific contributions and affiliations in an Acknowledgment in the manuscript. Written permission to include the names of individuals in the Acknowledgment section must be obtained.

Nonhuman artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies do not qualify for authorship. If these models or tools are used to create content or assist with writing or manuscript preparation, authors must take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated by these tools. Authors should report the use of artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies to create content or assist with writing or editing of manuscripts in the Acknowledgment section or Methods section if this is part of formal research design or methods. See also Use of AI in Publication and Research , Reproduced and Re-created Material , and Image Integrity .

The authors also must certify that the manuscript represents valid work and that neither this manuscript nor one with substantially similar content under their authorship has been published or is being considered for publication elsewhere (see also About Previous Release of Information, Embargo, and Access ). 2 Authors of manuscripts reporting original data or systematic reviews must provide an access to data statement from 1 or 2 named authors, often the corresponding author (see also Data Access, Responsibility, and Analysis ). If requested, authors should be prepared to provide the data and must cooperate fully in obtaining and providing the data on which the manuscript is based for examination by the editors or their assignees.

A single corresponding author (or coauthor designee in the event that the corresponding author is unavailable) will serve on behalf of all coauthors as the primary correspondent with the editorial office during the submission and review process. If the manuscript is accepted, the corresponding author will review an edited manuscript and proof, make decisions regarding release of information in the manuscript to the news media or federal agencies, handle all postpublication communications and inquiries, and will be identified as the corresponding author in the published article.

The corresponding author also is responsible for ensuring that the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript is complete (see Acknowledgment Section ) and that the conflict of interest disclosures reported in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript are accurate, up-to-date, and consistent with the information provided in each author's potential conflicts of interest section in the Authorship Form (see Conflicts of Interest and Financial Disclosures ).

The corresponding author also must complete the Acknowledgment statement part of the Authorship Form confirming that all persons who have contributed substantially but who are not authors are identified in the Acknowledgment section and that written permission from each person acknowledged has been obtained (see Acknowledgment Section ).

Requests for co-corresponding authors will be considered on a very limited basis if justified, but no more than 2 co-corresponding authors will be permitted. In such cases, a primary corresponding author must be designated as the point of contact responsible for all communication about the manuscript and article, manage the tasks described above, and will be listed first in the corresponding author section. 6 To read more about the role and responsibilities of corresponding authors, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Authors should determine the order of authorship among themselves and should settle any disagreements before submitting their manuscript. Changes in authorship (ie, order, addition, and deletion of authors) should be discussed and approved by all authors. Any requests for such changes in authorship after initial manuscript submission and before publication should be explained in writing to the editor in a letter or email from all authors. 2(pp128-133)

The JAMA Network recognizes that authors may change their names for personal reasons, and the editors respect authors' rights to autonomy and privacy in this regard. Authors who request confidential name changes after publication because of changes in identity, marital status, religion, or other reasons may have their names changed in articles without indication of the reason for the change and without a formal correction notice. If an author prefers this change to be public, a formal Correction notice can be issued, with or without the reason per author preference. The journal will not request the approval of coauthors, but the requesting author may wish to notify coauthors if this change will affect subsequent citations to the article. The requester may be asked to notify the corresponding author about this change to the published article; alternatively, the journal may inform the corresponding author of this change (without explaining the reason for the change). The journal will make this change to the online and PDF versions of the published article and will notify postpublication indexes and databases as a standard process but cannot guarantee when or if the change will be reflected in these indexes and databases.

If authorship is attributed to a group (either solely or in addition to 1 or more individual authors), all members of the group must meet the full criteria and requirements for authorship as described above, and all group member authors must complete Authorship Forms. 6 If all members of a group do not meet all authorship criteria, a group must designate 1 or more individuals as authors or members of a writing group who meet full authorship criteria and requirements and who will take responsibility for the group. 2 , 6 Group names should appear at the end of the byline and should not be interspersed within the list of individually named authors. Group authors may not be included for article types with limited numbers of authors (eg, opinion articles).

For articles with a large number of authors (eg, >50), a long list of authors will not fit in the byline of a print/PDF version of the article. In such cases, a group byline will be recommended with the individual names of each author listed at the end of the article. All author names would still be individually indexed, displayed, and easily searchable in bibliographic records such as PubMed. 6

Nonauthor Collaborators: Other group members who do not meet the criteria for authorship (eg, investigators, advisors, assistants) may be identified. For group author manuscripts, a Nonauthor Collaborator Template (with names, academic degrees, institution, location, role/contribution, and subgroup) must be completed during revision. The template will be available to authors with the request for revision. The collaborators will be published in an online Supplement based on this template and will be deposited to PubMed.

To read more about authorship, click here .

A conflict of interest may exist when an author (or the author's institution or employer) has financial or personal relationships or affiliations that could influence (or bias) the author's decisions, work, or manuscript. All authors are required to report potential conflicts of interest including specific financial interests relevant to the subject of their manuscript in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript 2 and in the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest section of the Authorship Form. Note: These forms will be requested after a manuscript has been submitted, but authors should also include conflict of interest disclosures in the Acknowledgment section of the submitted manuscript.

Definitions and Terms of Conflicts of Interest Disclosures:

Authors are expected to provide detailed information about all relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations (other than those affiliations listed in the title page of the manuscript) including, but not limited to, employment, affiliation, funding and grants received or pending, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speakers' bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Following the guidelines of the ICMJE, 4 the definitions and terms of such disclosures include

Any potential conflicts of interest "involving the work under consideration for publication" (during the time involving the work, from initial conception and planning to present), Any "relevant financial activities outside the submitted work" (over the 3 years prior to submission), and Any "other relationships or activities that readers could perceive to have influenced, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing" what is written in the submitted work (based on all relationships that were present during the 3 years prior to submission).

Authors without conflicts of interest, including relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations, should indicate such in their disclosures and include a statement of no such interests in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. Failure to include this information in the manuscript may delay evaluation and review of the manuscript. Authors should err on the side of full disclosure and should contact the editorial office if they have questions or concerns.

Although many universities and other institutions and organizations have established policies and thresholds for reporting financial interests and other conflicts of interest, the JAMA Network requires complete disclosure of all relevant financial relationships and potential financial conflicts of interest, regardless of amount or value. For example, authors of a manuscript about hypertension should report all financial relationships they have with all manufacturers and owners of products, devices, tests, and services used in the management of hypertension, not only those relationships with entities whose specific products, devices, tests, and services are mentioned in the manuscript. If authors are uncertain about what constitutes a relevant financial interest or relationship, they should contact the editorial office.

For all accepted manuscripts, the corresponding author will have been asked to confirm that each coauthor's disclosures of conflicts of interest and relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations and declarations of no such interests are accurate, up-to-date, and consistent with the disclosures reported in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript because this information will be published in the Acknowledgment section of the article. Decisions about whether such information provided by authors should be published, and thereby disclosed to readers, are usually straightforward. Although editors are willing to discuss disclosure of specific conflicts of interest with authors, JAMA Network policy is one of complete disclosure of all potential conflicts of interest, including relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations (other than those affiliations listed in the title page of the manuscript). The policy requiring disclosure of conflicts of interest applies for all manuscript submissions, including letters to the editor. If an author's disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is determined to be inaccurate or incomplete after publication, a correction will be published to rectify the original published disclosure statement, and additional action may be taken as necessary.

All authors must also complete the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest section of the Authorship Form. 7

All financial and material support for the research and the work should be clearly and completely identified in an Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. At the time of submission, information on the funding source (including grant identification) must also be completed via the online manuscript submission and review system. The specific role of the funding organization or sponsor in each of the following should be specified: "design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication." 7 To read more about reporting funding and other support, see the AMA Manual of Style .

For all reports (regardless of funding source) containing original data, at least 1 named author (eg, the principal investigator), and no more than 2 authors, must indicate that she or he "had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis." 7 This exact statement should be included in the Acknowledgment section at the end of the manuscript. Modified statements or generic statements indicating that all authors had such access are not acceptable. In addition, for all reports containing original data, the names and affiliations of all authors (or other individuals) who conducted and are responsible for the data analysis must be indicated in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. If the individual who conducted the analysis is not named as an author, a detailed explanation of his/her contributions and reasons for his/her involvement with the data analysis should be included.

For all reports of research, authors are required to provide a Data Sharing Statement to indicate if data will or will not be shared. Specific questions regarding the sharing of data are included in the manuscript submission system. If authors choose to share or not share data, this information will be published in a Data Sharing Statement in an online supplement linked to the published article. Authors will be asked to identify the data, including individual patient data, a data dictionary that defines each field in the data set, and supporting documentation (eg, statistical/analytic code), that will be made available to others; when, where, and how the data will be available (eg, a link to a data repository); types of analyses that are permitted; and if there will be any restrictions on the use of the data. Authors also have the option to explain why data may not be shared. A list of generalist public repositories that authors may consider using is available from the National Library of Medicine .

The Acknowledgment section is the general term for the list of contributions, disclosures, credits, and other information included at the end of the text of a manuscript but before the references. The Acknowledgment section includes authors' contributions; information on author access to data; disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, including financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations; sources of funding and support; an explanation of the role of funder(s)/sponsor(s); names, degrees, and affiliations of participants in a large study or other group (ie, collaborators); any important disclaimers; information on previous presentation of the information reported in the manuscript; and the contributions, names, degrees, affiliations, and indication if compensation has been received for all persons who have made substantial contributions to the work but who are not authors. 2

All other persons who have made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (eg, data collection, analysis, and writing or editing assistance) but who do not fulfill the authorship criteria should be named with their specific contributions in an Acknowledgment in the manuscript.

Authors must obtain written permission to include the names of all individuals included in the Acknowledgment section, and the corresponding author must confirm that such permission has been obtained in the Authorship Form.

Authors should report the use of artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies to create content or assist with writing or editing of manuscripts in the Acknowledgment section or the Methods section if this is part of formal research design or methods. This should include a description of the content that was created or edited and the name of the language model or tool, version and extension numbers, manufacturer, date(s) of use, and confirmation that the authors take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated. (Note: this does not include basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references, etc.) See also Use of AI in Publication and Research and Statistical Analysis Subsection .

