Publication support

What publication support is

A manuscript can fail for reasons that have little to do with the science: it was sent to a journal that does not publish that kind of paper, it breaks the journal's formatting or reporting requirements, the cover letter does not say why the paper matters, or a missing declaration delays the process. Publication support addresses these practical failures. It sits between the research and the journal, and it helps authors present sound work in the way editors and reviewers expect.

It is support and not substitution. The authors decide what the paper says, which journal to try and how to respond to criticism, and they are accountable for the content, as described in the research integrity and authorship statement. Support does not include promises about acceptance, speed or impact, or any attempt to influence an editor or reviewer.

What the service includes

Choosing a journal

The right journal is one whose readers need the paper and whose editors are likely to see it as within scope. A good fit is judged by several things. The scope and the article types should include the kind of paper. Journals vary in their openness to systematic reviews, meta-analyses, case reports or methodological work, and a mismatch is a common cause of quick rejection. The reporting guideline and any registration the journal requires should be met. The audience should be the one the authors want to reach. Indexing in the databases that matter to the field affects discoverability, and the peer-review model, the typical timeline and the costs, including any article processing charge, affect practicality.

The reputation of the journal needs checking. Predatory journals charge fees while offering little or no real editorial and peer review, and papers published in them can damage an author's credibility. There is no single definition or list, so assessment looks at several features: transparent editorial board and policies, indexing that can be verified in the databases themselves, membership of recognized publishing bodies, clear fees disclosed before submission, and the experience of colleagues. Guidance such as the Think. Check. Submit. checklist helps. Journal selection is covered in the guide to choosing a journal.

Reporting guidelines and checklists

Most journals now expect a completed reporting checklist at submission, and editors use it to judge whether a paper gives readers what they need. Which checklist applies depends on the design: PRISMA 2020 for systematic reviews, MOOSE for meta-analyses of observational studies, CONSORT for randomized trials, STROBE for observational studies, STARD for diagnostic accuracy, CARE for case reports, among others catalogued by the EQUATOR Network. The checklist is a tool for the authors, who should complete it by finding each item in the manuscript and, where an item is missing, adding it. A checklist completed after the fact without changing the manuscript has little value, and reviewers notice. See reporting guidelines.

Formatting and the instructions for authors

Each journal has instructions for authors that set the structure of the paper, word and reference limits, the style of references and headings, rules for tables, figures and supplementary files, the abstract format and requirements for statements. Following them exactly is a matter of courtesy and also of efficiency, because many submission systems return non-compliant papers without review. The work includes reformatting for a new journal after a rejection, which is routine, as well as checks of the reference list against the sources, consistency of numbers between the abstract, the text and the tables, and the quality of figures at the required resolution.

The cover letter

The cover letter is read by the editor before the manuscript. It should say, briefly, what question the paper addresses, what was done, what was found, why it matters to this journal's readers, and that the paper is not under consideration elsewhere. It discloses relevant matters such as related publications, potential conflicts of interest, and the use of any registered protocol. It should not overstate the importance of the findings or suggest reviewers who are not at arm's length, and it should not make claims that the paper does not support. A letter that is honest, concrete and short serves the authors better than a promotional one.

Declarations and statements

Journals require statements that only the authors can make truthfully. These typically cover ethics approval and consent, trial or review registration, funding and the role of the funder, conflicts of interest, data and code availability, the contribution of each author and acknowledgments, including help received with writing or analysis. Support can include drafting the statements from information the authors provide and checking them against the journal's requirements, but the authors confirm every statement. The ICMJE recommendations describe what is expected in most medical journals, and many journals in other fields have adopted similar rules. Authors are also expected to follow the journal's policy on the use of artificial intelligence tools, and our position is set out in the AI-use policy.

Preprints, open access and funder requirements

Several decisions sit beside the choice of journal. Many journals allow authors to post a preprint before or during peer review, but policies differ, so the journal's rules are checked first. Open access publishing can be required by funders and institutions, some of which, for example under Plan S, expect immediate open access to the results of the research they support, and this can limit the choice of journal or require a particular license or repository. Fees for open access, known as article processing charges, are set by the journal and may be covered by an institution or funder agreement, so it is worth finding out before submitting whether any are payable and by whom. Data and code availability statements, repositories and the license of the published article should be settled before submission and not discovered afterwards.

Authors, affiliations and identifiers

Submission systems ask for details that are easy to get wrong in the rush: the order of authors, the corresponding author, each author's affiliation at the time of the work, the funding acknowledgments and the ORCID identifiers, which many journals now require at least for the corresponding author. Disagreements about order and contributions are best settled by the authors before submission, using the journal's criteria and, where a contributor taxonomy such as CRediT is used, a shared description of who did what. Changes of authorship after submission usually need the written consent of every author and an explanation, and some journals do not allow them once a paper is accepted, so it is much easier to settle the matter first.

Submission and what happens after

Submission is done by the authors through the journal's system, and support can include checking the files and the entries before upload. The journal then screens the paper, and the editor decides whether to send it for review. The possible outcomes are rejection without review, rejection after review, a request for revision, which may be minor or major, and acceptance. Most papers are rejected at least once, and a rejection is not a verdict on the work. Rejections are best used to improve the paper and, if the reviewers have raised reasonable points, to address them before submitting elsewhere.

If revision is requested, the response to the reviewers matters as much as the changes. A point-by-point letter, a tracked manuscript, and additional analyses where they are warranted are standard, and the process is described under peer-review revision support.

Deliverables

Optional extension: preparing the paper itself

How long does it take?

Preparation can take days for a paper that is nearly ready, or weeks where the manuscript needs substantial work, the reporting checklist reveals gaps, or the journal has demanding requirements. After submission, the timing is set by the journal, and peer review commonly takes weeks to months. If there is a fixed deadline, such as a funder requirement or a thesis regulation, tell us at the start so that the scope can be planned around it.

Frequently asked questions