Requirements for Reporting

Authors of research articles should follow the EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines . See specific Study Types for detailed guidance on reporting.

Causal language (including use of terms such as effect and efficacy) should be used only for randomized clinical trials. For all other study designs (including meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials), methods and results should be described in terms of association or correlation and should avoid cause-and-effect wording. To read more about use of causal language, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Research reports should be timely and current and should be based on data collected as recently as possible. Manuscripts based on data from randomized clinical trials should be reported as soon as possible after the trial has ended, ideally within 1 year after follow-up has been completed.

For cohort studies, the date of final follow-up should be no more than 5 years before manuscript submission. Likewise, data used in case-control or cross-sectional studies should have been collected as recently as possible, but no more than 5 years before manuscript submission. Manuscripts in which the most recent data have been collected more than 5 years ago ordinarily will receive lower priority for publication; thus, authors of such manuscripts should provide a detailed explanation of the relevance of the information in light of current knowledge and medical practice as well as the most recent date(s) of analysis of the study.

General Considerations

Authors are encouraged to consult "Reporting Statistical Information in Medical Journal Articles." 1 In the Methods section, describe statistical methods with enough detail to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to reproduce the reported results. Such description should include appropriate references to the original literature, particularly for uncommon statistical methods. For more advanced or novel methods, provide a brief explanation of the methods and appropriate use in the text and consider providing a detailed description in an online supplement.

In the reporting of results, when possible, quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty, such as confidence intervals (see Reporting Standards and Data Presentation ). Avoid relying solely on statistical hypothesis testing, such as the use of P values, which fails to convey important quantitative information. For observational studies, provide the numbers of observations. For randomized trials, provide the numbers randomized. Report losses to observation or follow up (see Missing Data ). For multivariable models, report all variables included in models, and report model diagnostics and overall fit of the model when available (see Statistical Procedures ).

Define statistical terms, abbreviations, and symbols, if included. Avoid nontechnical uses of technical terms in statistics, such as correlation, normal, predictor, random, sample, significant, trend. Do not use inappropriate hedge terms such as marginal significance or trend toward significance for results that are not statistically significant. Causal language (including use of terms such as effect and efficacy) should be used only for randomized clinical trials. For all other study designs (including meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials), methods and results should be described in terms of association or correlation and should avoid cause-and-effect wording.

Sample Size Calculations

For randomized trials, a statement of the power or sample size calculation is required (see the EQUATOR Network CONSORT Guidelines ). For observational studies that use an established population, a power calculation is not generally required when the sample size is fixed. However, if the sample size was determined by the researchers, through any type of sampling or matching, then there should be some justification for the number sampled. In any case, describe power and sample size calculations at the beginning of the Statistical Methods section, following the general description of the study population.

Descriptive Statistics

It is generally not necessary to provide a detailed description of the methods used to generate summary statistics, but the tests should be briefly noted in the Methods section (eg, ANOVA or Fisher exact test).

Statistical Procedures

Identify regression models with more than 1 independent variable as multivariable and regression models with more than 1 dependent variable as multivariate. Report all variables included in models, as well as any mathematical transformations of those variables. Provide the scientific rationale (clinical, statistical, or otherwise) for including variables in regression models.

For regression models fit to dependent data (eg, clustered or longitudinal data), the models should account for the correlations that arise from clustering and/or repeated measures. Failure to account for such correlation will result in incorrect estimates of uncertainty (eg, confidence intervals). Describe how the model accounted for correlation. For example, for an analysis based on generalized estimating equations, identify the assumed correlation structure and whether robust (or, sandwich) variance estimators were used. Or, for an analysis based on mixed-effects models, identify the assumed structure for the random effects, such as the level of random intercepts and whether any random slopes were included. Fixed-effects estimation should be described as conditional likelihood. Avoid the term fixed effects for describing covariates.

Missing Data

Report losses to observation, such as dropouts from a clinical trial or those lost to follow-up or unavailable in an observational study. If some participants are excluded from analyses because of missing or incomplete data, provide a supplementary table that compares the observed characteristics between participants with complete and incomplete data. Consider multiple imputation methods to impute missing data and include an assessment of whether data were missing at random. Approaches based on "last observation carried forward" should not be used.

Primary Outcomes, Multiple Comparisons, and Post Hoc Comparisons

Both randomized and observational studies should identify the primary outcome(s) before the study began, as well as any prespecified secondary, subgroup, and/or sensitivity analyses. Comparisons arrived at during the course of the analysis or after the study was completed should be identified as post hoc. For analyses of more than 1 primary outcome, corrections for multiple testing should generally be used. For secondary outcomes, address multiple comparisons or consider such analyses as exploratory and interpret them as hypothesis-generating. The reporting of all outcomes should match that included in study protocols. For randomized clinical trials, protocols with complete statistical analysis plans should be cited in the Methods section and submitted as online supplementary content. Randomized clinical trials should be primarily analyzed according to the intention-to-treat approach. Deviations from strict intention-to-treat analysis should be described as "modified intention-to-treat," with the modifications clearly described.

Statistical Analysis Subsection

At the end of the Methods section, briefly describe the statistical tests used for the analysis. State any a priori levels of significance and whether hypothesis tests were 1- or 2-sided. Also include the statistical software used to perform the analysis, including the version and manufacturer, along with any extension packages (eg, the svy suite of commands in Stata or the survival package in R). Do not describe software commands (eg, SAS proc mixed was used to fit a linear mixed-effects model). If analysis code is included, it should be placed in the online supplementary content.

Reporting Standards and Data Presentation

Analyses should follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines and be consistent with the protocol and statistical analysis plan, or described as post hoc.

When possible, present numerical results (eg, absolute numbers and/or rates) with appropriate indicators of uncertainty, such as confidence intervals. Include absolute numbers and/or rates with any ratio measures and avoid redundant reporting of relative data (eg, % increase or decrease). Use means and standard deviations (SDs) for normally distributed data and medians and ranges or interquartile ranges (IQRs) for data that are not normally distributed. Avoid solely reporting the results of statistical hypothesis testing, such as P values, which fail to convey important quantitative information. For most studies, P values should follow the reporting of comparisons of absolute numbers or rates and measures of uncertainty (eg, 0.8%, 95% CI −0.2% to 1.8%; P  = .13). P values should never be presented alone without the data that are being compared. If P values are reported, follow standard conventions for decimal places: for P values less than .001, report as " P <.001"; for P values between .001 and .01, report the value to the nearest thousandth; for P values greater than or equal to .01, report the value to the nearest hundredth; and for P values greater than .99, report as " P >.99." For studies with exponentially small P values (eg, genetic association studies), P values may be reported with exponents (eg, P  = 1×10 −5 ). In general, there is no need to present the values of test statistics (eg, F statistics or χ² results) and degrees of freedom when reporting results.

For secondary and subgroup analyses, there should be a description of how the potential for type I error due to multiple comparisons was handled, for example, by adjustment of the significance threshold. In the absence of some approach, these analyses should generally be described and interpreted as exploratory, as should all post hoc analyses.

For randomized trials using parallel-group design, there is no validity in conducting hypothesis tests regarding the distribution of baseline covariates between groups; by definition, these differences are due to chance. Because of this, tables of baseline participant characteristics should not include P values or statements of statistical comparisons among randomized groups. Instead, report clinically meaningful imbalances between groups, along with potential adjustments for those imbalances in multivariable models. To read more about statistical tests and data presentation, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Researchers are encouraged to report studies that include diverse and representative participants and to indicate participant inclusion and exclusion criteria and how the findings generalize to the population(s) that are the focus of or are compatible with the research question. Aggregate, deidentified demographic information (eg, age, sex, race and ethnicity, and socioeconomic indicators) should be reported for all research reports along all prespecified outcomes. Demographic variables collected for a specific study should be reported in the Methods section. Demographic information assessed should be reported in the Results section, either in the main article or in an online supplement or both. If any demographic characteristics that were collected are not reported, the reason should be stated. Summary demographic information (eg, baseline characteristics of study participants) should be reported in the first line of the Results section of Abstracts.

Reporting Age

Study inclusion or exclusion criteria by age or age group should be defined in the Methods section. Stratification by age groups should be based on relevance to disease, condition, or population (eg, <5 or >65 years). The ages for study participants should be reported in aggregate (ie, mean and SD or median and IQR or range) in the Results section.

Reporting Sex and Gender

The term sex should be used when reporting biological factors and gender should be used when reporting gender identity or psychosocial/cultural factors. The methods used to obtain information on sex, gender, or both (eg, self-reported, investigator observed or classified, or laboratory test) should be explained in the Methods section. 12 The distribution of study participants or samples should be reported in the Results section, including for studies of humans, tissues, cells, or animals. All participants should be reported, not just the category that represents the majority of the sample. Studies that address pregnancy should follow these recommendations, and if the gender identity of participants was not assessed, use the terms "pregnant participants," "pregnant individuals," "pregnant patients," etc, as appropriate.

In research articles, sex or gender should be reported and defined, and how sex or gender was assessed should be described. Whenever possible, all main outcomes should be reported by sex (or gender if appropriate). In nonresearch reports, choose sex-neutral terms that avoid bias, suit the material under discussion, and do not intrude on the reader's attention.

Reporting Race and Ethnicity

The Methods section should include an explanation of who identified participant race and ethnicity and the source of the classifications used (eg, self-report or selection, investigator observed, database, electronic health record, survey instrument).

If race and ethnicity categories were collected for a study, the reasons that these were assessed also should be described in the Methods section. If collection of data on race and ethnicity was required by the funding agency, that should be noted.

Specific racial and ethnic categories are preferred over collective terms, when possible. Authors should report the specific categories used in their studies and recognize that these categories will differ based on the databases or surveys used, the requirements of funders, and the geographic location of data collection or study participants. Categories included in groups labeled as "other" should be defined.

Categories should be listed in alphabetical order in text and tables.

Race and ethnicity of the study population should be reported in the Results section.

For additional information, see " Updated Guidance on Reporting Race and Ethnicity in Medical and Science Journals " and the Summary Guide for Preferred Terms When Reporting Race and Ethnicity .

For all manuscripts reporting data from studies involving human participants or animals, formal review and approval, or formal review and waiver, by an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee is required and should be described in the Methods section. 2(p226) For those investigators who do not have formal ethics review committees, the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki should be followed. 13 For investigations of humans, state in the Methods section the manner in which informed consent was obtained from the study participants (ie, oral or written) and whether participants received a stipend. Authors of research studies involving humans should not make independent determinations of exemption or exclusion of IRB or ethical review; they should cite the institutional or regulatory policy for that determination and indicate if the data are deidentified and publicly available or protected by prior consent or privacy safeguards. Editors may request that authors provide documentation of the formal review and recommendation from the institutional review board or ethics committee responsible for oversight of the study.

A signed statement of informed consent to publish patient descriptions, photographs, video, and pedigrees should be obtained from all persons (parents or legal guardians for minors) who can be identified (including by the patients themselves) i/n such written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees and should be submitted with the manuscript and indicated in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. Such persons should be offered the opportunity to see the manuscript before its submission. 2(pp229-232)

Omitting data or making data less specific to deidentify patients is acceptable, but changing any such data is not acceptable. Only those details essential for understanding and interpreting a specific case report or case series should be provided. Although the degree of specificity needed will depend on the context of what is being reported, specific ages, race/ethnicity, and other sociodemographic details should be presented only if clinically or scientifically relevant and important. 2 Cropping of photographs to remove identifiable personal features that are not essential to the clinical message may be permitted as long as the photographs are not otherwise altered. Please do not submit masked photographs of patients. Patients' initials or other personal identifiers must not appear in an image.

Patient Permission Form:

The Patient Permission form for publication of identifying material is available here . Translated versions in Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Hindi, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, and Spanish are available on request.

AI Used in Manuscript Preparation

When traditional and generative AI technologies are used to create, review, revise, or edit any of the content in a manuscript, authors should report in the Acknowledgment section the following:

• Name of the AI software platform, program, or tool
• Version and extension numbers
• Manufacturer
• Date(s) of use
• A brief description of how the AI was used and on what portions of the manuscript or content
• Confirmation that the author(s) take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated

Note this guidance does not apply to basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references, and similar.

AI Used in Research

When AI (eg, large language model [LLM] or natural language processing [NLP], supervised or unsupervised machine learning [ML] for predictive/prescriptive or clustering tasks, chatbots, or similar other technologies) is used as part of a scientific study, authors should:

• Follow relevant reporting guidelines for specific study designs when they exist and report each recommended guideline element with sufficient detail to enable reproducibility.
• Avoid inclusion of identifiable patient information in text, tables, and figures.
• Be aware of copyright and intellectual property concerns - if including content (text, images) generated by AI, and indicate rights or permissions to publish that content as determined by the AI service or owner.

Also address the following:

Methods Section

• Include the study design and, if a relevant reporting guideline exists, indicate how it was followed, with sufficient detail to enable reproducibility.
• Describe how AI was used for specific aspects of the study (eg, to generate or refine study hypotheses, assist in the generation of a list of adjustment variables, create graphs to show visual relationships).
• For studies using LLMs, provide the name of the platform or program, tool, version, and manufacturer; specify dates and prompt(s) used and their sequence and any revisions to prompts in response to initial outputs.
• For studies reporting ML and algorithm development, include details about data sets used for development, training, and validation. Clearly state if algorithms were trained and tested only on previously collected or existing data sets or if the study includes prospective deployment. Include the ML model and describe the variables and outcome(s) and selection of the fine-tuning parameters. Describe any assumptions involved (eg, log linearity, proportionality) and how these assumptions were tested.
• Indicate the metric used to evaluate the performance of the algorithms, including bias, discrimination, calibration, reclassification, and others as appropriate.
• Indicate the methods used to address missing data.
• Indicate institutional review board/ethics review, approval, waiver, or exemption.
• Describe methods or analyses included to address and manage AI-related methodologic bias and inaccuracy of AI-generated content.
• Indicate, when appropriate, if sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the performance of the AI model in vulnerable or underrepresented subgroups.
• Provide a data sharing statement, including if code will be shared.

Results Section

• When reporting comparisons, provide performance assessments (eg, against standard of care), include effect sizes and measures of uncertainty (eg, 95% CIs) and other measurements such as likelihood ratios, and include information about performance errors, inaccurate or missing data, and sufficient detail for others to reproduce the findings.
• Report the results of analyses to address methodologic bias and population representation.
• If examples of generated text or content are included in tables or figures, be sure to indicate the source and licensing information, as noted above.

Discussion Section

• Discuss the potential for AI-related bias and what was done to identify and mitigate such bias.
• Discuss the potential for inaccuracy of AI-generated content and what was done to identify and manage this.
• Discuss generalizability of findings across populations and results of analyses performed to explore the performance of the AI model in vulnerable or underrepresented subgroups.

A signed statement of permission should be included from each individual identified as a source of information in a personal communication or as a source for unpublished data, and the date of communication and whether the communication was written or oral should be specified. 2(p199) Personal communications should not be included in the list of references but added to the text parenthetically.

Authors and reviewers are expected to notify editors if a manuscript could be considered to report dual use research of concern (ie, research that could be misused by others to pose a threat to public health and safety, agriculture, plants, animals, the environment, or material). 14 The editor in chief will evaluate manuscripts that report potential dual use research of concern and, if necessary, consult additional reviewers.

Journal Policies

Final decisions regarding manuscript publication are made by the editor in chief or a designated editor who does not have any relevant conflicts of interest. The journal has a formal recusal process in place to help manage potential conflicts of interest of editors. In the event that an editor has a conflict of interest with a submitted manuscript or with the authors, the manuscript, review, and editorial decisions are managed by another designated editor without a conflict of interest related to the manuscript.

All authors are required to complete and submit a Publishing Agreement that is part of the journal's electronic Authorship Form. In this agreement, authors will transfer copyright or a publication license; or indicate that they are employed by a federal government; or indicate that they are an employee of an institution that considers the work in the manuscript a work for hire, in which case an authorized representative of that institution will assign copyright or a publication license on the author's behalf.

Published articles become the permanent property of the American Medical Association (AMA) and may not be published elsewhere without written permission. Unauthorized use of the journal's name, logo, or any content for commercial purposes or to promote commercial goods and services (in any format, including print, video, audio, and digital) is not permitted by the JAMA Network or the AMA.

1. Cummings P, Rivara FP. Reporting statistical information in medical journal articles. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med . 2003;157(4):321-324. doi:10.1001/archpedi.157.4.321

2. Iverson C, Christiansen S, Flanagin A, et al. AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors . 11th ed. Oxford University Press; 2020. http://www.amamanualofstyle.com

3. Golub RM. Correspondence course: tips for getting a letter published in JAMA . JAMA . 2008;300(1):98-99. doi:10.1001/jama.300.1.98

4. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Updated May 2023. Accessed May 18, 2023. http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/

5. Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A, DeAngelis CD. Update on JAMA 's policy on release of information to the public. JAMA . 2008;300(13):1585-1587. doi:10.1001/jama.300.13.1585

6. Fontanarosa P, Bauchner H, Flanagin A. Authorship and team science. JAMA . 2017;318(24):2433-2437. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.19341

7. Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A, DeAngelis CD. Reporting conflicts of interest, financial aspects of research, and role of sponsors in funded studies. JAMA . 2005;294(1):110-111. doi:10.1001/jama.294.1.110

8. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al; International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA . 2004;292(11):1363-1364. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.6933

9. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al; International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Is this clinical trial fully registered? a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA . 2005;293(23):2927-2929. doi:10.1001/jama.293.23.jed50037

10. The CONSORT Group. The CONSORT statement. Updated 2014. Accessed September 23, 2016. http://www.consort-statement.org/consort-2010

11. American Association for Public Opinion Research. Best practices for survey research. Accessed March 23, 2023. https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/best-practices/

12. Clayton JA, Tannenbaum C. Reporting sex, gender, or both in clinical research? JAMA . 2016;316(18):1863-1864. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.16405

13. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA . 2013;310(20):2191-2194. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053

14. Journal Editors and Authors Group. Statement on scientific publication and security. Science . 2003;299(5610):1149. doi:10.1126/science.299.5610.1149 . Published correction appears in Science . 2003;299(5614):1845.

15. Christiansen S, Flanagin A. Correcting the medical literature: "to err is human, to correct divine." JAMA . 2017;318(9):804-805. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.11833

Last Updated: June 13, 2024

Quick Links

• Why Publish in JAMA
• Submit and Track Your Manuscript
• Author Reprints
• Permissions Requests
• Register for email alerts with links to free full-text articles
• Access PDFs of free articles
• Manage your interests
• Save searches and receive search alerts

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

MDPI Journals

• Web of Science
• Ei Compendex
• CAPlus / SciFinder
• Biology & Life Sciences
• Business & Economics
• Chemistry & Materials Science
• Computer Science & Mathematics
• Engineering
• Environmental & Earth Sciences
• Medicine & Pharmacology
• Physical Sciences
• Public Health & Healthcare
• Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities
• Journal Proposal
• Transferred and Acquired Journals
• Discontinued Journals

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.

Journal Finder

Our search tool uses state-of-the-art technology to match your research paper to MDPI Journals. Simply search to find the best suited journals for your paper.

Search results

Further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• ACS Publications

ACS Researcher Resources

Author guidelines.

Last updated: June 25, 2024

Manuscript Submission Requirements Checklists

Scope of the journal, manuscript types, submit with fast format, document templates and format, acceptable software, file designations, and tex/latex, cover letter, manuscript text components, supporting information, research data policy, data requirements, language and editing services, preparing graphics, figure and illustration services, prior publication policy, editorial policies, providing potential reviewer names, manuscript transfer, proofs via acs direct correct, publication date and patent dates, asap publication, post-publication policies, sharing your published article.

These checklists aid in confirming that a submission is complete, which facilitates the peer-review and editorial process and increases the likelihood of a successful outcome. Incomplete or noncompliant submissions are returned to authors.

Content Expectations

• The content of the manuscript clearly demonstrates relevance to the teaching and learning of chemistry, and the audience is clearly defined.
• The various manuscript types have been reviewed and the appropriate type selected. The submitted manuscript is of appropriate length and includes all components pertaining to the selected manuscript type. Articles that are to be reviewed as Chemical Education Research should follow the Content Requirements for Chemical Education Research Manuscripts .
• A thorough literature review has been conducted in order to place the submission within the context of previously published work, especially with respect to the chemical education literature.

ACS Paragon Plus Submission Requirements

• All files are current and supportable  and have been properly designated by file type  within ACS Paragon Plus.
• Within ACS Paragon Plus, the Custom Questions have been answered, including those about conflict of interest, unpublished work, and previous submissions.
• The ACS Ethical Guidelines  have been read and are understood.
• The abstract field in ACS Paragon Plus has been filled in; no citations or display elements are included in the abstract text.
• The authors’ names in ACS Paragon Plus match those in the manuscript file.
• The required cover letter, addressed to the Editor-in-Chief, describes the relevance of the work and intended audience.

Manuscript File

• The author guidelines have been reviewed, and the document template  has been used. Using the document template helps ensure that necessary components are included; templates for display elements (figures and structures) are also available.
• All markup elements within files such as tracked changes, comments, and highlights have been removed and the track changes feature has been turned off.
• Language and usage are standard. (Authors may wish to improve the language in the manuscript by consulting an English editing service .)
• The manuscript includes an appropriate, descriptive title; names of authors, affiliations, and the corresponding author’s e-mail address; approx. 5-8 keywords; and an abstract.
• A graphical abstract providing a “quick visual representation” of the paper has been provided (if desired) and is original work differentiated from other figures.
• Appropriate headings and subheadings have been included to indicate the overall structure and progression of ideas of the manuscript.
• Citations and references are complete, including article titles and use of DOIs. Previously published material has been cited and has not been excessively used.
• Unpublished work that has been cited has been uploaded for editorial review.

Display Elements

• Display elements appear after their mention in the text and are comprehensible without regard to the text.
• Display elements are numbered sequentially, are correctly designated (e.g., figure, table, equation, scheme, box) in the text, and are appropriately captioned or titled.
• Specifications for display elements have been reviewed and followed.
• Tables include appropriate titles, column headings, and notes; use table footnotes rather than annotating cell entries or table titles to convey details. Tables should be constructed using the table tool or function.
• Permission has been obtained for display elements that have been reproduced or adapted from other sources. Appropriate credit lines have been incorporated into captions, and documentation pertaining to permissions has been uploaded.
• Supporting Information for Publication has been provided separately from the main text and is discussed in the main text, and the contents of each file have been listed and file format(s) designated under an “Associated Content” section in the manuscript (see the document template ). Supporting Information is required for Laboratory Experiment, Activity, and Demonstration manuscripts; provide these materials in an editable format (e.g., a Word file) so that those adopting the lab or activity can adapt them. Supporting Information is optional for the other manuscript types. If the track changes feature was used, ensure that all changes are accepted and comments resolved, and that the track changes feature is off.
• No parts of the main manuscript are duplicated in the Supporting Information.
• The Supporting Information is original material produced by the authors for the purposes of J CE and has not been previously published elsewhere.

Permissions and Copyright

• It is understood that the American Chemical Society has strict policies regarding the use of material from other sources and that “fair use” is not considered to be a sufficient criterion. Material from Wikipedia, Flickr, or similar websites containing material with non-commercial Creative Commons licenses is not acceptable.
• Permissions have been obtained from copyright holders (including those that provide freely available content) to reproduce material not originated by the authors. Such material includes photographs, illustrations, screenshots, images of instrumentation, and materials produced by students. Documentation has been uploaded in ACS Paragon Plus.
• Model releases have been signed by people who are identifiable in photographs (including authors). Releases have been uploaded in ACS Paragon Plus.
• Trademarked product names (whether in images or in the text) have been replaced by descriptive generic names where possible.
• Logos, brand names, trademarks, and company images in screenshots, photographs, and spectra have been obscured by blurring, cropping, or masking.
• Necessary credit lines are included in figure captions and table or box notes.
• Informed consent (and institutional review board [IRB] approval, if applicable) has been obtained for studies involving human subjects , and the manuscript indicates that such consent and approval has been obtained. If student work is used, documentation indicating that students have granted their consent has been provided.

The Journal of Chemical Education   (JCE) is co-published by the ACS Division of Chemical Education and the American Chemical Society Publications division. Launched in 1924, JCE is the world’s premier chemical education journal. JCE is published online and in print and has electronic archival content available from 1924 (Vol. 1) to the present.

The Journal of Chemical Education publishes peer-reviewed articles and related information as a resource to those in the field of chemical education and to those institutions that serve them. The journal typically addresses chemical content, laboratory experiments, instructional methods, and pedagogies. JCE serves as a means of communication among people across the world who are interested in the teaching and learning of chemistry. The global audience includes instructors of chemistry from middle school through graduate school, professional staff who support these teaching activities, as well as some scientists in commerce, industry, and government.

The criteria for a publishable manuscript include these areas of evaluation: scholarship, novelty, pedagogy, utility, and presentation. To be considered for publication by the Journal of Chemical Education , a manuscript must:

• Demonstrate scientific and scholarly rigor, supported by up-to-date citations to relevant literature and guided by a rationale for how the work fits into existing knowledge.
• Exhibit novelty through original scholarship or a creative or innovative practice.
• Have pedagogical content and educational relevance and insight that demonstrate a positive impact on teaching and learning while articulating audience level, use with students, and details for adopting and adapting the material, if applicable.
• Be useful to JCE readers by showing a connection to teaching and learning within the context of curricula or coursework.
• Present well-developed ideas in a comprehensive, organized discussion written in clear, concise English and making effective use of display elements (figures, schemes, tables, etc.).
• Adhere to the requirements and JCE protocols outlined in this document for each respective manuscript type and be submitted according to ACS publishing policies.
• Be submitted electronically using ACS Paragon Plus

JCE does not publish science research papers (or papers exclusively covering scientific content) unless they have a direct link to the teaching and learning of chemistry.

JCE publishes a wide variety of scholarly content categorized by manuscript type. All manuscripts must be designated as a particular type upon submission. Word counts associated with each manuscript type are a recommended word limit; these word counts exclude display elements, manuscript references, and Supporting Information, which is material published separately only online.

An Activity (3000 words) describes a hands-on activity at any level (from elementary through the university level) that can be done in the classroom or laboratory or in an informal setting. Activities are intended to introduce engaging and thought-provoking ideas or topics and to spark discussion. They need to have been done with students in a teaching or outreach setting and to have been evaluated and used several times in order to substantiate claims of success. They should not be proposals.

The ways in which the activity has been implemented in the context of a curriculum should be described. Details such as the total number of students who completed the activity, how long it took students to complete the activity, and whether they worked individually or in groups should be included, as should student results. The range of student results should be stated in addition to typical student results (an average value). Problems that instructors might encounter should be mentioned, and other information that would assist an instructor with implementing the activity should be provided. There should also be an assessment of how the activity improved the learning process of students. Any potential hazards and safety precautions must be addressed in a dedicated Hazards section in the manuscript.

Supporting Information to aid in the use of the activity by others is required—for example, notes for instructors (including sources for materials used) and actual student handouts. Materials used should be inexpensive, nonhazardous, and readily available.

Permissions and documentation are required in order to reproduce material created by students. (See Use of Student Work section.)

An Article (5000 words) describes a novel educational idea or approach, content for the classroom or laboratory, pedagogical advance, or educational research. Invited Articles may review a broad topic area that has wide applicability. Articles can target specific constituencies (i.e., precollege or introductory or advanced college students), address a specific content area, describe a new pedagogy or teaching method, or provide results on an innovation or chemical education research study.

Chemical Education Research

Articles specific to reporting the research pertaining to teaching and learning chemistry (chemical education research, CER) should be identified as such in the cover letter. CER manuscripts must be written and will be reviewed using the Specific Content Requirements for Chemical Education Research Manuscripts . Because of these requirements for CER manuscripts, the recommended word limit for this category of article is 7000.

Scholarly discussions of a topic of interest to the chemical education community that include the opinions of the author(s) are published using the manuscript type Commentary (2,000 words or as agreed to by the editorial office). The manuscript should provide sufficient information for readers to understand the topic or formulate their own opinions.

Communication

Communications (3000 words) generally update or extend topics addressed in manuscripts that have already been published. The ways in which the update is interesting, useful, and novel should be made clear. Manuscripts of this type are not intended as precursors to Articles. For Communications pertaining to laboratory experiments and activities, the focus should be on student experiences and student results with regard to the update. The details of the lab or activity must be included in the Supporting Information, as should materials that have been used with students.

Demonstration

A description, explanation, and procedure for an actual or virtual demonstration for teaching chemistry concepts, Demonstrations (3000 words) must reflect best practices related to safety (i.e., handling and storage of chemicals) and to hazards (i.e., fires, explosions, noxious fumes), as well as provide complete information that will enable others to use the demonstration in their settings. Hazards and safety precautions must be addressed in a dedicated Hazards section. Providing Supporting Information is required; including a video of the demonstration as Supporting Information is encouraged.

Editorials (1000 words) are opinion pieces by the Editor-in-Chief, an Associate Editor, or a guest writer invited by the Editor-in-Chief.

Laboratory Experiment

Laboratory Experiment (4000 words) manuscripts are intended to help readers visualize their students performing an experiment. Thus, labs are expected to have been done by students as part of an actual laboratory course or learning experience and to have been evaluated and used several times in order to substantiate claims of success. They should not be proposals. Labs should be novel and placed within the context of similar experiments that have been published. The pedagogical effectiveness of the reported experiment must be made clear.

Information about how the experiment was conducted with students should be provided, including the number of students who participated, whether the students worked individually or in groups, the number of times the experiment was run, and the time it took to complete the experiment. The focus should not be on procedures; rather, procedures should be summarized and details provided in the Supporting Information. Hazards and safety precautions must be addressed in a dedicated Hazards section in the manuscript.

There should also be an assessment of how the experiment improved the learning process of students and whether the pedagogical goals were achieved. Typical assessments include exam questions, pre- and postlab quizzes, assignments, and laboratory reports. If laboratory reports are used for assessment of achieving the pedagogical goals for an experiment, authors should state what specific information in the lab reports was used to assess achievement of each of the pedagogical goals, and how well students did on those aspects of the reports. Student surveys are not considered adequate tools. Limitations of the experiment (e.g., the use of expensive or uncommon equipment or professionally fabricated materials) should be noted as an indication of whether it can be used in certain settings.

Supporting Information must accompany the manuscript; it should contain material that a reader would find necessary to set up, adapt, and carry out the lab in a particular instructional environment. Materials such as student handouts, instructor notes, detailed procedures, safety information, CAS numbers, pre- and postlab assessments, and data (representative student data; “idealized” author data are optional) are particularly useful. Student handouts and instructor notes should be placed in separate files. It is appropriate to mention developmental work in instructor notes. An editable version of the Supporting Information (i.e., Word document) should be provided; this format is convenient for instructors who adapt or modify the lab.

For experiments involving recombinant DNA work, authors should consult their institutional biosafety committees (IBCs) for the biosafety level (i.e., BSL-1, BSL-2, BSL-3) of the work in the experiment; for student experiments it will probably be BSL-1, but authors should confirm this with the IBC and register the experiment with the committee. For experiments involving study subject animals, please see the ACS Ethical Guidelines .

Letter to the Editor

A manuscript type that allows readers to respond to a piece that has been published in JCE , Letter to the Editor (1000 words) should contribute to or elicit discussion on a subject without overstepping the bounds of professional courtesy. The author(s) of the publication referred to may be invited to submit a reply. Letter to the Editor will typically be peer-reviewed.

Technology Report

A Technology Report (3000 words) provides a scholarly description of a website, software application, media item, or other use of technology that enhances teaching and learning. The technology described should have been used with students and the results reported. The manuscript text describes the item and its intended use with students and provides the URL for Web-based resources, as appropriate. For all other applications described, the file related to the described technology should be included as Supporting Information for publication (e.g., Excel worksheet, Flash animation, specific application codes, scripts, Mathematica program file).

While this document will provide basic information on how to prepare and submit the manuscript as well as other critical information about publishing, we also encourage authors to visit the ACS Researcher Resources for additional information on everything that is needed to prepare (and review) manuscripts for ACS journals and partner journals, such as

• Mastering the Art of Scientific Publication , which shares editor tips about a variety of topics including making your paper scientifically effective, preparing excellent graphics, and writing cover letters.
• Resources on how to prepare and submit a manuscript to ACS Paragon Plus, ACS Publications’ manuscript submission and peer review environment, including details on selecting the applicable Journal Publishing Agreement .
• Sharing your research with the public through the ACS Publications open access program.
• ACS Reviewer Lab , a free online course covering best practices for peer review and related ethical considerations. 
• ACS Author Lab , a free online course that empowers authors to prepare and submit strong manuscripts, avoiding errors that could lead to delays in the publication process.
• ACS Inclusivity Style Guide , a guide that helps researchers communicate in ways that recognize and respect diversity in all its forms.

Manuscript Preparation

All ACS journals and partner journals have simplified their formatting requirements in favor of a streamlined and standardized format for an initial manuscript submission. Read more about the requirements and the benefits these serves authors and reviewers here .

Manuscripts submitted for initial consideration must adhere to these standards:

• Submissions must be complete with clearly identified standard sections used to report original research, free of annotations or highlights, and include all numbered and labeled components.
• Figures, charts, tables, schemes, and equations should be embedded in the text at the point of relevance. Separate graphics can be supplied later at revision, if necessary.
• When required by a journal's structure or length limitations, manuscript templates should be used.
• References can be provided in any style, but they must be complete, including titles. For information about the required components of different reference types, please refer to the  ACS Style Quick Guide .
• Supporting Information must be submitted as a separate file(s).

The templates facilitate the peer review process by allowing authors to place artwork and tables close to the point where they are discussed within the text. Learn more about document templates here . 

General information on the preparation of manuscripts may also be found in the ACS Guide to Scholarly Communication .

See the list of Acceptable Software and appropriate File Designations to be sure your file types are compatible with ACS Paragon Plus. Information for manuscripts generated from TeX/LaTeX is also available.

A cover letter must accompany every manuscript submission. During the submission process, you may type it or paste it into the submission system, or you may attach it as a file.

A cover letter for the attention of the Editor-in-Chief describing the relevance of the submission and intended audience should be provided. Any previous manuscript identification numbers should be referenced, and any changes that have been made to the manuscript should be summarized in the cover letter.

The title should clearly and concisely reflect the emphasis and content of the manuscript and be accessible to a broad audience. The title should not contain esoteric terms, symbols, trademark names, institution names, abbreviations, or uncommon acronyms, and part or series numbers. Proscribed terms include “new”, “first”, and “green”. Indicate the audience and the setting if that is significant. A well- crafted title aids in successful information retrieval.

Author List

Include all those who made substantial contributions to the work and to the preparation of the manuscript. To facilitate indexing and retrieval and for unique identification of an author, use given (first) names, initials, and surnames (e.g., John R. Smith) or first initials, second names, and surnames (e.g., J. Robert Smith). Because all author names are automatically imported into the electronic Journal Publishing Agreement, all author names must be entered into ACS Paragon Plus. Do not use only initials with surnames (e.g., J. R. Smith), as this causes indexing and retrieval difficulties and interferes with unique identification of an author.

One author must be designated as the person to whom correspondence should be addressed, indicated by an asterisk after that author’s surname and inclusion of an e-mail address in the manuscript file. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all authors have approved the manuscript before submission and for all subsequent revisions.

Note that all authors listed should have made significant and substantial intellectual contributions to the work. Students should not be listed as coauthors unless their authorship meets the criteria outlined in the ACS Ethical Guidelines : see section B(11) for further details. Students may be recognized in the Acknowledgments section for their contributions.

Author Affiliation

For each author, include an institutional affiliation (department or unit and address) where the work was done. If the present affiliation of an author differs from the one at which the work was done, the new affiliation and address should be given in an author information note at the end of the manuscript file. Authors should ensure that the information in their ACS Paragon Plus account is up to date.

Institution Identification

Many funders and institutions require that institutional affiliations are identified for all authors listed in the work being submitted. ACS facilitates this requirement by collecting institution information during manuscript submission under Step 2: Authors and Affiliations in ACS Paragon Plus.

The abstract (approximately 250 words or fewer) should summarize the important points made in the manuscript. Include the abstract text in the manuscript file. No cited literature or display elements should appear in the abstract. A well-written abstract aids in successful information retrieval and is the first aspect of a submission that will be reviewed.

Keyword Terms

Provide significant keywords to aid the reader in literature retrieval. Please consider the use of words different from those in the title to expand the discoverability of the article. The keywords are published immediately before the text, following the abstract. Note that the keyword term “Chemical Education Research” is reserved for manuscripts that are intended for review using the specific criteria for CER described online .

Manuscript content should adhere to the criteria for the manuscript type selected. The Journal expects that manuscripts will be written in literate, grammatically correct, scientific English; the absence of these qualities inhibits and detracts from the effectiveness of the review and evaluation process and may lead to substantial delays. An informal tone and overuse of first-person pronouns, especially used as adjectives or possessives (e.g., “my”, “mine”, “our”, “ours”) and second-person pronouns (e.g., “you”, “your”) should be avoided.

Text should be presented in one column with numbered pages, and organized using headings and subheadings (without numbers, references, or acronyms in the headings). Abbreviations and acronyms should be used sparingly and should be defined at their first occurrence. Other than headings, present the text in black.

Whenever possible, use systematic nomenclature as recommended by IUPAC for chemical compounds and SI units, including in table column headings. (See the IUPAC “color books” , which include nomenclature and terminology guides.) Present analyzed data in an accurate, complete, yet concise manner. Express results with indications of their reliability. This includes appropriate use of significant figures, as well as statistical parameters (e.g., standard deviation, p-values indicating statistical significance, and measures of effect size). Terms, variables, and symbols should be defined within the text (rather than in a list of abbreviations). The Journal does not publish appendices. Such material should be removed from the main text of the manuscript and uploaded as separate Supporting Information. Authors must emphasize any unexpected, new, and/or significant hazards or risks associated with the reported work. This information should be in a separate Hazards section.

Hazards and Safety Precautions

Any manuscript type should contain a Hazards section if it describes the use of or exposure to hazardous chemicals or the use of equipment or procedures that present health or safety risks. A Hazards section is required in Demonstration and Laboratory Experiment manuscript types and in Communication manuscripts if they pertain to these manuscript types. Hazards and safety precautions relating to the handling or use of chemicals or the manipulation of materials or equipment must be completely and clearly described in this section.

Authors describing laboratory procedures, activities, and demonstrations are urged to consult the following resources to determine the appropriate and accepted standards for chemical laboratory safety practice:

• Prudent Practices in the Laboratory: Handling and Management of Chemical Hazards, Updated Version ,  from the National Research Council details standards for chemical laboratory safety practice.
• The ACS Center for Lab Safety hosts many resources including a laboratory safety resource specifically written for secondary schools and one written specifically for academic institutions from two-year colleges through graduate school.
• Safety Guidelines for Chemical Demonstrations from the ACS Division of Chemical Education outlines current best practices with a checklist of key issues for demonstrators.

The Journal does not publish manuscripts that involve the use of domestic (i.e., kitchen) microwave ovens because such use is potentially hazardous and poses safety concerns. The Journal also does not publish manuscripts in which authors describe the use of or exposure to chemicals known to be toxic, such as n -hexane, benzene, and others, unless the author presents a convincing case that such use or exposure does not pose a risk to health and safety.

In manuscripts that discuss procedures in which products are formed, the author must provide hazard and safety information about these compounds, inasmuch as in some cases they may be more hazardous than the reactants. If the hazards of the products of a reaction are not known, the author should state the hazards or safety concerns that might be assumed.

Display elements (figures, tables, equations, schemes, boxes, charts, structures, and reactions) should be self-explanatory, that is, understandable independent of the text. They must be created using the appropriate tool (e.g., the table tool, equation editor for equations, ChemDraw for chemical structures), numbered sequentially by type using arabic numerals, and cited in the text discussion. Each multipart figure, scheme, or equation must be assembled into a single object, and lines should not be placed around the entire display element. Display elements may be resized during production; for further details about the graphics specifications for display elements, see Appendix 2: Preparing Graphics . Any references that are cited in a caption need to be clarified with a credit line; that is, the caption must make clear whether the graphic has been adapted or reproduced from another source or is original but based on material from another source (see Copyright and Permissions for more information). Display elements in the Supporting Information should be numbered sequentially and discretely from those in the manuscript.

Specifications for preparing graphics are detailed below.

Acknowledgments

Include acknowledgments of grant and other financial support, technical assistance, colleagues’ advice, and so on. Do not use professional titles or honorifics in this section. Persons other than the authors who are acknowledged for having created artwork should also provide documentation granting consent to use their work.

Supporting Information for Publication

Supporting Information (SI) is material (e.g., figures, raw data, movies, media files, lengthy tables, sample computer files, student handouts, details for setting up and performing an Activity, Demonstration, or Laboratory Experiment) separate from the manuscript that will be published only online. Supporting Information, including separate materials for instructors and students, is required for Activities, Demonstrations, and Laboratory Experiments, and is optional for other manuscript types. The Supporting Information should be original material produced by the authors for publication in JCE and not previously published elsewhere or duplicated in the manuscript. Only those materials that are most relevant to the submission should be included, and the Supporting Information must be discussed in the text. If presentations are included, they are subject to the same policies concerning copyright and permissions as is other content.

For supplementary material that is not formally submitted as Supporting Information but is hosted on an author’s website, a description of the material and the URL for the website should be included in a separate paragraph following the list of SI files. In addition, the URL may be provided by citing this material in the manuscript and including a corresponding reference in the References section.

See the Supporting Information section for additional details.

A thorough literature review should be conducted, and the submission should be placed within the context of previously published work, including that which has appeared in JCE . Citations and references should follow the publication style found in The ACS Style Guide . Titles are required for all works cited; please provide complete publication information, including an issue number where applicable, and a DOI. Unpublished work that has been cited should be uploaded for editorial review. Reference call-out numbers in the text should be superscripted sequential Arabic numerals. Journal names are abbreviated according to the Chemical Abstracts Service Source Index (CASSI). Page ranges for articles as well as book citations should also be provided. Rather than providing URLs in the main text of the manuscript, add a citation for each discrete URL and include it sequentially in the References section with an “accessed” statement: “(accessed [Month] 20XX).” References to resources only in a language other than English will be largely inaccessible to JCE readers; including sufficient references to English- language resources will benefit readers and increase the value of the manuscript.

Textual material that might otherwise constitute a footnote or endnote must be incorporated into the References section and presented using complete sentences.

This information is provided to the reviewers during the peer-review process (for Review Only) and is available to readers of the published work (for Publication). Supporting Information must be submitted at the same time as the manuscript. See the list of Acceptable Software by File Designation and confirm that your Supporting Information is viewable .

If the manuscript is accompanied by any supporting information files for publication, these files will be made available to readers. A brief, nonsentence description of the actual contents of each file, including the file type extension, is required. This description should be labeled Supporting Information and should appear before the Acknowledgement and Reference sections.  Examples of sufficient and insufficient descriptions are as follows:

Examples of sufficient descriptions: “Supporting Information: 1 H NMR spectra for all compounds (PDF)” or “Additional experimental details, materials, and methods, including photographs of experimental setup (DOC)”.

Examples of insufficient descriptions: “Supporting Information: Figures S1-S3” or “Additional figures as mentioned in the text”.

When including supporting information for review only, include copies of references that are unpublished or in-press. These files are available only to editors and reviewers.

All ACS journals strongly encourage authors to make the research data underlying their articles publicly available at the time of publication.

Research data is defined as materials and information used in the experiments that enable the validation of the conclusions drawn in the article, including primary data produced by the authors for the study being reported, secondary data reused or analyzed by the authors for the study, and any other materials necessary to reproduce or replicate the results.

The ACS Research Data Policy provides additional information on Data Availability Statements, Data Citation, and Data Repositories.

A well-written paper helps share your results most clearly. ACS Publications’ English Editing Service is designed to help scientists communicate their research effectively. Our subject-matter expert editors will edit your manuscript for grammar, spelling, and other language errors so your ideas are presented at their best.

The quality of illustrations in ACS journals and partner journals depends on the quality of the original files provided by the authors. Figures are not modified or enhanced by journal production staff. All graphics must be prepared and submitted in digital format.

Graphics should be inserted into the main body whenever possible. Please see Appendix 2 for additional information.

Any graphic (figure chart, scheme, or equation) that has appeared in an earlier publication should include a credit line citing the original source. Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to re-use this material.

The impact of your research is not limited to what you can express with words. Tables and figures such as graphs, photographs, illustrations, diagrams, and other visuals can play a significant role in effectively communicating your findings. Our Artwork Editing and Graphical Abstract services generate publication-ready figures and Table of Contents (TOC) graphics that conform to your chosen journal’s specifications. For figures, this includes changes to file type, resolution, color space, font, scale, line weights, and layout (to improve readability and professional appearance). For TOC graphics, our illustrators can work with a rough sketch or concept or help extract the key findings of your manuscript directly for use as a visual summary of your paper.

Preparing for Submission

Manuscripts, graphics, supporting information, and required forms, as well as manuscript revisions, must all be submitted in digital format through ACS Paragon Plus , which requires an ACS ID to log in. Registering for an ACS ID is fast, free, and does not require an ACS membership. Please refer to Appendix 1 for additional information on preparing your submission

JCE considers for publication only original work that has not been previously published and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Material published jointly by the Journal and the Publications Division of the ACS is subject to the terms of the Journal Publishing Agreement, signed on behalf of all authors. Exceptions to this policy are described below.

Preprints, Theses, and Dissertations

JCE authors are allowed to deposit an initial draft of their manuscript in a preprint repository such as ChemRxiv , arXiv , or bioRxiv . Please note that any use of a preprint server needs to be disclosed in the cover letter during submission and, as appropriate, state how the manuscript has been adjusted/updated between deposition and submission. Upon publication in JCE , authors should add a link from the preprint to the published article via the Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Some preprint servers, including ChemRxiv and bioRxiv, add this link for authors automatically after publication. The ACS Publications policy on theses and dissertations is available online .

Proceedings of Conferences and Symposia

Publication of a preprint or extended abstract in an ACS division meeting preprint book, in either print or electronic format, does not preclude consideration of a manuscript for publication, provided that the manuscript includes significant new information and data beyond what was in the preprint or extended abstract. It is the author’s responsibility to provide the Editor with copies of any relevant preprint(s). The Editors will make the decision on the suitability of the paper for publication. Upon publication in JCE , authors are advised to add a link from the preprint to the published paper via the citation and Digital Object Identifier (DOI).

JCE will consider for publication a paper that has been posted on an electronic site available to the general public, provided that the site is the personal site of the author or that of a funding agency (i.e., government or non-profit foundation) and is not connected to a commercial site that holds copyright to the material. Authors must notify JCE at the time of submission if the material has been available on the Internet or equivalent electronic media.

Initial Processing

JCE editors initially evaluate each submitted manuscript to determine whether it should be sent for peer review based on its meeting publication requirements and adherence to the stated criteria for its Manuscript Type. Submissions that do not comply with protocols will be returned to authors (or “unsubmitted”).

The Journal does not conduct preassessments prior to formal submission, nor are presubmission inquiries regarding proposals considered outside the ACS Paragon Plus environment. The JCE Editorial Office is unable to provide information pertaining to analytics. Authors can track statistics pertaining to their own articles in the ACS Researcher Resources .

Using Material from Other Sources

The American Chemical Society has strict policies regarding the use of material from other sources. Permissions are not needed for material that the author produced or that is copyrighted by ACS. Authors must obtain permissions from copyright holders to use figures, illustrations, or photographs from other sources that appear in the author’s manuscript and Supporting Information, even if the author produced the content originally. Documentation must be uploaded into ACS Paragon Plus before a manuscript can be sent to reviewers. See the Copyright and Permissions section for additional information.

Appropriate Material

The following material is suggested for use:

• Photographs, illustrations, and figures created by the authors. Model releases  must be signed by people who are identifiable in photographs, including authors.
• Figures for which ACS owns the copyright and that have been published previously in an ACS journal. Citations and credit lines are needed.
• Work for which formal permission has been obtained (including student work; see the Use of Student Work section). Authors must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Credit lines are needed.

Inappropriate Material

The following material is inappropriate:

• Logos (including commercial and institutional logos, logos on spectra, and logos shown on instrumentation in photographs). These images should be obscured by blurring, cropping, or masking.
• Trademarked product names or brand names (whether in images or in the text). These names should be replaced by generic names wherever possible.
• Stock photography, clip art, and cartoons (even if the images have been paid for).
• Images of currency (paper or coins), postage stamps, or flags from any country.
• Screenshots (or “captures”) from software companies, unless permission has been obtained from the software producer (including those that provide freely available material). Interfaces are considered to be proprietary. Permission also is required for screenshots showing ACS content and content from YouTube and similar Web entities. Note that screenshots cannot show logos, brand names, or other content that has been copyrighted elsewhere.
• Material from Wikipedia, Flickr, or similar websites.
• Creative Commons content. Creative Commons licenses should be carefully scrutinized. Some versions of the license permit the use of material for commercial purposes; others do not. Use of material in ACS journals is considered commercial because ACS sells subscriptions (“educational” use does not qualify). It is the responsibility of authors to carefully review the provisions of Creative Commons licenses, to follow any stipulations of the license, and to provide documentation to the journal's editorial office summarizing the license provisions and the ways in which the requirements have been met (in a letter, for example).
• Material from the Internet (unless produced by the author). Images pulled from the Internet cannot be used without permission from the original source, even if the source is cited.
• Art of unknown provenance that cannot be attributed to a specific source, especially that which has appeared in “old” publications.
• YouTube videos not created by the authors. Links may be included rather than providing videos.

Use of Student Work

If examples of student work (including anonymous work) are provided in the manuscript or the Supporting Information, documentation indicating that students have granted their consent should be uploaded along with the submission files. Documentation may include institutional review board (IRB) forms or permission statements from the students themselves. Full student names should not appear in the manuscript or Supporting Information.

Requests to reproduce content published in JCE are handled via the RightsLink permission system.

Peer Review

Those manuscripts that meet the initial requirements are assigned to an Associate Editor (AE). The AE sends the manuscript to reviewers for them to evaluate according to the following criteria:

• Scholarship (scientific and scholarly rigor)
• Novelty (originality, innovation, creativity)
• Pedagogy (educational relevance, insight)
• Utility (usefulness to readers, rationale)
• Presentation (organization, comprehensiveness, readability)

Reviewers may recommend “publish as is”, “minor revision”, “major revision”, or “do not publish”. After the reviewers have submitted their comments and suggestions, the AE evaluates their arguments and recommendations and makes a decision whether to approve, request a minor or major revision, or reject the manuscript. The AE adjudicates based on the reviewer comments; however, the reviews are not to be considered “votes”, and the review process is not one of “majority rules”. Very few manuscripts are published as originally submitted; nearly all are recommended for revision and are improved in response to reviewer suggestions before being accepted and published.

Because of the many submissions the Journal receives—and because manuscripts are unique and require varying levels of attention—definitive processing times cannot be guaranteed. Authors are notified once their manuscripts proceed to the next stage.

Types of Decisions

Decision types include revision, reject and resubmit, reject, and accept. Decisions are based on reviews and assessments made by the JCE Editorial Office. All resubmissions and revisions must be formally processed via the ACS Paragon Plus environment.

The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) or AE may request a minor or major revision at any point during the peer- review process. The revised manuscript must be accompanied by a cover letter that acknowledges the revision as well as a separate author response document that contains a detailed, itemized list of changes made to the manuscript and reasons why a reviewer’s suggestion or concern does not merit a change. Reiterate reviewer comments and follow each with a response. In this way, the editors can refer to a single document rather than having to revisit separate documents. The author’s response may also be entered or pasted into a text box provided by ACS Paragon Plus for this purpose. Ensure that the latest files have been uploaded and that there are no extraneous files. Files showing changes may be uploaded for review purposes. However, “clean” files should be provided. If the track changes feature in Word has been used, ensure for the manuscript file and Supporting Information file(s) that all changes have been accepted and comments resolved, and that the track changes feature has been turned off.

Reject and Resubmit

The EIC or AE may reject a submission with editorial or external peer review, yet invite a revision based on the merit of the submission. Typically, the decision letter will contain a list of suggested improvements. A thorough cover letter and a document containing itemized responses to reviewer comments must accompany the resubmission. Previous manuscript identification numbers should be referenced, and the changes that have been made to the manuscript should be clearly stated in the cover letter. The revised manuscript will be handled as a new submission and will be given a new receipt date.

The EIC or AE may reject a manuscript based on either editorial or external peer review at any point during the peer-review process after determining that the submission is not within the scope or objectives of the Journal. If there is no invitation to resubmit, permission from the AE should first be sought before resubmitting a previously rejected manuscript. Previous manuscript identification numbers should be referenced, and the changes that have been made to the manuscript should be clearly stated in the cover letter.

When the EIC or AE is satisfied with the submission, it is formally accepted, and the files are forwarded to ACS for production and publication. ACS contacts authors regarding page proofs, which should be reviewed carefully. After page proofs are approved, the manuscript will be published online as an Article ASAP available through the ACS website. Once a manuscript appears on the Web it is considered published. Any change to the manuscript will need to be submitted to the JCE Editorial Office as an Addition and Correction.

When submitting their manuscripts to ACS Paragon Plus, authors may suggest reviewers and are encouraged to provide the names, affiliations, e-mail addresses, and a few words explaining their qualifications to review the manuscript. These reviewers’ names will be added to the unranked list of suggested reviewers for the submission. Editors may choose to invite any, all, or none of the suggested reviewers to evaluate the submission. Including suggested reviewers assists the Journal in expanding its reviewer pool. Authors are encouraged to avoid suggesting reviewers from the authors’ institutions. Do not suggest reviewers who may have a real or perceived conflict of interest . Whenever possible, suggest academic email addresses rather than personal email addresses.

If your submission is declined for publication by this journal, the editors might deem your work to be better suited for another ACS Publications journal or partner journal and suggest that the authors consider transferring the submission. Manuscript Transfer simplifies and shortens the process of submitting to another ACS journal or partner journal, as all the coauthors, suggested reviewers, manuscript files, and responses to submission questions are copied by ACS Paragon Plus to the new draft submission. Authors are free to accept or decline the transfer offer.

Note that each journal is editorially independent. Transferring a manuscript is not a guarantee that the manuscript will be accepted, as the final publication decision will belong to the editor of the next journal.

PRODUCTION AND PUBLICATION

Correction of the galley proofs is the responsibility of the Corresponding Author. The Corresponding Author of an accepted manuscript will receive e-mail notification and complete instructions when page proofs are available for review via ACS Direct Correct . Extensive or important changes on page proofs, including changes to the title or list of authors, are subject to review by the editor.

It is the responsibility of the Corresponding Author to ensure that all authors listed on the manuscript agree with the changes made on the proofs. Galley proofs should be returned within 48 hours in order to ensure timely publication of the manuscript.

Accepted manuscripts will be published on the ACS Publications Web site as soon as page proofs are corrected and all author concerns are resolved. The first date on which the document is published on the Web is considered the publication date.

Publication of manuscripts on the Web may occur weeks in advance of the cover date of the issue of publication. Authors should take this into account when planning their patent and intellectual property activities related to a document and should ensure that all patent information is available at the time of first publication, whether ASAP or issue publication.

All articles published ahead of print receive a unique Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, which is used to cite the manuscript before and after the paper appears in an issue.

Manuscripts will be published on the “ASAP Articles” page on the web as soon as page proofs are corrected and all author concerns are resolved. ASAP publication usually occurs within a few working days of receipt of page proof corrections, which can be several weeks in advance of the cover date of the issue.

The American Chemical Society follows guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when considering any ethical concerns regarding a published article, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern.

Additions and Corrections

Additions and Corrections may be requested by the author(s) or initiated by the Editor to address important issues or correct errors and omissions of consequence that arise after publication of an article. All Additions and Corrections are subject to approval by the Editor, and should bring new and directly relevant information and corrections that fix scientific facts. Minor corrections and additions will not be published. Readers who detect errors of consequence in the work of others should contact the corresponding author of that work.

Additions and Corrections must be submitted as new manuscripts via ACS Paragon Plus by the Corresponding Author for publication in the “Addition/Correction” section of the Journal. The corresponding author should obtain approval from all coauthors prior to submitting or provide evidence that such approval has been solicited. The manuscript should include the original article title and author list, citation including DOI, and details of the correction.

Retractions

Articles may be retracted for scientific or ethical reasons and may be requested by the article author(s) or by the journal Editor(s), but are ultimately published at the discretion of the Editor. Articles that contain seriously flawed or erroneous data such that their findings and conclusions cannot be relied upon may be retracted in order to correct the scientific record. When an article is retracted, a notice of Retraction will be published containing information about the reason for the Retraction. The originally published article will remain online except in extraordinary circumstances (e.g. where deemed legally necessary, or if the availability of the published content poses public health risks).

Expressions of Concern

Expressions of Concern may be issued at the discretion of the Editor if:

• there is inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors;
• there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case;
• an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been, or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive;
• an investigation is underway but a judgment will not be available for a considerable time.

Upon completion of any related investigation, and when a final determination is made about the outcome of the article, the Expression of Concern may be replaced with a Retraction notice or Correction.

At ACS Publications, we know it is important for you to be able to share your peer reviewed, published work with colleagues in the global community of scientists. As sharing on sites known as scholarly collaboration networks (SCNs) is becoming increasingly prevalent in today’s scholarly research ecosystem, we would like to remind you of the many ways in which you, a valued ACS author, can share your published work .

Publishing open access makes it easy to share your work with friends, colleagues, and family members. In addition, ACS Publications makes it easy to share your newly published research with ACS Articles on Request (see below). Don’t forget to promote your research and related data on social media, at conferences, and through scholarly communication networks. Increase the impact of your research using the following resources: Altmetrics , Figshare , ACS Certified Deposit

When your article is published in an ACS journal or partner journal, corresponding authors are provided with a link that offers up to 50 free digital prints of the final published work. This link is valid for the first 12 months following online publication, and can be shared via email or an author’s website. After one year, the access restrictions to your article will be lifted, and you can share the Articles on Request URL on social media and other channels. To access all your Articles on Request links, log in to your ACS Researcher Resources account and visit the “My Published Manuscripts” page.

Article , journal , and commercial reprints are available to order.

Appendix 1: PREPARING FOR SUBMISSION

We’ve developed ACS’ publishing and editorial policies in consultation with the research communities that we serve, including authors and librarians. Browse our policies below to learn more.

Ethical Guidelines

ACS editors have provided Ethical Guidelines for persons engaged in the publication of chemical research—specifically, for editors, authors, and reviewers. Each journal also has a specific policy on prior publication .

OFAC Compliance

As a U.S.-based non-profit organization, the American Chemical Society (ACS) is required to comply with U.S. sanctions laws and regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). While these laws and regulations permit U.S.-based publishers like ACS to engage in publishing-related activities with authors located in sanctioned regions in many cases, ACS may be prohibited under U.S. law from engaging in publishing-related activities in some cases, including, but not limited to, instances where an author or the institution with which an author is affiliated is located in a particular sanctioned region or has been designated by OFAC as a Specially Designated National (SDN) pursuant to certain U.S. sanctions programs. ACS reserves the right to refrain from engaging in any publishing-related activities that ACS determines in its sole discretion may be in violation of U.S. law.

Safety Considerations

Authors must emphasize any unexpected, new, and/or significant hazards or risks associated with the reported work. This information should be in the Experimental Section of a full article and included in the main text of a letter. Statement examples can be found in the Safety Statement Style Sheet  and additional information on communicating safety information from the  ACS Guide to Scholarly Communication is freely available here .

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

A statement describing any financial conflicts of interest or lack thereof is published in each ACS journal and partner journal article.

During the submission process, the Corresponding Author must provide a statement on behalf of all authors of the manuscript, describing all potential sources of bias, including affiliations, funding sources, and financial or management relationships, that may constitute conflicts of interest. If the manuscript is accepted, the statement will be published in the final article.

If the manuscript is accepted and no conflict of interest has been declared, the following statement will be published in the final article: “The authors declare no competing financial interest.”

In publishing only original research, ACS is committed to deterring plagiarism, including self-plagiarism. ACS Publications uses CrossCheck's iThenticate software to screen submitted manuscripts for similarity to published material. Note that your manuscript may be screened during the submission process.

Further information about plagiarism can be found in Part B of the Ethical Guidelines to Publication of Chemical Research . See also the press release regarding ACS' participation in the CrossCheck initiative.

Authorship, Author List, and Coauthor Notification

Authors are required to obtain the consent of all their coauthors prior to submitting a manuscript. The submitting author accepts the responsibility of notifying all coauthors that the manuscript is being submitted.

During manuscript submission, the submitting author must provide contact information (full name, email address, institutional affiliation, and mailing address) for all of the coauthors. Because all of the author names are automatically imported into the electronic Journal Publishing Agreement , the names must be entered into ACS Paragon Plus. (Note that coauthors are not required to register in ACS Paragon Plus.) Author affiliation should reflect where the work was completed, even if the author has since left that institution. Authors may include a note with a current address if their institution has changed since the work was completed.

To expedite the processing of your manuscript, please format your author and affiliation information according the guidelines in this link: https://pubsapp.acs.org/paragonplus/submission/author-address-information.pdf .

Criteria for authorship can be found in Part B of the Ethical Guidelines to Publication of Chemical Research . Artificial intelligence (AI) tools do not qualify for authorship. The use of AI tools for text or image generation should be disclosed in the manuscript within the Acknowledgment section with a description of when and how the tools were used. For more substantial use cases or descriptions of AI tool use, authors should provide full details within the Methods or other appropriate section of the manuscript.

If any change in authorship is necessary after a manuscript has been submitted, confirmation is required that all of the authors (including those being added or removed) have been notified and have agreed to the change. To provide this confirmation, authors are asked to complete and sign an authorship change form and provide the completed form to the appropriate editorial office.

Authors with a single name:  If you, or any of your coauthors, have only one name, please follow these steps for proper submission to ACS Paragon Plus:

• First (Given) Name Field: Enter an asterisk (*) into the "First (Given) Name" field.
• Last (Family) Name Field: Enter your single name into the "Last (Family) Name" field.

If your paper is accepted, the asterisk (*) will be removed from the published version of the paper.

Patent Activities and Intellectual Property

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all patent activities and intellectual property issues are satisfactorily resolved prior to first publication (ASAP or in issue). Acceptance and publication will not be delayed for pending or unresolved issues of this nature.

Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID)

Authors submitting manuscript revisions are required to provide their own personal, validated ORCID iD before completing the submission, if an ORCID iD is not already associated with their ACS Paragon Plus user profiles. This ID may be provided during original manuscript submission or when submitting the manuscript revision. All authors are strongly encouraged to register for an ORCID iD, a unique researcher identifier. The ORCID iD will be displayed in the published article for any author on a manuscript who has a validated ORCID iD associated with ACS when the manuscript is accepted.

ORCID iDs should not be typed into the manuscript. ACS publishes only those ORCID iDs that have been properly verified and linked before the manuscript is accepted . After your ORCID iD is linked, it will be displayed automatically in all subsequently accepted manuscripts for any/all ACS journals. We do not publish ORCID iDs provided during proof review or via other communications after a manuscript is accepted for publication.

With an ORCID iD, you can create a profile of your research activities to distinguish yourself from other researchers with similar names, and make it easier for your colleagues to find your publications. If you do not yet have an ORCID iD, or you wish to associate your existing ORCID iD with your ACS Paragon Plus account, you may do so by clicking on “Edit Your Profile” from your ACS Paragon Plus account homepage and following the ORCID-related links. Learn more at www.orcid.org .

Copyright and Permissions

To obtain forms and guidelines for completing the Journal Publishing Agreement or obtaining permissions from copyright owners, and to explore a Copyright Learning Module for chemists, click here .

Funder Reporting Requirement

Authors are required to report funding sources and grant/award numbers. Enter ALL sources of funding for ALL authors in BOTH the Funder Registry Tool in ACS Paragon Plus and in your manuscript to meet this requirement.

Open Access Compliance

ACS offers options by which authors can fulfill the requirements for open access and deposition into repositories for funded research. Visit our ACS Open Science site to see how to fulfill requirements for specific funders  and to find out if you are eligible to publish under a Read + Publish agreement between ACS and your institution. You can also find out more about Open Access Compliance and ACS Open Science initiatives .

Diversity and Inclusion Statement

During manuscript submission, ACS journal authors have the option to submit a statement sharing information related to diversity and inclusion that is relevant for their paper. If supplying a diversity and inclusion statement, the corresponding author must provide this on behalf of all authors of the manuscript during the submission process. These statements include but are not limited to analysis of citation diversity and acknowledgment of indigenous land on which research was conducted. Statements expressing political beliefs are not permitted and may be removed by the journal office. All statements are subject to final review by the Editor.

• Citation Diversity Statement: The citation diversity statement should appear in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript. ACS recommends including the following: (1) the importance of citation diversity, (2) the proportion of citations by gender and race/ethnicity for the first and last authors, (3) the method used to determine those proportions and its limitations, and (4) steps taken to by the authors to improve citation diversity in the article. We recognize that one limitation of the current methods is that it cannot account for intersex, non-binary, and transgender people, or Indigenous and mixed-race authors. (Adapted from BMES/Springer Guidelines )
• Land acknowledgment: The land acknowledgment statement should appear in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript. The statement should link to the institutions’ formal land acknowledgments on which the research took place, if possible. Further guidance for creating these statements can be found here: https://nativegov.org/news/a-guide-to-indigenous-land-acknowledgment/ .

Appendix 2: Preparing Graphics

Digital graphics pasted into manuscripts should have the following minimum resolutions:

• Black and white line art, 1200 dpi
• Grayscale art, 600 dpi
• Color art, 300 dpi

Graphics must fit a one- or two-column format. Single-column graphics can be sized up to 240 points wide (3.33 in.) and double-column graphics must be sized between 300 and 504 points (4.167 in. and 7 in.). The maximum depth for all graphics is 660 points (9.167 in.) including the caption (allow 12 pts. For each line of caption text). Lettering should be no smaller than 4.5 points in the final published format. The text should be legible when the graphic is viewed full-size. Helvetica or Arial fonts work well for lettering. Lines should be no thinner than 0.5 point.

Color may be used to enhance the clarity of complex structures, figures, spectra, and schemes, etc., and color reproduction of graphics is provided at no additional cost to the author. Graphics intended to appear in black and white or grayscale should not be submitted in color.

Type of Graphics

Table of contents (toc)/abstract graphic.

Consult the Guidelines for Table of Contents/Abstract Graphics for specifications.

Our team of subject-matter experts and graphical designers can also help generate a compelling TOC graphic to convey your key findings. Learn more about our Graphical Abstract service .

A caption giving the figure number and a brief description must be included below each figure. The caption should be understandable without reference to the text. It is preferable to place any key to symbols used in the artwork itself, not in the caption. Ensure that any symbols and abbreviations used in the text agree with those in the artwork.

Charts (groups of structures that do not show reactions) may have a brief caption describing their contents.

Each table must have a brief (one phrase or sentence) title that describes the contents. The title should be understandable without reference to the text. Details should be put in footnotes, not in the title. Tables should be used when the data cannot be presented clearly in the narrative, when many numbers must be presented, or when more meaningful inter-relationships can be conveyed by the tabular format. Tables should supplement, not duplicate, information presented in the text and figures. Tables should be simple and concise.

Each scheme (sequences of reactions) may have a brief caption describing its contents.

Chemical Structures

Chemical structures should be produced with the use of a drawing program such as ChemDraw.

Journal of Chemical Education  authors are encouraged to submit images to be considered for use on the journal’s front cover or Supplementary Covers at the time of submission of their revised manuscript. If your article is accepted for publication, your suggestion may also be selected for use on one of the journal’s covers. Images chosen for the front cover will be published at no cost to the author. If your art is selected for the front cover, ACS will send you information about how to request one complimentary 18” by 24” printed poster featuring your work.

Authors should submit high-resolution, engaging, relevant images to be considered for use as cover art, including images showing students (and people generally) engaged in chemistry. Table of Contents graphics are rarely suitable as cover art. Authors must ensure that all images for consideration have been created by them or, if not, that the appropriate permissions for commercial use have been secured.

Image files should be submitted as TIF, JPG, PNG, or EPS files (not PDF or PPT) with a resolution of at least 300 dpi for pixel-based images. Cover art should be 8.19 in. × 10 in. (20.80 cm × 25.4 cm), and submission of “layered” artwork is encouraged. Please note that the journal title will cover the top 2 in. (5.08 cm) of the image. Authors should submit the cover image, along with a short, clear legend (less than 50 words) explaining the image, as supplementary files to ACS Paragon Plus with their revised manuscript

If you wish to be considered only for the front cover, and not a paid supplementary cover, please respond NO accordingly to the Journal Covers question in ACS Paragon Plus. For more information on the Supplementary Covers program, please see this webpage . All art submitted for consideration for a supplementary cover will also be considered for a front cover.

Web Enhanced Objects (WEO)

The Web editions of ACS journals allow readers to view multimedia attachments such as animations and movies that complement understanding of the research being reported.

WEOs should be uploaded in ACS Paragon Plus with ‘Web Enhanced Object’ selected as the file designation. Consult the list of compatible WEO formats .

1155 Sixteenth Street N.W. Washington, DC 20036

京ICP备13047075

Copyright © 2017 American Chemical Society

• Journals A–Z
• C&EN Archives
• ACS Legacy Archives

User Resources

• ACS Members
• Authors & Reviewers
• Website Demos
• Privacy Policy
• Mobile Site
• For Advertisers
• Institutional Sales
• Connect with ACS Publications

• DOI: 10.1079/cabicompendium.47256
• Corpus ID: 253960301

Rhododendron lepidotum

• Published in CABI Compendium 7 January 2022
• Environmental Science, Biology

Related Papers

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers