Submission guidelines

Our 3-step submission process, before you submit.

Now you’ve identified a journal to submit to, there are a few things you should be familiar with before you submit.

  • Make sure you are submitting to the most suitable journal - Aims and scope
  • Understand the costs and funding options - Fees and funding
  • Make sure your manuscript is accurate and readable - Language editing services
  • Understand the copyright agreement - Copyright

Ready to submit

To give your manuscript the best chance of publication, follow these policies and formatting guidelines.

  • Check the quality of your writing - Free Language check
  • General formatting rules for all article types - Preparing your manuscript
  • Make sure your submission is complete - Prepare supporting information
  • Copyright and license agreement - Conditions of publication
  • Read and agree to our Editorial Policies - Editorial policies

Submit and promote

After acceptance, we provide support so your article gains maximum impact in the scientific community and beyond.

Please note that manuscript can only be submitted by an author of the manuscript and may not be submitted by a third party. 

  • Who decides whether my work will be accepted? - Peer-review policy
  • Want to submit to a different journal? - Manuscript transfers
  • Spreading the word - Promoting your publication
  • Submit manuscript

New Content Item

Owned by the  Association for International Promotion & Study in Tumors (APSIT)

Regina Elena NCI

Official journal of the  Regina Elena National Cancer Institute , Scientific Director Gennaro Ciliberto, Rome, Italy

  • Editorial Board
  • Manuscript editing services
  • Instructions for Editors
  • Sign up for article alerts and news from this journal

Annual Journal Metrics

2022 Citation Impact 11.3 - 2-year Impact Factor 11.5 - 5-year Impact Factor 1.870 - SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper) 2.413 - SJR (SCImago Journal Rank)

2023 Speed 4 days submission to first editorial decision for all manuscripts (Median) 100 days submission to accept (Median)

2023 Usage  3,003,080 downloads 3,022 Altmetric mentions

  • More about our metrics

Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research

ISSN: 1756-9966

  • Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
  • General enquiries: [email protected]

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • View all journals
  • Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts

For Authors

Thank you for your interest in writing for Nature Reviews . These guidelines are intended to help you at all stages, from deciding whether to accept an invitation to write for Nature Reviews, to writing, revising and checking the proofs of your manuscript.

Why write for Nature Reviews?

Find out why you should consider writing for Nature Reviews and how our team will assist you.

Preparing your submission

All you need to know about the submission process, including article format instructions.

Editorial process

Read this section to learn more about our editorial process, from commissioning to publication.

Relationship to other Nature Research journals

Information on the relationship between this journal and other Nature-branded journals can be found in this section.

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

clinical cancer research author guidelines

clinical cancer research author guidelines

Submission guidelines

Types of papers, manuscript submission, scientific style, statements & declarations, artwork and illustrations guidelines, supplementary information (si), editing services, ethical responsibilities of authors, authorship principles, compliance with ethical standards, disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, research involving human participants, their data or biological material, informed consent, research data policy and data availability statements, after acceptance, open access publishing.

  • Mistakes to avoid during manuscript preparation

Instructions for Authors

  • Original Articles
  • Review Articles
  • Letter to the Editor
  • Case Based Review
  • Matters Arising

• Original Articles

Manuscripts must contain a structured abstract (max. 250 words) including headings: Purpose (stating the main purposes and research question), Methods, Results, and Conclusion. Word limit 5,000 words, no more than 6 tables and figures (combined total), no more than 60 references.

• Review Articles

Manuscripts must contain an unstructured abstract (max. 250 words). Word limit 5,000 words, no more than 4 tables and figures (combined total), no more than 100 references.

• Letter to the Editor

No abstract. Word limit 750 words, no more than of 1 table or figure (combined total), no more than 10 references.

• Case Based Review

A case report of significant clinical interest incorporating a literature review in an area of new knowledge. Case reports on different aspects of precision medicine are specifically welcome. Manuscripts should contain an unstructured abstract of up to 250 words, an Introduction (incorporating the literature review), the Case Presentation, and a Discussion. Word limit 3,500 words; 50 references; no more than 5 figures.

• Matters Arising

Matters Arising articles are formal post-publication scientific commentaries on papers published in the journal; they can include either challenges or clarifications of the published work. No abstract, word limit 750 words, no tables or figures, no more than 5 references, no more than 3 authors.

Submission of a manuscript implies: that the work described has not been published before; that it is not under consideration for publication anywhere else; that its publication has been approved by all co-authors, if any, as well as by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – at the institute where the work has been carried out. The publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.

Permissions

Authors wishing to include figures, tables, or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) for both the print and online format and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.

Online Submission

Please follow the hyperlink “Submit manuscript” and upload all of your manuscript files following the instructions given on the screen.

Source Files

Please ensure you provide all relevant editable source files at every submission and revision. Failing to submit a complete set of editable source files will result in your article not being considered for review. For your manuscript text please always submit in common word processing formats such as .docx or LaTeX.

Submitting Declarations

Please note that Author Contribution information and Competing Interest information must be provided at submission via the submission interface. Only the information submitted via the interface will be used in the final published version. Please make sure that if you are an editorial board member and also a listed author that you also declare this information in the Competing Interest section of the interface.

Please see the relevant sections in the submission guidelines for further information on these statements as well as possible other mandatory statements.

This publication requires that the corresponding author provides his/her ORCiD ID before proceeding with submission.

For more information about this journal’s ORCiD policy, please visit the ORCID FAQ

Additional Information for Manuscript Submission

Authors must cite the DOI of a pre-print publication as a footnote to the title, if applicable.

Please make sure your title page contains the following information.

The title should be concise and informative.

Author information

  • The name(s) of the author(s)
  • The affiliation(s) of the author(s), i.e. institution, (department), city, (state), country
  • A clear indication and an active e-mail address of the corresponding author
  • If available, the 16-digit ORCID of the author(s)

If address information is provided with the affiliation(s) it will also be published.

For authors that are (temporarily) unaffiliated we will only capture their city and country of residence, not their e-mail address unless specifically requested.

Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT , do not currently satisfy our authorship criteria . Notably an attribution of authorship carries with it accountability for the work, which cannot be effectively applied to LLMs. Use of an LLM should be properly documented in the Methods section (and if a Methods section is not available, in a suitable alternative part) of the manuscript.

Please provide a structured abstract of 150 to 250 words which should be divided into the following sections:

  • Purpose (stating the main purposes and research question)

For life science journals only (when applicable)

  • Trial registration number and date of registration for prospectively registered trials
  • Trial registration number and date of registration followed by “retrospectively registered”, for retrospectively registered trials

Please provide 4 to 6 keywords which can be used for indexing purposes.

Text Formatting

Manuscripts should be submitted in Word.

  • Use a normal, plain font (e.g., 10-point Times Roman) for text.
  • Use italics for emphasis.
  • Use the automatic page numbering function to number the pages.
  • Do not use field functions.
  • Use tab stops or other commands for indents, not the space bar.
  • Use the table function, not spreadsheets, to make tables.
  • Use the equation editor or MathType for equations.
  • Save your file in docx format (Word 2007 or higher) or doc format (older Word versions).

Manuscripts with mathematical content can also be submitted in LaTeX. We recommend using Springer Nature’s LaTeX template .

Please use no more than three levels of displayed headings.

Abbreviations

Abbreviations should be defined at first mention and used consistently thereafter.

Footnotes can be used to give additional information, which may include the citation of a reference included in the reference list. They should not consist solely of a reference citation, and they should never include the bibliographic details of a reference. They should also not contain any figures or tables.

Footnotes to the text are numbered consecutively; those to tables should be indicated by superscript lower-case letters (or asterisks for significance values and other statistical data). Footnotes to the title or the authors of the article are not given reference symbols.

Always use footnotes instead of endnotes.

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments of people, grants, funds, etc. should be placed in a separate section on the title page. The names of funding organizations should be written in full.

Generic names of drugs and pesticides are preferred; if trade names are used, the generic name should be given at first mention.

Cite references in the text by name and year in parentheses. Some examples:

  • Negotiation research spans many disciplines (Thompson 1990).
  • This result was later contradicted by Becker and Seligman (1996).
  • This effect has been widely studied (Abbott 1991; Barakat et al. 1995a, b; Kelso and Smith 1998; Medvec et al. 1999, 2000).

Reference list

The list of references should only include works that are cited in the text and that have been published or accepted for publication. Personal communications and unpublished works should only be mentioned in the text.

Reference list entries should be alphabetized by the last names of the first author of each work. Please alphabetize according to the following rules: 1) For one author, by name of author, then chronologically; 2) For two authors, by name of author, then name of coauthor, then chronologically; 3) For more than two authors, by name of first author, then chronologically.

If available, please always include DOIs as full DOI links in your reference list (e.g. “https://doi.org/abc”).

Gamelin FX, Baquet G, Berthoin S, Thevenet D, Nourry C, Nottin S, Bosquet L (2009) Effect of high intensity intermittent training on heart rate variability in prepubescent children. Eur J Appl Physiol 105:731-738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-008-0955-8

Ideally, the names of all authors should be provided, but the usage of “et al” in long author lists will also be accepted:

Smith J, Jones M Jr, Houghton L et al (1999) Future of health insurance. N Engl J Med 965:325–329

Slifka MK, Whitton JL (2000) Clinical implications of dysregulated cytokine production. J Mol Med. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001090000086

South J, Blass B (2001) The future of modern genomics. Blackwell, London

Brown B, Aaron M (2001) The politics of nature. In: Smith J (ed) The rise of modern genomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 230-257

Cartwright J (2007) Big stars have weather too. IOP Publishing PhysicsWeb. http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/11/6/16/1. Accessed 26 June 2007

Trent JW (1975) Experimental acute renal failure. Dissertation, University of California

Always use the standard abbreviation of a journal’s name according to the ISSN List of Title Word Abbreviations, see

If you are unsure, please use the full journal title.

The following statements must be included in your submitted manuscript under the heading 'Statements and Declarations'. This should be placed after the References section. Please note that submissions that do not include required statements will be returned as incomplete.

Please describe any sources of funding that have supported the work. The statement should include details of any grants received (please give the name of the funding agency and grant number).

Example statements:

“This work was supported by […] (Grant numbers […] and […]). Author A.B. has received research support from Company A.”

“The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.”

Competing Interests

Authors are required to disclose financial or non-financial interests that are directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication. Interests within the last 3 years of beginning the work (conducting the research and preparing the work for submission) should be reported. Interests outside the 3-year time frame must be disclosed if they could reasonably be perceived as influencing the submitted work.

“Financial interests: Author A and B declare they have no financial interests. Author C has received speaker and consultant honoraria from Company M. Dr. C has received speaker honorarium and research funding from Company M and Company N. Author D has received travel support from Company O. Non-financial interests: Author D has served on advisory boards for Company M and Company N.”

“The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.”

Please refer to the “Competing Interests” section below for more information on how to complete these sections.

Author Contributions

Authors are encouraged to include a statement that specifies the contribution of every author to the research and preparation of the manuscript.

Example statement:

“All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by [full name], [full name] and [full name]. The first draft of the manuscript was written by [full name] and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.”

Please refer to the “Authorship Principles ” section below for more information on how to complete this section.

Data Availability

This journal encourages authors to provide an optional statement of data availability in their article. Data Availability Statements should include information on where data supporting the results reported in the article can be found, including, where applicable, hyperlinks to publicly archived datasets analysed or generated during the study. Data availability statements can also indicate whether data are available on request from the authors and where no data are available, if appropriate.

“The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT LINK TO DATASETS]”

“The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.”

Please refer to the “Research Data Policy and Data Availability” section below for more information on how to complete this section.

In addition to the above, manuscripts that report the results of studies involving humans and/or animals should include the following declarations:

Ethics approval

Authors of research involving human or animal subjects should include a statement that confirms that the study was approved (or granted exemption) by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee (including the name of the ethics committee and reference number, if available). For research involving animals, their data or biological material, authors should supply detailed information on the ethical treatment of their animals in their submission. If a study was granted exemption or did not require ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript.

“This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of University B (Date.../No....).”

“This is an observational study. The XYZ Research Ethics Committee has confirmed that no ethical approval is required.”

For detailed information on relevant ethical standards and criteria, please refer to the sections on “Research involving human participants, their data or biological material”, “Research involving animals, their data or biological material”.

Consent to participate

For all research involving human subjects, freely-given, informed consent to participate in the study must be obtained from participants (or their parent or legal guardian in the case of children under 16) and a statement to this effect should appear in the manuscript.

“Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.”

“Written informed consent was obtained from the parents.”

Please refer to the section on “Informed Consent” for additional help with completing this information.

Consent to publish

Individuals may consent to participate in a study, but object to having their data published in a journal article. If your manuscript contains any individual person’s data in any form (including any individual details, images or videos), consent for publication must be obtained from that person, or in the case of children, their parent or legal guardian. This is in particular applicable to case studies. A statement confirming that consent to publish has been received from all participants should appear in the manuscript.

“The authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for publication of the images in Figure(s) 1a, 1b and 1c.”

  • All tables are to be numbered using Arabic numerals.
  • Tables should always be cited in text in consecutive numerical order.
  • For each table, please supply a table caption (title) explaining the components of the table.
  • Identify any previously published material by giving the original source in the form of a reference at the end of the table caption.
  • Footnotes to tables should be indicated by superscript lower-case letters (or asterisks for significance values and other statistical data) and included beneath the table body.

Electronic Figure Submission

  • Supply all figures electronically.
  • Indicate what graphics program was used to create the artwork.
  • For vector graphics, the preferred format is EPS; for halftones, please use TIFF format. MSOffice files are also acceptable.
  • Vector graphics containing fonts must have the fonts embedded in the files.
  • Name your figure files with "Fig" and the figure number, e.g., Fig1.eps.
  • Definition: Black and white graphic with no shading.
  • Do not use faint lines and/or lettering and check that all lines and lettering within the figures are legible at final size.
  • All lines should be at least 0.1 mm (0.3 pt) wide.
  • Scanned line drawings and line drawings in bitmap format should have a minimum resolution of 1200 dpi.

Halftone Art

clinical cancer research author guidelines

  • Definition: Photographs, drawings, or paintings with fine shading, etc.
  • If any magnification is used in the photographs, indicate this by using scale bars within the figures themselves.
  • Halftones should have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi.

Combination Art

clinical cancer research author guidelines

  • Definition: a combination of halftone and line art, e.g., halftones containing line drawing, extensive lettering, color diagrams, etc.
  • Combination artwork should have a minimum resolution of 600 dpi.
  • Color art is free of charge for online publication.
  • If black and white will be shown in the print version, make sure that the main information will still be visible. Many colors are not distinguishable from one another when converted to black and white. A simple way to check this is to make a xerographic copy to see if the necessary distinctions between the different colors are still apparent.
  • If the figures will be printed in black and white, do not refer to color in the captions.
  • Color illustrations should be submitted as RGB (8 bits per channel).

Figure Lettering

  • To add lettering, it is best to use Helvetica or Arial (sans serif fonts).
  • Keep lettering consistently sized throughout your final-sized artwork, usually about 2–3 mm (8–12 pt).
  • Variance of type size within an illustration should be minimal, e.g., do not use 8-pt type on an axis and 20-pt type for the axis label.
  • Avoid effects such as shading, outline letters, etc.
  • Do not include titles or captions within your illustrations.

Figure Numbering

  • All figures are to be numbered using Arabic numerals.
  • Figures should always be cited in text in consecutive numerical order.
  • Figure parts should be denoted by lowercase letters (a, b, c, etc.).
  • If an appendix appears in your article and it contains one or more figures, continue the consecutive numbering of the main text. Do not number the appendix figures,"A1, A2, A3, etc." Figures in online appendices [Supplementary Information (SI)] should, however, be numbered separately.

Figure Captions

  • Each figure should have a concise caption describing accurately what the figure depicts. Include the captions in the text file of the manuscript, not in the figure file.
  • Figure captions begin with the term Fig. in bold type, followed by the figure number, also in bold type.
  • No punctuation is to be included after the number, nor is any punctuation to be placed at the end of the caption.
  • Identify all elements found in the figure in the figure caption; and use boxes, circles, etc., as coordinate points in graphs.
  • Identify previously published material by giving the original source in the form of a reference citation at the end of the figure caption.

Figure Placement and Size

  • Figures should be submitted within the body of the text. Only if the file size of the manuscript causes problems in uploading it, the large figures should be submitted separately from the text.
  • When preparing your figures, size figures to fit in the column width.
  • For large-sized journals the figures should be 84 mm (for double-column text areas), or 174 mm (for single-column text areas) wide and not higher than 234 mm.
  • For small-sized journals, the figures should be 119 mm wide and not higher than 195 mm.

If you include figures that have already been published elsewhere, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) for both the print and online format. Please be aware that some publishers do not grant electronic rights for free and that Springer will not be able to refund any costs that may have occurred to receive these permissions. In such cases, material from other sources should be used.

Accessibility

In order to give people of all abilities and disabilities access to the content of your figures, please make sure that

  • All figures have descriptive captions (blind users could then use a text-to-speech software or a text-to-Braille hardware)
  • Patterns are used instead of or in addition to colors for conveying information (colorblind users would then be able to distinguish the visual elements)
  • Any figure lettering has a contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1

Generative AI Images

Please check Springer’s policy on generative AI images and make sure your work adheres to the principles described therein.

Springer accepts electronic multimedia files (animations, movies, audio, etc.) and other supplementary files to be published online along with an article or a book chapter. This feature can add dimension to the author's article, as certain information cannot be printed or is more convenient in electronic form.

Before submitting research datasets as Supplementary Information, authors should read the journal’s Research data policy. We encourage research data to be archived in data repositories wherever possible.

  • Supply all supplementary material in standard file formats.
  • Please include in each file the following information: article title, journal name, author names; affiliation and e-mail address of the corresponding author.
  • To accommodate user downloads, please keep in mind that larger-sized files may require very long download times and that some users may experience other problems during downloading.
  • High resolution (streamable quality) videos can be submitted up to a maximum of 25GB; low resolution videos should not be larger than 5GB.

Audio, Video, and Animations

  • Aspect ratio: 16:9 or 4:3
  • Maximum file size: 25 GB for high resolution files; 5 GB for low resolution files
  • Minimum video duration: 1 sec
  • Supported file formats: avi, wmv, mp4, mov, m2p, mp2, mpg, mpeg, flv, mxf, mts, m4v, 3gp

Text and Presentations

  • Submit your material in PDF format; .doc or .ppt files are not suitable for long-term viability.
  • A collection of figures may also be combined in a PDF file.

Spreadsheets

  • Spreadsheets should be submitted as .csv or .xlsx files (MS Excel).

Specialized Formats

  • Specialized format such as .pdb (chemical), .wrl (VRML), .nb (Mathematica notebook), and .tex can also be supplied.

Collecting Multiple Files

  • It is possible to collect multiple files in a .zip or .gz file.
  • If supplying any supplementary material, the text must make specific mention of the material as a citation, similar to that of figures and tables.
  • Refer to the supplementary files as “Online Resource”, e.g., "... as shown in the animation (Online Resource 3)", “... additional data are given in Online Resource 4”.
  • Name the files consecutively, e.g. “ESM_3.mpg”, “ESM_4.pdf”.
  • For each supplementary material, please supply a concise caption describing the content of the file.

Processing of supplementary files

  • Supplementary Information (SI) will be published as received from the author without any conversion, editing, or reformatting.

In order to give people of all abilities and disabilities access to the content of your supplementary files, please make sure that

  • The manuscript contains a descriptive caption for each supplementary material
  • Video files do not contain anything that flashes more than three times per second (so that users prone to seizures caused by such effects are not put at risk)

How can you help improve your manuscript for publication?

Presenting your work in a well-structured manuscript and in well-written English gives it its best chance for editors and reviewers to understand it and evaluate it fairly. Many researchers find that getting some independent support helps them present their results in the best possible light. The experts at Springer Nature Author Services can help you with manuscript preparation—including English language editing, developmental comments, manuscript formatting, figure preparation, translation , and more.

Get started and save 15%

You can also use our free Grammar Check tool for an evaluation of your work.

Please note that using these tools, or any other service, is not a requirement for publication, nor does it imply or guarantee that editors will accept the article, or even select it for peer review.

Chinese (中文)

您怎么做才有助于改进您的稿件以便顺利发表?

如果在结构精巧的稿件中用精心组织的英语展示您的作品,就能最大限度地让编辑和审稿人理解并公正评估您的作品。许多研究人员发现,获得一些独立支持有助于他们以尽可能美好的方式展示他们的成果。Springer Nature Author Services 的专家可帮助您准备稿件,具体包括 润色英语表述、添加有见地的注释、为稿件排版、设计图表、翻译 等。

开始使用即可节省 15% 的费用

您还可以使用我们的 免费语法检查工具 来评估您的作品。

请注意,使用这些工具或任何其他服务不是发表前必须满足的要求,也不暗示或保证相关文章定会被编辑接受(甚至未必会被选送同行评审)。

Japanese (日本語)

発表に備えて、論文を改善するにはどうすればよいでしょうか?

内容が適切に組み立てられ、質の高い英語で書かれた論文を投稿すれば、編集者や査読者が論文を理解し、公正に評価するための最善の機会となります。多くの研究者は、個別のサポートを受けることで、研究結果を可能な限り最高の形で発表できると思っています。Springer Nature Author Servicesのエキスパートが、 英文の編集、建設的な提言、論文の書式、図の調整、翻訳 など、論文の作成をサポートいたします。

今なら15%割引でご利用いただけます

原稿の評価に、無料 の文法チェック ツールもご利用いただけます。

これらのツールや他のサービスをご利用いただくことは、論文を掲載するための要件ではありません。また、編集者が論文を受理したり、査読に選定したりすることを示唆または保証するものではないことにご注意ください。

Korean (한국어)

게재를 위해 원고를 개선하려면 어떻게 해야 할까요?

여러분의 작품을 체계적인 원고로 발표하는 것은 편집자와 심사자가 여러분의 연구를 이해하고 공정하게 평가할 수 있는 최선의 기회를 제공합니다. 많은 연구자들은 어느 정도 독립적인 지원을 받는 것이 가능한 한 최선의 방법으로 자신의 결과를 발표하는 데 도움이 된다고 합니다. Springer Nature Author Services 전문가들은 영어 편집, 발전적인 논평, 원고 서식 지정, 그림 준비, 번역 등과 같은 원고 준비를 도와드릴 수 있습니다.

지금 시작하면 15% 할인됩니다.

또한 당사의 무료 문법 검사 도구를 사용하여 여러분의 연구를 평가할 수 있습니다.

이러한 도구 또는 기타 서비스를 사용하는 것은 게재를 위한 필수 요구사항이 아니며, 편집자가 해당 논문을 수락하거나 피어 리뷰에 해당 논문을 선택한다는 것을 암시하거나 보장하지는 않습니다.

This journal is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record. As a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics ( COPE ) the journal will follow the COPE guidelines on how to deal with potential acts of misconduct.

Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results which could damage the trust in the journal, the professionalism of scientific authorship, and ultimately the entire scientific endeavour. Maintaining integrity of the research and its presentation is helped by following the rules of good scientific practice, which include*:

  • The manuscript should not be submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration.
  • The submitted work should be original and should not have been published elsewhere in any form or language (partially or in full), unless the new work concerns an expansion of previous work. (Please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the concerns about text-recycling (‘self-plagiarism’).
  • A single study should not be split up into several parts to increase the quantity of submissions and submitted to various journals or to one journal over time (i.e. ‘salami-slicing/publishing’).
  • Concurrent or secondary publication is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. Examples include: translations or a manuscript that is intended for a different group of readers.
  • Results should be presented clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation (including image based manipulation). Authors should adhere to discipline-specific rules for acquiring, selecting and processing data.
  • No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the author’s own (‘plagiarism’). Proper acknowledgements to other works must be given (this includes material that is closely copied (near verbatim), summarized and/or paraphrased), quotation marks (to indicate words taken from another source) are used for verbatim copying of material, and permissions secured for material that is copyrighted.

Important note: the journal may use software to screen for plagiarism.

  • Authors should make sure they have permissions for the use of software, questionnaires/(web) surveys and scales in their studies (if appropriate).
  • Research articles and non-research articles (e.g. Opinion, Review, and Commentary articles) must cite appropriate and relevant literature in support of the claims made. Excessive and inappropriate self-citation or coordinated efforts among several authors to collectively self-cite is strongly discouraged.
  • Authors should avoid untrue statements about an entity (who can be an individual person or a company) or descriptions of their behavior or actions that could potentially be seen as personal attacks or allegations about that person.
  • Research that may be misapplied to pose a threat to public health or national security should be clearly identified in the manuscript (e.g. dual use of research). Examples include creation of harmful consequences of biological agents or toxins, disruption of immunity of vaccines, unusual hazards in the use of chemicals, weaponization of research/technology (amongst others).
  • Authors are strongly advised to ensure the author group, the Corresponding Author, and the order of authors are all correct at submission. Adding and/or deleting authors during the revision stages is generally not permitted, but in some cases may be warranted. Reasons for changes in authorship should be explained in detail. Please note that changes to authorship cannot be made after acceptance of a manuscript.

*All of the above are guidelines and authors need to make sure to respect third parties rights such as copyright and/or moral rights.

Upon request authors should be prepared to send relevant documentation or data in order to verify the validity of the results presented. This could be in the form of raw data, samples, records, etc. Sensitive information in the form of confidential or proprietary data is excluded.

If there is suspicion of misbehavior or alleged fraud the Journal and/or Publisher will carry out an investigation following COPE guidelines. If, after investigation, there are valid concerns, the author(s) concerned will be contacted under their given e-mail address and given an opportunity to address the issue. Depending on the situation, this may result in the Journal’s and/or Publisher’s implementation of the following measures, including, but not limited to:

  • If the manuscript is still under consideration, it may be rejected and returned to the author.

- an erratum/correction may be placed with the article

- an expression of concern may be placed with the article

- or in severe cases retraction of the article may occur.

The reason will be given in the published erratum/correction, expression of concern or retraction note. Please note that retraction means that the article is maintained on the platform , watermarked “retracted” and the explanation for the retraction is provided in a note linked to the watermarked article.

  • The author’s institution may be informed
  • A notice of suspected transgression of ethical standards in the peer review system may be included as part of the author’s and article’s bibliographic record.

Fundamental errors

Authors have an obligation to correct mistakes once they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published article. The author(s) is/are requested to contact the journal and explain in what sense the error is impacting the article. A decision on how to correct the literature will depend on the nature of the error. This may be a correction or retraction. The retraction note should provide transparency which parts of the article are impacted by the error.

Suggesting / excluding reviewers

Authors are welcome to suggest suitable reviewers and/or request the exclusion of certain individuals when they submit their manuscripts. When suggesting reviewers, authors should make sure they are totally independent and not connected to the work in any way. It is strongly recommended to suggest a mix of reviewers from different countries and different institutions. When suggesting reviewers, the Corresponding Author must provide an institutional email address for each suggested reviewer, or, if this is not possible to include other means of verifying the identity such as a link to a personal homepage, a link to the publication record or a researcher or author ID in the submission letter. Please note that the Journal may not use the suggestions, but suggestions are appreciated and may help facilitate the peer review process.

These guidelines describe authorship principles and good authorship practices to which prospective authors should adhere to.

Authorship clarified

The Journal and Publisher assume all authors agreed with the content and that all gave explicit consent to submit and that they obtained consent from the responsible authorities at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out, before the work is submitted.

The Publisher does not prescribe the kinds of contributions that warrant authorship. It is recommended that authors adhere to the guidelines for authorship that are applicable in their specific research field. In absence of specific guidelines it is recommended to adhere to the following guidelines*:

All authors whose names appear on the submission

1) made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the creation of new software used in the work;

2) drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content;

3) approved the version to be published; and

4) agree 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.

* Based on/adapted from:

ICMJE, Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors,

Transparency in authors’ contributions and responsibilities to promote integrity in scientific publication, McNutt at all, PNAS February 27, 2018

Disclosures and declarations

All authors are requested to include information regarding sources of funding, financial or non-financial interests, study-specific approval by the appropriate ethics committee for research involving humans and/or animals, informed consent if the research involved human participants, and a statement on welfare of animals if the research involved animals (as appropriate).

The decision whether such information should be included is not only dependent on the scope of the journal, but also the scope of the article. Work submitted for publication may have implications for public health or general welfare and in those cases it is the responsibility of all authors to include the appropriate disclosures and declarations.

Data transparency

All authors are requested to make sure that all data and materials as well as software application or custom code support their published claims and comply with field standards. Please note that journals may have individual policies on (sharing) research data in concordance with disciplinary norms and expectations.

Role of the Corresponding Author

One author is assigned as Corresponding Author and acts on behalf of all co-authors and ensures that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately addressed.

The Corresponding Author is responsible for the following requirements:

  • ensuring that all listed authors have approved the manuscript before submission, including the names and order of authors;
  • managing all communication between the Journal and all co-authors, before and after publication;*
  • providing transparency on re-use of material and mention any unpublished material (for example manuscripts in press) included in the manuscript in a cover letter to the Editor;
  • making sure disclosures, declarations and transparency on data statements from all authors are included in the manuscript as appropriate (see above).

* The requirement of managing all communication between the journal and all co-authors during submission and proofing may be delegated to a Contact or Submitting Author. In this case please make sure the Corresponding Author is clearly indicated in the manuscript.

Author contributions

In absence of specific instructions and in research fields where it is possible to describe discrete efforts, the Publisher recommends authors to include contribution statements in the work that specifies the contribution of every author in order to promote transparency. These contributions should be listed at the separate title page.

Examples of such statement(s) are shown below:

• Free text:

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by [full name], [full name] and [full name]. The first draft of the manuscript was written by [full name] and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Example: CRediT taxonomy:

• Conceptualization: [full name], …; Methodology: [full name], …; Formal analysis and investigation: [full name], …; Writing - original draft preparation: [full name, …]; Writing - review and editing: [full name], …; Funding acquisition: [full name], …; Resources: [full name], …; Supervision: [full name],….

For review articles where discrete statements are less applicable a statement should be included who had the idea for the article, who performed the literature search and data analysis, and who drafted and/or critically revised the work.

For articles that are based primarily on the student’s dissertation or thesis , it is recommended that the student is usually listed as principal author:

A Graduate Student’s Guide to Determining Authorship Credit and Authorship Order, APA Science Student Council 2006

Affiliation

The primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done. If an author has subsequently moved, the current address may additionally be stated. Addresses will not be updated or changed after publication of the article.

Changes to authorship

Authors are strongly advised to ensure the correct author group, the Corresponding Author, and the order of authors at submission. Changes of authorship by adding or deleting authors, and/or changes in Corresponding Author, and/or changes in the sequence of authors are not accepted after acceptance of a manuscript.

  • Please note that author names will be published exactly as they appear on the accepted submission!

Please make sure that the names of all authors are present and correctly spelled, and that addresses and affiliations are current.

Adding and/or deleting authors at revision stage are generally not permitted, but in some cases it may be warranted. Reasons for these changes in authorship should be explained. Approval of the change during revision is at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. Please note that journals may have individual policies on adding and/or deleting authors during revision stage.

Author identification

Authors are recommended to use their ORCID ID when submitting an article for consideration or acquire an ORCID ID via the submission process.

Deceased or incapacitated authors

For cases in which a co-author dies or is incapacitated during the writing, submission, or peer-review process, and the co-authors feel it is appropriate to include the author, co-authors should obtain approval from a (legal) representative which could be a direct relative.

Authorship issues or disputes

In the case of an authorship dispute during peer review or after acceptance and publication, the Journal will not be in a position to investigate or adjudicate. Authors will be asked to resolve the dispute themselves. If they are unable the Journal reserves the right to withdraw a manuscript from the editorial process or in case of a published paper raise the issue with the authors’ institution(s) and abide by its guidelines.

Confidentiality

Authors should treat all communication with the Journal as confidential which includes correspondence with direct representatives from the Journal such as Editors-in-Chief and/or Handling Editors and reviewers’ reports unless explicit consent has been received to share information.

To ensure objectivity and transparency in research and to ensure that accepted principles of ethical and professional conduct have been followed, authors should include information regarding sources of funding, potential conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial), informed consent if the research involved human participants, and a statement on welfare of animals if the research involved animals.

Authors should include the following statements (if applicable) in a separate section entitled “Compliance with Ethical Standards” when submitting a paper:

  • Research involving Human Participants and/or Animals

Please note that standards could vary slightly per journal dependent on their peer review policies (i.e. single or double blind peer review) as well as per journal subject discipline. Before submitting your article check the instructions following this section carefully.

The corresponding author should be prepared to collect documentation of compliance with ethical standards and send if requested during peer review or after publication.

The Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned guidelines. The author will be held responsible for false statements or failure to fulfill the above-mentioned guidelines.

Authors must disclose all relationships or interests that could have direct or potential influence or impart bias on the work. Although an author may not feel there is any conflict, disclosure of relationships and interests provides a more complete and transparent process, leading to an accurate and objective assessment of the work. Awareness of a real or perceived conflicts of interest is a perspective to which the readers are entitled. This is not meant to imply that a financial relationship with an organization that sponsored the research or compensation received for consultancy work is inappropriate. Examples of potential conflicts of interests that are directly or indirectly related to the research may include but are not limited to the following:

  • Research grants from funding agencies (please give the research funder and the grant number)
  • Honoraria for speaking at symposia
  • Financial support for attending symposia
  • Financial support for educational programs
  • Employment or consultation
  • Support from a project sponsor
  • Position on advisory board or board of directors or other type of management relationships
  • Multiple affiliations
  • Financial relationships, for example equity ownership or investment interest
  • Intellectual property rights (e.g. patents, copyrights and royalties from such rights)
  • Holdings of spouse and/or children that may have financial interest in the work

In addition, interests that go beyond financial interests and compensation (non-financial interests) that may be important to readers should be disclosed. These may include but are not limited to personal relationships or competing interests directly or indirectly tied to this research, or professional interests or personal beliefs that may influence your research.

The corresponding author collects the conflict of interest disclosure forms from all authors. In author collaborations where formal agreements for representation allow it, it is sufficient for the corresponding author to sign the disclosure form on behalf of all authors. Examples of forms can be found

The corresponding author will include a summary statement in the text of the manuscript in a separate section before the reference list, that reflects what is recorded in the potential conflict of interest disclosure form(s).

Please make sure to submit all Conflict of Interest disclosure forms together with the manuscript.

See below examples of disclosures:

Funding: This study was funded by X (grant number X).

Conflict of Interest: Author A has received research grants from Company A. Author B has received a speaker honorarium from Company X and owns stock in Company Y. Author C is a member of committee Z.

If no conflict exists, the authors should state:

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

When reporting a study that involved human participants, their data or biological material, authors should include a statement that confirms that the study was approved (or granted exemption) by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee (including the name of the ethics committee) and certify that the study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration or comparable standards, the authors must explain the reasons for their approach, and demonstrate that an independent ethics committee or institutional review board explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. If a study was granted exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the reasons for the exemption).

Retrospective ethics approval

If a study has not been granted ethics committee approval prior to commencing, retrospective ethics approval usually cannot be obtained and it may not be possible to consider the manuscript for peer review. The decision on whether to proceed to peer review in such cases is at the Editor's discretion.

Ethics approval for retrospective studies

Although retrospective studies are conducted on already available data or biological material (for which formal consent may not be needed or is difficult to obtain) ethics approval may be required dependent on the law and the national ethical guidelines of a country. Authors should check with their institution to make sure they are complying with the specific requirements of their country.

Ethics approval for case studies

Case reports require ethics approval. Most institutions will have specific policies on this subject. Authors should check with their institution to make sure they are complying with the specific requirements of their institution and seek ethics approval where needed. Authors should be aware to secure informed consent from the individual (or parent or guardian if the participant is a minor or incapable) See also section on Informed Consent .

If human cells are used, authors must declare in the manuscript: what cell lines were used by describing the source of the cell line, including when and from where it was obtained, whether the cell line has recently been authenticated and by what method. If cells were bought from a life science company the following need to be given in the manuscript: name of company (that provided the cells), cell type, number of cell line, and batch of cells.

It is recommended that authors check the NCBI database for misidentification and contamination of human cell lines. This step will alert authors to possible problems with the cell line and may save considerable time and effort.

Further information is available from the International Cell Line Authentication Committee (ICLAC).

Authors should include a statement that confirms that an institutional or independent ethics committee (including the name of the ethics committee) approved the study and that informed consent was obtained from the donor or next of kin.

Research Resource Identifiers (RRID)

Research Resource Identifiers (RRID) are persistent unique identifiers (effectively similar to a DOI) for research resources. This journal encourages authors to adopt RRIDs when reporting key biological resources (antibodies, cell lines, model organisms and tools) in their manuscripts.

Organism: Filip1 tm1a(KOMP)Wtsi RRID:MMRRC_055641-UCD

Cell Line: RST307 cell line RRID:CVCL_C321

Antibody: Luciferase antibody DSHB Cat# LUC-3, RRID:AB_2722109

Plasmid: mRuby3 plasmid RRID:Addgene_104005

Software: ImageJ Version 1.2.4 RRID:SCR_003070

RRIDs are provided by the Resource Identification Portal . Many commonly used research resources already have designated RRIDs. The portal also provides authors links so that they can quickly register a new resource and obtain an RRID.

Clinical Trial Registration

The World Health Organization (WHO) definition of a clinical trial is "any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate the effects on health outcomes". The WHO defines health interventions as “A health intervention is an act performed for, with or on behalf of a person or population whose purpose is to assess, improve, maintain, promote or modify health, functioning or health conditions” and a health-related outcome is generally defined as a change in the health of a person or population as a result of an intervention.

To ensure the integrity of the reporting of patient-centered trials, authors must register prospective clinical trials (phase II to IV trials) in suitable publicly available repositories. For example www.clinicaltrials.gov or any of the primary registries that participate in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform .

The trial registration number (TRN) and date of registration should be included as the last line of the manuscript abstract.

For clinical trials that have not been registered prospectively, authors are encouraged to register retrospectively to ensure the complete publication of all results. The trial registration number (TRN), date of registration and the words 'retrospectively registered’ should be included as the last line of the manuscript abstract.

Standards of reporting

Springer Nature advocates complete and transparent reporting of biomedical and biological research and research with biological applications. Authors are recommended to adhere to the minimum reporting guidelines hosted by the EQUATOR Network when preparing their manuscript.

Exact requirements may vary depending on the journal; please refer to the journal’s Instructions for Authors.

Checklists are available for a number of study designs, including:

Randomised trials (CONSORT) and Study protocols (SPIRIT)

Observational studies (STROBE)

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) and protocols (Prisma-P)

Diagnostic/prognostic studies (STARD) and (TRIPOD)

Case reports (CARE)

Clinical practice guidelines (AGREE) and (RIGHT)

Qualitative research (SRQR) and (COREQ)

Animal pre-clinical studies (ARRIVE)

Quality improvement studies (SQUIRE)

Economic evaluations (CHEERS)

Summary of requirements

The above should be summarized in a statement and placed in a ‘Declarations’ section before the reference list under a heading of ‘Ethics approval’.

Examples of statements to be used when ethics approval has been obtained:

• All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the Bioethics Committee of the Medical University of A (No. ...).

• This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of University B (Date.../No. ...).

• Approval was obtained from the ethics committee of University C. The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

• The questionnaire and methodology for this study was approved by the Human Research Ethics committee of the University of D (Ethics approval number: ...).

Examples of statements to be used for a retrospective study:

• Ethical approval was waived by the local Ethics Committee of University A in view of the retrospective nature of the study and all the procedures being performed were part of the routine care.

• This research study was conducted retrospectively from data obtained for clinical purposes. We consulted extensively with the IRB of XYZ who determined that our study did not need ethical approval. An IRB official waiver of ethical approval was granted from the IRB of XYZ.

• This retrospective chart review study involving human participants was in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The Human Investigation Committee (IRB) of University B approved this study.

Examples of statements to be used when no ethical approval is required/exemption granted:

• This is an observational study. The XYZ Research Ethics Committee has confirmed that no ethical approval is required.

• The data reproduced from Article X utilized human tissue that was procured via our Biobank AB, which provides de-identified samples. This study was reviewed and deemed exempt by our XYZ Institutional Review Board. The BioBank protocols are in accordance with the ethical standards of our institution and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Authors are responsible for correctness of the statements provided in the manuscript. See also Authorship Principles. The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject submissions that do not meet the guidelines described in this section.

All individuals have individual rights that are not to be infringed. Individual participants in studies have, for example, the right to decide what happens to the (identifiable) personal data gathered, to what they have said during a study or an interview, as well as to any photograph that was taken. This is especially true concerning images of vulnerable people (e.g. minors, patients, refugees, etc) or the use of images in sensitive contexts. In many instances authors will need to secure written consent before including images.

Identifying details (names, dates of birth, identity numbers, biometrical characteristics (such as facial features, fingerprint, writing style, voice pattern, DNA or other distinguishing characteristic) and other information) of the participants that were studied should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, and genetic profiles unless the information is essential for scholarly purposes and the participant (or parent/guardian if the participant is a minor or incapable or legal representative) gave written informed consent for publication. Complete anonymity is difficult to achieve in some cases. Detailed descriptions of individual participants, whether of their whole bodies or of body sections, may lead to disclosure of their identity. Under certain circumstances consent is not required as long as information is anonymized and the submission does not include images that may identify the person.

Informed consent for publication should be obtained if there is any doubt. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of participants is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic profiles, authors should provide assurance that alterations do not distort meaning.

Exceptions where it is not necessary to obtain consent:

• Images such as x rays, laparoscopic images, ultrasound images, brain scans, pathology slides unless there is a concern about identifying information in which case, authors should ensure that consent is obtained.

• Reuse of images: If images are being reused from prior publications, the Publisher will assume that the prior publication obtained the relevant information regarding consent. Authors should provide the appropriate attribution for republished images.

Consent and already available data and/or biologic material

Regardless of whether material is collected from living or dead patients, they (family or guardian if the deceased has not made a pre-mortem decision) must have given prior written consent. The aspect of confidentiality as well as any wishes from the deceased should be respected.

Data protection, confidentiality and privacy

When biological material is donated for or data is generated as part of a research project authors should ensure, as part of the informed consent procedure, that the participants are made aware what kind of (personal) data will be processed, how it will be used and for what purpose. In case of data acquired via a biobank/biorepository, it is possible they apply a broad consent which allows research participants to consent to a broad range of uses of their data and samples which is regarded by research ethics committees as specific enough to be considered “informed”. However, authors should always check the specific biobank/biorepository policies or any other type of data provider policies (in case of non-bio research) to be sure that this is the case.

Consent to Participate

For all research involving human subjects, freely-given, informed consent to participate in the study must be obtained from participants (or their parent or legal guardian in the case of children under 16) and a statement to this effect should appear in the manuscript. In the case of articles describing human transplantation studies, authors must include a statement declaring that no organs/tissues were obtained from prisoners and must also name the institution(s)/clinic(s)/department(s) via which organs/tissues were obtained. For manuscripts reporting studies involving vulnerable groups where there is the potential for coercion or where consent may not have been fully informed, extra care will be taken by the editor and may be referred to the Springer Nature Research Integrity Group.

Consent to Publish

Individuals may consent to participate in a study, but object to having their data published in a journal article. Authors should make sure to also seek consent from individuals to publish their data prior to submitting their paper to a journal. This is in particular applicable to case studies. A consent to publish form can be found

here. (Download docx, 36 kB)

The above should be summarized in a statement and placed in a ‘Declarations’ section before the reference list under a heading of ‘Consent to participate’ and/or ‘Consent to publish’. Other declarations include Funding, Competing interests, Ethics approval, Consent, Data and/or Code availability and Authors’ contribution statements.

Please see the various examples of wording below and revise/customize the sample statements according to your own needs.

Sample statements for "Consent to participate" :

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Informed consent was obtained from legal guardians.

Written informed consent was obtained from the parents.

Verbal informed consent was obtained prior to the interview.

Sample statements for “Consent to publish” :

The authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for publication of the images in Figure(s) 1a, 1b and 1c.

The participant has consented to the submission of the case report to the journal.

Patients signed informed consent regarding publishing their data and photographs.

Sample statements if identifying information about participants is available in the article:

Additional informed consent was obtained from all individual participants for whom identifying information is included in this article.

Images will be removed from publication if authors have not obtained informed consent or the paper may be removed and replaced with a notice explaining the reason for removal.

This journal follows Springer Nature research data policy . Sharing of all relevant research data is strongly encouraged and authors must add a Data Availability Statement to original research articles.

Research data includes a wide range of types, including spreadsheets, images, textual extracts, archival documents, video or audio, interview notes or any specialist formats generated during research.

Data availability statements

All original research must include a data availability statement. This statement should explain how to access data supporting the results and analysis in the article, including links/citations to publicly archived datasets analysed or generated during the study. Please see our full policy here .

If it is not possible to share research data publicly, for instance when individual privacy could be compromised, this statement should describe how data can be accessed and any conditions for reuse. Participant consent should be obtained and documented prior to data collection. See our guidance on sensitive data for more information.

When creating a data availability statement, authors are encouraged to consider the minimal dataset that would be necessary to interpret, replicate and build upon the findings reported in the article.

Further guidance on writing a data availability statement, including examples, is available at:

Data repositories

Authors are strongly encouraged to deposit their supporting data in a publicly available repository. Sharing your data in a repository promotes the integrity, discovery and reuse of your research, making it easier for the research community to build on and credit your work.

See our data repository guidance for information on finding a suitable repository.

We recommend the use of discipline-specific repositories where available. For a number of data types, submission to specific public repositories is mandatory.

See our list of mandated data types .

The journal encourages making research data available under open licences that permit reuse. The journal does not enforce use of particular licences in third party repositories. You should ensure you have necessary rights to share any data that you deposit in a repository.

Data citation

The journal recommends that authors cite any publicly available data on which the conclusions of the paper rely. This includes data the authors are sharing alongside their publication and any secondary data the authors have reused. Data citations should include a persistent identifier (such as a DOI), should be included in the reference list using the minimum information recommended by DataCite (Dataset Creator, Dataset Title, Publisher [repository], Publication Year, Identifier [e.g. DOI, Handle, Accession or ARK]) and follow journal style.

See our further guidance on citing datasets.

Research data and peer review

If the journal that you are submitting to uses double-anonymous peer review and you are providing reviewers with access to your data (for example via a repository link, supplementary information or data on request), it is strongly suggested that the authorship in the data is also anonymised. There are data repositories that can assist with this and/or will create a link to mask the authorship of your data.

Support with research data policy

Authors who need help understanding our data sharing policy, finding a suitable data repository, or organising and sharing research data can consult our Research Data Helpdesk for guidance.

See our FAQ page for more information on Springer Nature’s research data policy.

Upon acceptance, your article will be exported to Production to undergo typesetting. Shortly after this you will receive two e-mails. One contains a request to confirm your affiliation, choose the publishing model for your article, as well as to arrange rights and payment of any associated publication cost. A second e-mail containing a link to your article’s proofs will be sent once typesetting is completed.

Article publishing agreement

Depending on the ownership of the journal and its policies, you will either grant the Publisher an exclusive licence to publish the article or will be asked to transfer copyright of the article to the Publisher.

Offprints can be ordered by the corresponding author.

Color illustrations

Publication of color illustrations is free of charge.

Proof reading

The purpose of the proof is to check for typesetting or conversion errors and the completeness and accuracy of the text, tables and figures. Substantial changes in content, e.g., new results, corrected values, title and authorship, are not allowed without the approval of the Editor.

After online publication, further changes can only be made in the form of an Erratum, which will be hyperlinked to the article.

Online First

The article will be published online after receipt of the corrected proofs. This is the official first publication citable with the DOI. After release of the printed version, the paper can also be cited by issue and page numbers.

Articles in Springer Nature open access journals do not require transfer of copyright as the copyright remains with the author. In confirming the publication of your article with open access you agree to the Creative Commons Attribution License.

Find more about the license agreement

To find out more about publishing your work Open Access in Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology , including information on fees, funding and licenses, visit our Open access publishing page .

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research
  • Search Menu
  • Advance Articles
  • Supplements
  • Author Guidelines
  • Submission Site
  • Why Publish with Us?

Open Access

  • Author Resource Centre
  • Editorial Board
  • Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
  • Advertising and Corporate Services
  • Journals Career Network
  • Self-Archiving Policy
  • Dispatch Dates
  • Journals on Oxford Academic
  • Books on Oxford Academic

Instructions to Authors

Manuscript types, editorial policies, research data policy, preparing your manuscript.

  • Licensing and Charges

Scope of the Journal

JNCI: The Journal of the National Cancer Institute publishes manuscripts that describe novel findings of significance in cancer research with a particular focus on clinical, epidemiologic, behavioral, and health outcomes studies. Submission of reviews, minireviews, and commentaries are welcome (see Manuscript type below for specific requirements). The Journal employs a process of rigorous yet rapid review of submitted manuscripts so that findings of high scientific and medical interest can be published with minimum delay.

JNCI is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes 12 issues per year in print and online.

Some papers in JNCI may have associated charges. Please refer to the Licensing and Charges section below.

Once a paper is accepted, JNCI will publish a pre-copyedited, pre-proofed version of the paper online as soon as possible unless a request is made by the author to set an embargo. This is replaced by a copyedited, proofed version of the paper as soon as it is ready.

Please read these instructions carefully and follow them closely. The Editors may return manuscripts that do not follow these instructions.

Authors can contact the Editorial Office at [email protected] for questions about manuscripts prior to submission or at any time during the review process. Authors can contact the OUP Journals Author Support team at  [email protected]  for questions about published manuscripts and the production process. 

Articles provide the most extensive description of new findings of major importance. An Article should contain 3000 or fewer words, not counting the abstract, reference list, tables, and figure legends. (See “ Figures, Tables, and Boxes .”) Methods are included in the word count, but some methods may be moved to an online-only Supplementary Methods section.

Systematic Reviews (with or without Meta-analysis) and Meta-analyses

Manuscripts using these study designs should be formatted like Articles (see above) and should contain 6000 or fewer words (including the Methods section, but not counting abstract, reference list, tables, and figure legends). The study design (eg, systematic review, meta-analysis) should be included in the title.

Brief Communications

Brief Communications are concise descriptions of new findings of general interest. A Brief Communication should contain 1500 or fewer words, not counting abstract, reference list, tables, and figure legends. Neither a Brief Communication nor its abstract should be divided by headings and subheadings.

Correspondence

Letters to the editor may express an opinion about material previously published in the Journal or express views on topics of current relevance to some aspect of cancer, but not with exclusive reference to a specific report published in a journal other than JNCI . A letter should contain 500 or fewer words, not counting the reference list (seven references maximum), and 1 figure legend or table. A letter relating to work published in the Journal will ordinarily be referred to the author(s) of the original item for a response, which may be published along with the letter. These should be titled “RE: [Title of the original work in JNCI ].” Complete references should be given if the letter cites the work of others; and if the letter comments on an Article published in the Journal, that Article must be included in the numbered reference list.

Invited Responses

Responses are invited when a correspondence refers to a paper previously published in the Journal. Responses should be no more than 500 words, not counting the reference list (seven references maximum), and 1 figure legend or table may be included. They should be titled “Response to…” using the last names of the first three authors who wrote the correspondence followed by “et al.” if there are more than three authors. The authors of the response should not self-cite the original Article being referred to so it should not be included on the reference list.

Editorials convey opinions on any subject relevant to the Journal's concerns. They discuss a paper in the same issue of the Journal, a recent finding published elsewhere, or a particular topic of importance. Editorials are solicited by the editors, and unsolicited submissions will not be considered. Editorials usually contain about 1500 words in the main text (not counting reference list). One table or figure will be allowed if necessary. The JNCI Article being editorialized should be cited in the editorial and included on the reference list.

Commentaries

Topical items under this heading convey to the reader, in relatively nontechnical style, a summary of current activities or issues that bear on some aspect of cancer. Discussions of appropriate data analyses or of thematic issues to emerge from recent scientific meetings are examples of suitable subject areas. A Commentary usually contains 2000-4000 words, not counting the abstract, reference list, tables, and figure legends.

A good Review provides a comprehensive overview of an area of cancer biology, epidemiology, prevention, treatment, survivorship, behavioral science, or policy. Although Reviews should be accessible to knowledgeable readers not expert in the subject area, they should be prepared with the same rigor as a research paper reporting specific results. The Journal encourages high-quality systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis over narrative reviews, unless discussing a hypothesis or presenting basic information (please see “ The Need for Systematic Reviews in Oncology ” for details). Although most Reviews are solicited by the editors, unsolicited submissions are also welcome. A Review should contain 6000 or fewer words, not counting abstract, reference list, tables, and figure legends.

MiniReviews

MiniReviews are concise Reviews that highlight timely topics in oncology of major importance that are of broad interest; they can also simplify complex topics for the broad readership. MiniReviews are not opinion pieces and should be prepared with the same rigor as a full review or meta-analysis, reporting and synthesizing specific results into a coherent overview. Some MiniReviews are solicited by the editors, but unsolicited submissions are also welcome. A MiniReview should contain 2000 or fewer words, not counting abstract, reference list, tables, and figure legends.

Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion

JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute is committed to supporting and advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DE&I) in our editorial practices and published content on cancer research. Please visit the Journal’s DE&I page for our official DE&I statement and more information.

The Journal expects that authors will observe high standards with respect to  publication ethics . By submitting your manuscript to the Journal, it is understood that it is an original manuscript, is unpublished work, and is not under consideration elsewhere. The following practices are unacceptable: falsification or fabrication of data; plagiarism, including duplicate publication of the authors’ own work, in whole or in part, without proper citation; misappropriation of the work of others such as omission of qualified authors or of information regarding financial support. Manuscripts may be checked for originality using iThenticate software at any time, but all revised submissions are checked as part of standard journal procedure as part of the CrossCheck initiative to detect and prevent plagiarism.   More information about CrossCheck is available. The Journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Any cases of ethical misconduct are treated very seriously and will be dealt with in accordance with the appropriate COPE guidelines, which may include contacting authors’ institutions and funding agencies. If you have a concern please contact the Editorial Office ( [email protected] ). All research published in our Journal must have been conducted according to international and local guidelines. For more information on specific requirements for human and animal subjects, see “Ethical Research Requirements.” If an author has been sanctioned by the Office of Research Integrity of the U.S. Public Health Service, the manuscript will be returned unless the author affirms that the research described is unrelated to the matter for which the author was sanctioned.

Authorship is limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the design and execution of the work described. Any contributors whose participation does not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged but not listed as an author. The Journal will contact all listed authors at the point of submission to confirm their role. For a detailed definition of authorship, please see the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) definitions of authors and contributors .

For manuscripts with more than 50 authors, the author list on the first page will include the first 49 and last author. The full list of authors and their affiliations will be listed in the "Acknowledgements" section. A footnote will be added below the author list in these cases to direct readers to the "Acknowledgements" to see the full author list and affiliations. All individuals named as contributors in the "Acknowledgements" must provide written documentation that they consent to have their names listed.

The Journal does not allow ghost authorship, where an unnamed author prepares the article with no credit, or guest/gift authorship, where an author who made little or no contribution is listed as an author. The Journal follows Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidance on investigating and resolving these cases. For more information, please see the OUP Publication Ethics page .

Natural language processing tools driven by artificial intelligence (AI) do not qualify as authors, and the Journal will screen for them in author lists. The use of AI (for example, to help generate content or images, write code, process data, or for translation) should be disclosed both in cover letters to editors and in the "Methods" or "Acknowledgements" section of manuscripts. Please see the COPE position statement on Authorship and AI for more details.

After manuscript submission, no authorship changes (including the authorship list, author order, and who is designated as the corresponding author) should be made unless there is a substantive reason to do so. The editor and all co-authors must agree on the change(s), and neither the Journal nor the publisher mediates authorship disputes. If individuals cannot agree on the authorship of a submitted manuscript, contact the editorial office at [email protected] . The dispute must be resolved among the individuals and their institution(s) before the manuscript can be accepted for publication. If an authorship dispute or change arises after a paper is accepted, contact OUP’s Author Support team. COPE provides guidance for authors on resolving authorship disputes .

Please note only one author can be designated as the corresponding author. Authors are welcome to include a footnote designating that multiple authors contributed equally to the work on the title page.

After submission, changing who is designated as the corresponding author will be permitted only where there is a substantive reason to do so. For the avoidance of doubt, changing the corresponding author in order to access Read and Publish funding is not permissible. For more information on Read and Publish funding, see the Open access charges section .

Group Authorship

Groups (also known as corporate, organization, or collective names) who meet authorship criteria should be included in the main author list. Every individual in the group should fully meet the criteria for authorship. At least one individual must be designated on behalf of the group as the primary point of contact during the peer-review and production processes, as well as for correspondence following publication. You may list this individual separately in the main author list if desired. A complete list of the individual members of the group must be included in the manuscript under a "Contributors" heading at the end of the manuscript file.

The group name will be entered for a PubMed citation. The names of the individual members of the group will be entered as collaborator names for PubMed citation, in the order in which they are published in the paper. If an individual is named both in the main author list and as a member of the group, they will appear in PubMed as both an author and a collaborator.

The Journal uses the contributor roles taxonomy (CRediT), which allows authors to describe the contributor roles in a standardized, transparent, and accurate way. Authors should choose from the contributor roles outlined on the CRediT website and supply this information upon submission. You may choose multiple contributor roles per author. Any other individuals who do not meet authorship criteria and made less substantive contributions should be listed in your manuscript as non-author contributors with their contributions clearly described. Following manuscript submission, any changes to contributor roles require the approval of the editor.

Submitting authors are required to provide an ORCID iD (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) at submission.

If you do not already have an ORCID iD, you can register for free via the ORCID website .

As ORCID identifiers are collected, they are included in papers and displayed online, both in the HTML and PDF versions of the publication, in compliance with recommended practice issued by ORCID.

ORCID functionality online allows users to link to the ORCID website to view an author’s profile and list of publications. ORCID iDs are displayed on web pages and are sent downstream to third parties in data feeds, where supported.

If you have registered with ORCID, you can associate your ORCID iD with your submission system account by going to your account details, entering your ORCID iD, and validating your details. Learn more about ORCID and how to link it to your account .

Peer Review

The Journal uses the ANSI/NISO Standard Terminology for Peer Review. If you would like further description of the peer review terms used here, please refer to the most recent standard definitions . If further clarification is needed, please contact the editorial office at [email protected] .

Peer review summary:

  • Identity transparency: single anonymized
  • Reviewer interacts with: editor
  • Review information published: none
  • Post publication commenting: none

The Journal operates single anonymized peer review, meaning that the identity of the authors is known to the editors and to the reviewers, but that the reviewers’ identities are known only to the editors and are hidden from the authors. During peer review, reviewers communicate directly with the editors but not the authors or other reviewers.

Once a submitted manuscript passes initial assessment by the Journal’s Editor-in-Chief or a Deputy Editor, it will then be passed to a handling editor, who will oversee peer review and recommend a final decision. The Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor makes the final decision on the submitted manuscript.

Editors and reviewers must not handle manuscripts if they have a conflict of interest with an author or the content. Editors make every effort to avoid potential conflicts of interest in the assignment of other editors and peer reviewers. For more information, please see the section on Conflicts of interest . During the peer review phase, your manuscript is typically sent to 2 peer reviewers.

You may suggest potential reviewers at submission. However, there is no guarantee the suggested reviewers will be selected by the Journal. Recommended reviewers should be experts in their field and able to provide an objective assessment of your manuscript without financial or interpersonal conflicts of interest with any authors. We encourage you to consider reviewers from a diverse range of backgrounds, including those from under-represented communities.

At the time of submission, you may request that specific individuals not be used as reviewers of your manuscript. Please do so in your cover letter, along with a brief explanation as to why you want them excluded. However, there is no guarantee these individuals will be excluded by the Journal.

Statistical methods should be rigorous, and reporting of statistical findings should be accurate and complete. Editors may request an expert statistical review of any submission containing statistical analysis.

Acceptance is contingent on author submission of complete and consistent data, accurate reference list, and conclusions consistent with the results demonstrated in the study. Inconsistencies and inaccuracies found after acceptance may warrant return of the manuscript for resubmission. The decision to publish a manuscript is solely the responsibility of the Editors. Opinions expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of the publisher or the Editors.

Authors of submissions that are deemed more suitable for review by  JNCI Cancer Spectrum   may be invited to transfer their JNCI submission to  JNCI Cancer Spectrum . Such manuscripts may be transferred at the authors’ request, eg, manuscripts are not automatically transferred without the author’s permission. 

Manuscript Transfer

In addition to these transfer opportunities, JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute sends transfers to other journals on related topics published by Oxford University Press. All transfers are sent according to the choice of the authors. Unless a reviewer declines to have their feedback shared, reviewer reports and the original decision letter are included in the transfer, but the reviewer identities are not shared. 

Transferred manuscripts may be sent out for additional peer review, and a decision will be made on the manuscript based on the feedback from all reviewers and the judgment of the editorial team.

Reviewer Recognition

The journal is very pleased to offer reviewers recognition for their time and contribution to the review process. For those with an ORCID iD, we offer the option to have verified reviews listed under their profile. Please visit the ORCID website for more information. Reviewers also have the option to have their reviews verified and listed on their Web of Science Researcher Profile . More information is provided in the reviewer invitation and during submission of the review.

Maintaining Confidentiality

The Journal holds all submitted manuscripts in confidence during the submission and publication process, releasing them only on an as-needed basis to individuals (e.g., peer reviewers, Editorial Board members) who agree to maintain that confidentiality. When questioned about an alleged unpublished manuscript, it is our policy to neither confirm nor deny its existence.

It is imperative that all authors – corresponding author, co-author(s), as well as invited editorialists – and their institutions maintain confidentiality about submitted manuscripts until the publication date. If there is a legitimate need to disclose data during the publication process (e.g., in grant proposals, to congressional committees, in citations), an author must discuss the matter with the Journal’s Scientific Managing Editor at [email protected] before making a disclosure.

Previously Published Material

All manuscripts are considered for publication with the clear understanding that their contents have not been previously published; abstracts and papers presented at scientific meetings and published as part of the proceedings are excepted, but copies must accompany the manuscript submission. Failure to submit all related abstracts and manuscripts will be cause for rejection, even if the failure is discovered after an acceptance letter is mailed. If there is any doubt about whether a manuscript qualifies as related, it is best to submit it..

The Journal strongly discourages authors from the practice of fragmented reporting of aspects of a single investigation. Authors submitting a manuscript that is but one of a number of existing or planned manuscripts related to a single study must include a statement submitted with the manuscript that (a) so identifies the manuscript and (b) justifies the use of the fragmented approach. Authors must describe in the cover letter the scope of each planned related manuscript. The submitted manuscript itself must clearly explain and justify the fragmented approach and reveal the full extent of the investigation.

Written permission from the following parties should be submitted with the manuscript, as appropriate: (a) those named in acknowledgments who have been credited with substantive scientific contributions to the work and (b) one author of each work cited in the manuscript as a personal communication, unpublished data, or a manuscript in preparation, submitted for publication, or in press.

Reusing Copyrighted Material

Authors submitting manuscripts should avoid the use of copyrighted material (eg, original, minimally altered, or partial versions of tables and illustrations). If the use of such material is unavoidable, authors must obtain written permission from the copyright holder for use by the Journal and Oxford University Press in print form, microfiche, and all electronic formats. This written permission must accompany the manuscript submission. Permission from the author of the original material is also required. For further information see our Online Licensing, Copyright and Permissions policies .

Preprint Policy

You retain the right to make an Author’s Original Version (also known as a preprint) available through various channels. Making an Author’s Original Version available does not prevent submission to the journal. For further information see our Online Licensing, Copyright and Permissions policies . If your paper is accepted, you will need to update the status of any preprint, including your published paper’s DOI. For details, see our Author Self-Archiving policy page.

Author Self Archiving and Public Access

JNCI has a NIH Portfolio Agreement with PubMed Central (PMC). Oxford University Press will automatically deposit to PMC, upon publication in an Issue, the Version of Record of all Open Access articles and manuscripts that acknowledge funding from the NIH, Wellcome Trust, CIHR, or HHMI. Authors who are funded by other organizations that require deposit in PMC or require that a manuscript be deposited before its Issue is published should refer to the information given on the  NCBI Submission Methods page, and should post their Accepted Manuscript to the NIH Manuscript Submission (NIHMS) system.

You may self-archive versions of your work on your own webpages, on institutional webpages, and in other repositories. If you want more information about the reuse rights you retain if you publish with us, please visit our Author Self Archiving Policy page.

Conflict of Interest

All authors are required to report conflicts of interest (COIs) related to the study at submission, using a modified version of the ICMJE COI disclosure form (see “ICMJE Conflicts of Interest” on the ICMJE website) that will be sent to each co-author after submission. The corresponding author will be asked to submit their statements as part of the submission process. In addition, a complete summary of all author disclosures, or a statement that no conflicts exist if that is the case, must be included in the "Conflicts of Interest" section at the end of the submitted manuscript file. The Journal requires the written disclosure section to match the COI forms submitted by each author to the Journal via the submission site. Editors will have access to the completed COI forms when evaluating a manuscript.

Authors will be asked to disclose: 1) any financial interest in or arrangement with a company whose product was used in a study or is referred to in a Review, MiniReview, opinion piece, or letter, 2) any financial interest in or arrangement with a competing company, and 3) any other financial connections, direct or indirect, or other situations that might raise the question of bias in the work reported or the conclusions, implications, or opinions stated—including pertinent commercial or other sources of funding for the individual author(s) or for the associated department(s) or organization(s), personal relationships, or direct academic competition. If the manuscript is published, such information should be communicated in the “Conflicts of Interest” following the text and references.

Reviewers and Editors

Reviewers and Editors are asked when they evaluate manuscripts whether they have a conflict of interest and are requested to decline to review if they feel they have a conflict. Editors will take declared conflicts into consideration when evaluating peer reviews.

Authors of any submitted manuscript who also serve as an Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor, or Associate Editor are not allowed to be involved in the editorial review or decisions on publication for their own manuscript. Authors are asked to include a COI statement in the accepted, published manuscript stating that the author, who is an Editor-in-Chief/Deputy Editor/Associate Editor and a co-author on the manuscript, was not involved in the editorial review or decision to publish the manuscript. This statement should be included in the "Conflicts of Interest" section in the main text file.

Invited Editorialists

Potential Editorialists will be required to complete a Conflict of Interest disclosure form at invitation. Invitations may be withdrawn to write an editorial if the Editors decide that potential conflicts are substantial.

A detailed definition of conflicts of interests is available .

To appeal an editorial decision, please contact the Editorial Office ( [email protected] ). With your message, please provide strong rationale or new data/information in response to the comments in the decision letter for why they Editors should reconsider their decision. All appeals will be dealt with through the Editorial Office by email only. Under no circumstances should authors contact our Editors directly regarding manuscripts. Every appeal will receive a response from the Editorial Office. Please do not resubmit your manuscript in the interim.  Submissions with a rejection decision from JNCI Cancer Spectrum that were previously submitted to JNCI will not be considered for appeal at JNCI.

Media Coverage

If your manuscript has the potential to be featured in a news story, please reach out to your institutional press office to discuss the possibility of issuing a press release. You can search for the public relations, publicity, or external relations department at your university or institution. You may share the manuscript with them and ask if they are willing to promote your work, provided that they respect the publication date. Please reach out to them as early as possible to allow time to coordinate the publication of the article and the press release. To set an embargo date for your article, contact the production team at [email protected] as soon as possible after receiving the letter that your manuscript has been sent to production for publication. Include the manuscript number and desired embargo date for the article in the email.

Post-publication Changes

Corrections.

We will only make changes to published articles if the publication record is seriously affected by the academic accuracy of the published information. Changes to published articles will not be made without a formal correction notice. Authors' corrections to Supplementary Data are made only in exceptional circumstances (for example major errors that compromise the conclusion of the study). For the removal and correction of published content we follow the COPE guidelines on retractions. To request corrections to published manuscripts please contact [email protected]. Requests for corrections should state ‘Correction notice request’ and the article ID in the subject line. Please also include as an email attachment the pdf of the article marked up with the requested amendments using the ‘Comment’ feature in Adobe Acrobat. Details on changes to published articles can be found here.

Post-publication Name Changes

JNCI and our publisher, Oxford University Press, are committed to working with authors who wish to update their name and/or pronouns following article publication and will make such changes upon request. To update their article(s), authors should contact  [email protected]   directly. OUP will respect authors’ privacy throughout the process and will:

update the metadata associated with the article(s) on the Oxford Academic platform

update the editable, digital versions of the relevant article(s), including any author bio and disclosure statements

make the changes without requiring a correction notice, though authors may opt to proceed with one

resupply the new metadata and updated article(s) to indexing and discovery services, which may have their own policies regarding such changes.

The Journal requires all authors, where ethically possible, to publicly release all data underlying any published paper as a condition of publication. Authors must include a Data Availability Statement in their published article. The availability of data, code, and other materials underlying research publications offers greater transparency, better trust in the literature and better reproducibility. Reuse of data offers enormous potential for corroboration of scientific findings and further discoveries. Making available the data underlying research publications supports the Journal’s educational and scholarly mission. The Journal requires all authors to follow the FAIR principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, Reproducibility) for data access as a condition of publication. Data Availability Statements are required in the main text files of both initial and revised submissions. The statements in initial submissions may outline how data will be made available at the time of publication, but because the journal publishes the accepted versions of manuscripts, all revised manuscripts must include a Data Availability Statement that is finalized and includes active links that can be verified by the peer reviewers and editors. (See " Data Availability Statement .") Authors will also be asked to provide this information in the submission site when uploading their files. We will allow exceptions where data sharing is not possible under the existing consent or Institutional Review Board constraints. If you require an exception to the Journal’s policy because your data cannot be broadly shared either through a public or controlled access site, you should explain alternative methods of sharing the data. If the data cannot be shared at all, either upon specific request to the investigators or through a repository, you should explain why in the submission questionnaire box and provide a data availability statement in the manuscript that states you are unable to share the data and provide the reason(s) why. Data availability statements will be checked as part of the peer review process for revised manuscripts. If you have questions, please contact the Editorial Office at [email protected] .

Choosing where to archive your data

Large molecular datasets and associated data included in the analyses should be shared via accessible controlled-access repositories. A controlled-access data repository should be used, if applicable, phenotype data with clear identifiers and necessary methods to link the molecular data with accompanying other data is mandatory. Examples of broadly accessible controlled-access repositories are listed in the table below. US National Institutes of Health-supported domain-specific data repositories that make data accessible for reuse and are open for both submitting and accessing data can be found at  Open Domain-Specific Data Sharing Repositories. We understand that some types of high-throughput/high-content data may require dedicated repositories outside this list. In this case, authors must provide a justification in the Data Availability Statement for the use of a repository other than the broadly accessible controlled-access repositories recommended below for Editorial consideration. If custom code is central to the conclusions of a study, or if the study generates a new mathematical/computational algorithm, the Data Availability Statement must indicate how the code or algorithm can be accessed, along with information on licensing and any restrictions on re-use. This statement must be in-place at peer-review. Similar to sharing of data, algorithms and their full set of parameters and hyper-parameters should be shared in an accessible repository.  

We will consider your manuscript as long as:

  • It is your own original work and does not duplicate any previously published work, including your own;
  • It is not under consideration, in peer review, or accepted for publication in any journal other than JNCI ;
  • It has not been published in any other journal; and
  • It contains nothing abusive, defamatory, libelous, obscene, fraudulent, or illegal.

Authors should observe high ethical standards and obey publication best practices. The following are all unacceptable:

  • Data falsification or fabrication
  • Plagiarism, including duplicate publication of your own work without proper citation
  • Misappropriation of work

We treat any case of ethical or publication malpractice very seriously. We will address them in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. Further information about OUP’s ethical policies is available at Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines .

How to Submit

You must submit your manuscript via our submission system, which may be found at the Journal’s online submission site . If you have not published with JNCI before, you will need to create an account. Additional help and instruction are available throughout the submission process on the website. Questions about submitting can be sent to the Editorial Office at [email protected] . To simplify the submission process and help author avoid unnecessary work, JNCI has relaxed guidelines for initial submission of Articles, Brief Communications, Commentaries, MiniReviews, Systematic Reviews (with or without meta-analyses) Meta-Analyses, and Reviews. Please follow the basic formatting requirements below for initial submission. Authors are required to format their manuscripts and meet all requirements as outlined below for revised submissions . Correspondences, Editorials, and Invited Responses are not typically revised and must meet all formatting requirements at initial submission.

Basic Formatting Requirements for Initial Submissions

An initial submission should include the following in order for us to evaluate your manuscript:

  • Files can be in any format but avoid submitting very large files (a single file should be no more than 30 MB)
  • A cover letter that explains why your submission is suitable for the journal by providing a summary of the key findings that would be of interest to our readers. Your cover letter should be brief (no more than 1-2 pages). 
  • A title page with the manuscript title, author names, and affiliations listed.
  • A single corresponding author should be designated on the title page.
  • Abstract (if applicable to the manuscript type). See the word limits below.
  • Figures should be submitted at the lowest resolution that will permit reviewers to evaluate the work.
  • Related manuscripts or abstracts should be included in the uploaded files.
  • Conflicts of Interest (or a statement that none exist) for all authors. See the “ Conflict of Interest Policy .”
  • Funding information.
  • A Data Availability Statement describing how data are/will be shared at the time of publication. See the Journal’s “ Research Data Policy .”
  • Please ensure your submission includes all supplementary material files and that they are cited in the text.
  • If your manuscript is a Phase III clinical trial, please be sure your submission includes the following: i) A CONSORT Checklist. ii) A brief description of the statistical plan of the original study that includes the primary and secondary endpoints, power calculation, and sample size, provided as a Clinical Trial Protocol file. iii) A CONSORT diagram showing the flow of participants through each stage of the randomized trial. Authors of randomized Phase II trials must provide to the Journal at the time of submission a brief description of the statistical plan of the original study that includes the primary and secondary endpoints, power calculation, and sample size, provided as a Clinical Trial Protocol file as a supplementary file to aid the Editors and Reviewers during review. Any manuscript that analyzes patient material or data that is derived from a clinical trial should include a copy of the protocol from the that clinical trial with the submission materials as a supplementary file to aid the Editors and Reviewers during review.
  • The journal encourages the presentation of uncropped images of blots and gels in figures for publication. If cropped or altered images of blots and gels are presented in a manuscript, the full uncropped and unedited images must be submitted as Supplementary Materials for review and publication. See Submission of data from blots and gels for more information.

Manuscript Format for Revised Submissions

When submitting revised manuscripts, authors must follow all  instructions in the Manuscript Checklist  (save the form to your computer locally, as it is interactive). Please note that as part of the revised manuscript submission, authors are required to upload a completed Manuscript Checklist, a point-by-point response to the comments from the Reviewers and Editors, a “tracked changes version” of the revised manuscript in which all changes from the original have been clearly indicated (eg, using any of the following: the track changes tool; comments in the margins; highlighting; underlined, strikethrough, color, and/or bold font), and a clean version of the revised manuscript to be used for publication should the manuscript be accepted. JNCI will publish the accepted version of the manuscript shortly after the author signs their license unless an embargo is requested. Please remember the accepted manuscript will publish as-is and that no changes will be made to the accepted version. The accepted version will be replaced by the typeset and copyedited version of the paper as soon as it is ready.

All files, for any revised manuscript, must be in a Microsoft Word–compatible format; such formats include the Word, Word Perfect, text, and RTF formats. Manuscript title page, the body of the manuscript, reference list, and figure legends must be typed double-spaced. Tables may be single- or double-spaced, although the type must be large enough and the lines of type sufficiently spaced to be easily read. Figures should be submitted separately from the main manuscript file in .pdf, .eps, .ai, .pptx, or .docx format. Avoid submitting very large files; figures should be submitted at the lowest resolution that will permit reviewers to evaluate the work. Electronic versions of figures will be used for production. If a figure file is large (as will be the case for some color figures and for photomicrographs and other figures that need to be reproduced at high resolution), the author should upload a low-resolution version of the figure with the manuscript submission; if higher-resolution files are necessary during the publication process, instructions for providing those files will be sent at that time. Related manuscripts or abstracts should be included in the uploaded files. Tables must be submitted in Microsoft Word format as Microsoft Word tables. Tables must be included at the end of the manuscript file and should not be submitted as separate files.

The title should be brief (14 words or fewer) and, except for Editorials and Correspondences, should not be in sentence form. Titles should not pose questions unless they are an Invited Editorial. If a Correspondence pertains to an item published in the Journal, the title of the letter should be "RE:" followed by the title of the original item. Please avoid abbreviations in the title. The title page should give the full name, degree(s),  affiliation of each author and the name and address of the single author to whom correspondence and/or reprint requests are to be sent. The Journal does not allow multiple corresponding authors. (See the “ Authorship ” policy above.) Include the full mailing address and e-mail address of the corresponding author. Authors are welcome to include a footnote designating that multiple authors contributed equally to the work. Authors should be aware that the individual named first in a list of authors of a manuscript, and his/her institutional affiliation, will be the one named in any publication-related or post-publication citation or communication by the Journal concerning the manuscript.

Abbreviations

Journal policy is to avoid the use of abbreviations whenever possible. If abbreviations are essential, define them upon first use in the Abstract, main text, tables, and figure legends. Author-created abbreviations are not to be used.

Word limits and figure/table/box limits by manuscript type

a The main text word limit includes the main text only: Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion. The Abstract, Data Availability statement, Funding, Conflicts of Interest, Acknowledgements, References, table notes, and Figure Legends are not counted.

Text Abstract

Articles, Systematic Reviews (with or without Meta-analysis), Meta-analyses, Commentaries, Reviews, and MiniReviews must contain an abstract of no more than 250 words; Brief Communications must contain an abstract of no more than 150 words. Abstracts should be written using complete sentences. An abstract should clearly state unique elements of the work, should be readable by non-specialists as well as by experts in the particular field, and should concisely state all important findings of the study. All information in the abstract (including implications) must be explicitly stated in the text. Include, as appropriate, the following headings in abstracts for Articles, Systematic Reviews (with or without Meta-analysis), and Meta-analyses (but not for Brief Communications, Commentaries, Reviews, or MiniReviews):  Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusion(s). The  Background  should come from the Introduction of the manuscript and should note relevant previous findings, designated as those of the authors and/or other investigators. It should also state the purpose of the present manuscript. The  Methods  should indicate all important materials or techniques used to fulfill the purpose of the study; these methods will be described more fully in the Methods section of the manuscript, and for each finding noted in the Results , a corresponding method should be provided in the Methods . The  Results  should contain only information detailed in the Results section of the manuscript. All important results should be noted in the  Results . (See “ Statistical Methods .”) The  Methods  must not contain results, and the  Results  must not contain methods. The next section of the abstract should state any important  Conclusion(s)  demonstrated or suggested by the results. The  Conclusion(s)  should come from the Discussion section and can include any implication(s) derived as a next logical step or inference directly from the results of the study reported and other related findings from investigators mentioned in the Discussion . Implication(s), as stated in the Discussion , may suggest directions for future experimental research and/or possible clinical applications and may note a particular need for confirmatory studies or offer cautions regarding interpretation of the results. Carefully review each statement in the abstract to ensure that the above points are satisfied.

Graphical abstract

A graphical abstract is a single figure prepared by the authors that summarizes the key point(s) of an article and serves as a visual introduction to encourage interest in the content. When preparing your graphical abstract, keep in mind that they are ideally suited for promoting your article on social media, so text should be large enough to be read in that context and the image should be oriented in landscape format. 

Please also consider the accessibility of your graphical abstract to all readers. See OUP’s Guidelines for making figures accessible . Graphical abstracts are peer reviewed and published as part of the article online and in the PDF. It also appears in the table of contents and some other journal pages including in search results. 

OUP partners with Tidbit , an online tool for creating attractive visuals that describe your work with an easy-to-use interface. Prospective authors are entitled to a discount of 10% to use Tidbit’s services using the discount code: JNCICS.  

Your graphical abstract should be submitted as a separate file (TIF, EPS, or editable PDF), selecting the appropriate file type designation in the online submission system. The file should be named “graphical_abstract”. Sans-serif font must be used and the figure ratio should be 5:2. Please see OUP's guidance on appropriate file format and resolution for graphics . 

If you create a graphical abstract using Tidbit, you will be provided with a unique link which should be added to the relevant field of the Journal's online submission system. 

Authors of Articles and Brief Communications may submit a graphical abstract in addition to a text abstract for their manuscript at initial submission.

All submitted text should be typed double-spaced and should be written in standard grammatical English. (Refer to the  American Medical Association Manual of Style, 11th Edition  on questions of style.) Indent the first line of each paragraph. Number all pages consecutively, beginning with the title page. Dot-matrix or italicized text will not be accepted. All symbols and abbreviations should be defined. Number references, tables, and figures in the order in which they are cited in the text. References in tables should continue the sequence of numbers in the text at the point where the table is first mentioned (ie, numbering of table references should not be reserved until the end of the reference list). Articles should contain a brief introduction and three additional sections labeled Methods, Results, and Discussion.

Pre-submission Language Editing

If you are not confident in the quality of your English, you may wish to use a language-editing service to ensure that editors and reviewers understand your paper. Oxford University Press partners with Enago, a leading provider of author services. Prospective authors are entitled to a discount of 30% for editing services at Enago, via this link: https://www.enago.com/pub/oup . Enago is an independent service provider, who will handle all aspects of this service, including payment. As an author you are under no obligation to take up this offer. Language editing is optional and does not guarantee that your manuscript will be accepted. Edited manuscripts will still undergo peer review by the journal.

Guidance for Reporting Demographic Information in Research Articles

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 if relevant to the main study question.

With regard to the collection and reporting of demographic data on sex/gender:  Sex refers to the biological characteristics of males and females. Gender includes more than sex and serves as a cultural indicator of a person’s personal and social identity. 

  • 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
  • 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.
  • When reporting the sex of participants in a table, include both sexes, as defined in the study, regardless of ratio (unless the study concerns a disease or condition relevant to a single sex, such as ovarian cancer).

With regard to the collection and reporting of demographic data on 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 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 categories of the study population should be reported in the Results section.
  • The terms African American or Black may be used to describe participants in studies involving populations in the US, following how such information was recorded or collected for the study. However, the 2 terms should not be used interchangeably in reports of research unless both terms were formally used in the study, and the terms should be used consistently within a specific article. 
  • Generally, abbreviations of categories for race and ethnicity should be avoided unless necessary because of space constraints (eg, in tables and figures) or to avoid long, repetitive strings of descriptors. If used, any abbreviations should be clearly explained parenthetically in text or in table and figure footnotes or legends.
  • When reporting the race and ethnicity of participants in a table, include all categories, as defined in the study, regardless of ratio. Be as specific as possible, even if these comprise a small percentage of participants.

The methods of key experiments and statistical analyses must be in the main manuscript and not in the “Supplementary Methods.” Methods descriptions should be succinct but sufficiently detailed to allow replication of the study by a qualified investigator. If a procedure has been previously published, a brief description should be provided in addition to the reference, especially if the procedure was modified. Authors should specify full names, types, amounts, and sources of reagents (giving complete names of suppliers); full names as well as standard abbreviations of labeled compounds and isotopes used for labeling; concentrations of solutions; and reaction conditions (eg, incubation times and temperatures). In addition, techniques and procedures used should be accurately named, clearly and thoroughly explained, referenced when appropriate, and organized under appropriate subheadings. The “Methods” section must be complete and should include the methodology corresponding to each of the end points presented in the “Results.” Authors should specify experimental conditions that limit the generalizability of the results.

For clinical trials, authors should clearly define and explain the purpose of the study, study design, numbers of patients, clinical staging of disease, type and sequence of treatments given before and during the study, time points for evaluation of response, duration of follow-up, end points used (eg, overall survival, disease-free survival), specific outcomes assessed, and methods of assessment. This requirement should be met, even when the major focus of a study is not the clinical trial to which it is related (eg, association of gene, messenger RNA, or protein expression with disease therapy or prognosis). (See also “ Human Subjects .”)

Where appropriate, clinical and epidemiologic studies should be analyzed to see if there is an effect of sex or any of the major ethnic groups. If there is no effect, it should be so stated in the “Results”.

The “Methods” section should contain a "Statistical Analysis" subsection, where applicable. (See “ Statistical Methods .”)

The “Methods” sections of Articles are included in the word count (see “Articles”). Therefore, if meeting the requirements causes the article to exceed the word limit, general methods that do not specifically describe the key experiments and analyses may be moved to the online-only “Supplementary Materials.”

Statistical Methods

The methods of statistical analysis should be described in sufficient detail that a knowledgeable reader could reproduce the analysis if the data were available. The word "significant" should be used only if a result is statistically significant. (If biological, clinical, or prognostic significance is being referred to, that should be made clear.) A  P value or confidence interval should be cited in the abstract and in the text for any statistically significant finding reported. Exact  P values should be given unless P is less than .001. (If P is less than .001, write “ P < .001”. If P is greater than .99, write “ P > .99”. If P is between .99 and .01, report to two decimal places. However, if less than .05 but equal to or greater than .045, report to three decimal places. If between .009 and .001, report to three decimal places.) All tests of statistical significance should be 2-sided, and the abstract and the text should so state. Outcome variables should generally be given as point estimates, with 95% confidence intervals or standard deviations rather than standard errors.

Reporting Guidelines

Authors are encouraged to follow published standard reporting guidelines for the study discipline. Please refer to this table.

Ethical Research Requirements

JNCI follows  COPE guidelines on ethical oversight.   We take research ethics very seriously and all research published in our journal must have been conducted in a fair and ethical manner. Wherever appropriate, the journal requires that all research be done according to international and local guidelines. 

Human Subjects

When reporting on human subjects, authors should indicate in the Methods section whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Helsinki Declaration (1964, amended most recently in 2008), which was created by the World Medical Association. Manuscripts must include a statement in the Methods section that the human investigations were performed after approval by a local ethics committee, institutional review board and/or local licensing committee, to confirm the study met national and international guidelines for research on humans. The name of the authorizing body and any reference/permit numbers (where available) should be stated in the Methods section. Authors must be prepared to provide further information to the Journal editorial office upon request.  For non-interventional studies, where ethical approval is not required or where a study has been granted an exemption by an ethics committee, this should be stated within the manuscript with a full explanation. Human subjects must give written informed consent, or it must be obtained from their guardian. If this requirement was waived, this must be included in the Methods section along with the name of the authorizing body. Authors must be prepared to provide dated copies signed by the participants and author(s) to the Journal editorial team if requested. In studies where verbal informed consent has been obtained rather than written informed consent, this must be explained and stated within the manuscript.  In reporting randomized clinical trials, authors must comply with published  CONSORT guidelines . The recommended checklist must be completed and provided to the Journal at the time of manuscript submission. The recommended trial flow diagram should be presented as a figure (usually Figure 1). Because manuscripts describing clinical trials are generally submitted as Articles, the allowable number of figures and tables for this format will be increased by one to accommodate the flow diagram. Thus, Articles describing clinical trials may have up to nine figures and tables. (See also " Methods .")   Authors of Phase III clinical trials, should include the following with their submission: i) A CONSORT Checklist. ii) A brief description of the statistical plan of the original study that includes the primary and secondary endpoints, power calculation, and sample size, provided as a Clinical Trial Protocol file. iii) A CONSORT diagram showing the flow of participants through each stage of the randomized trial. Authors of randomized Phase II trials must provide to the Journal at the time of submission a brief description of the statistical plan of the original study that includes the primary and secondary endpoints, power calculation, and sample size, provided as a Clinical Trial Protocol file as a supplementary file to aid the Editors and Reviewers during review. Any manuscript that analyzes patient material or data that is derived from a clinical trial should include a copy of the protocol from the that clinical trial with the submission materials as a supplementary file to aid the Editors and Reviewers during review. Clinical trials should be registered in accordance with the criteria outlined by the  International Committee of Medical Journal Editors , including the December 2017 update. Authors should provide the trial registration number at the end of the Abstract. It should also be in the Methods section with a link to the trial registration, to be cited as a reference.

Animal Subjects

Studies involving research on animals must have been carried out after obtaining approval from the relevant institutional ethics committee or institutional animal use and care committee. Research must be conducted in accordance with applicable national and international guidelines. A statement that institutional and national and international standards (where applicable) for the care and use of laboratory animals were followed should be included in the “Methods” section.  All manuscripts must include a statement in the “Methods” section providing details of the name of the ethics committee(s) which approved the study and include the permit or animal license numbers where available. Where a study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethical approval, this should be stated along with the name of the ethics committee which gave the exemption, and the reasons for the exemption. Authors must be prepared to provide further information to the Journal editorial office upon request. Authors are encouraged to consult the ARRIVE guidelines recommended by the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research. 

Gene Nomenclature

Journal policy is to allow use of the specific gene symbol preferred by the author. For human genes, if a symbol other than that listed in Human Gene Mapping is preferred, the author should identify parenthetically, at first mention, the appropriate gene symbol listed in the Human Gene Mapping report from the most recent international workshop on human gene mapping. All Human Gene Mapping designations for human genes should be capitalized; for other species, the symbols should follow nomenclature committee recommendations, and the species of origin should be identified at first mention.

Sequence Information

Before final acceptance of any manuscript containing new nucleotide and/or amino acid sequences, the author(s) must deposit the sequence information with the  GenBank database . Alternatively, authors of manuscripts originating from outside the United States may submit sequence information to either  the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) database  or  the DNA Databank of Japan database . The accession number(s) must be provided to the Journal to verify that the information has been deposited in one of the three databases. Accession number(s) will be published in the relevant figure legend(s). (Please see “ Research Data Policy ” above.)

Microarray and Proteomic Data

Microarray and proteomic data serving as the basis of manuscripts published in JNCI  should be made publicly available at the time of publication. JNCI supports the  Minimum Information About a Microarray Experiment (MIAME) guidelines  created by the Functional GEnomics Data Society (formerly known as the MGED Society). The data provided should include: (1) a file of the complete expression data for each microarray used in the manuscript. The expression data provided should include the complete output of the image analysis program before data selection and transformation for all probes/spots on the array—for example, for Affymetrix arrays the CEL files should be provided; (2) a file documenting the format of the expression data files; (3) a file identifying the genes represented on the array; (4) a file annotating the samples, indicating what labels were used for which samples and which samples were hybridized to which arrays; the annotations should include the clinical data sufficient for each sample to reproduce the analyses mentioned in the manuscript. Authors are encouraged to deposit the data with either the  GEO  or  ArrayExpress  public archives and to provide accession numbers by the time the manuscript is accepted. The data may alternatively be made available at the author's institutional Web site. Data stored on a public or institution web-based database must be cited in the text or supplementary files using the accession numbers and/or URL. (Please see “ Research Data Policy ” above.)

Authors of provisionally accepted manuscripts that use cell lines should state the methods used to authenticate any cell lines used in their studies and should give the date of the last authentication.

Submission of data from blots and gels

The journal encourages the presentation of uncropped images of blots and gels in figures for publication.  If cropped images are used, you must submit the full uncropped images as Supplementary Materials for review and publication.  Do not differentially enhance bands or lanes to emphasize specific findings. Also, the journal discourages high-contrast blots and gels as overexposure may mask additional bands and renders the data non-quantitative.  Finally, loading controls must be run on the same blot.

Sharing Materials

Authors of manuscripts published in the Journal are expected to honor reasonable requests from qualified researchers to share biological materials that were used in the reported study. However, authors are not expected to share materials that are difficult to obtain and cannot be propagated, nor are they expected to provide materials for commercial use.

Availability of Data and Materials

The Journal requires all authors, where ethically possible, to publicly release all data underlying any published manuscript as a condition of publication. Authors must include a Data Availability Statement in their published manuscript. (See “ Research Data Policy .”)

Data Availability Statement

Data Availability Statements provide a standardized format to describe the availability of data underlying the research results of the paper. The statement may refer to original data generated in the course of the study or to third-party data analyzed in the paper. The statement should describe and provide means of access, where applicable, by linking to the data or providing the required unique identifier. All supporting data and pre-processing/analysis code, as well as any previously unreported software/bioinformatic tool, must be made available to editors and peer reviewers upon request at any time during peer review for the purposes of evaluating the manuscript. Authors are responsible for providing mechanisms for peer-reviewers to access data and source-code anonymously, as required to enable review of the manuscript. Upon Submission of a Revised Manuscript

Authors must make all data necessary to reproduce the aims of the study and associated source code and protocols promptly available without undue qualifications. All restrictions must be clearly stated in the Data Availability Statement, along with details of how access can be obtained, what criteria will be used to approve data access requests, and any conditions or restrictions on data re-use. This statement must be finalized at submission of a revised manuscript and will be considered as part of the assessment of the manuscript. It is not permissible to require (co)authorship in exchange for post-publication access to published molecular data and associated source code, protocols, meta data, and data dictionaries. The general statement “data are available upon reasonable request” is not acceptable. A Data Availability Statement that implies that the corresponding author has the authority to decide who would be a worthy recipient of the data used in the published paper is unacceptable. We consider legitimate arguments for restricting immediate availability privacy and ethical concerns explicitly stated in policy documents by a governing organization charged with data curation. However, the Data Availability Statement must clearly describe a mechanism whereby an interested individual may apply to such an organization to obtain the data. If patient data were used for the research study, deidentified data should be made available.

Sample Data Availability Statements

Data citation.

The journal   supports the  Force 11 Data Citation Principles  and requires that all publicly available datasets be fully referenced in the reference list with an accession number or unique identifier such as a digital object identifier (DOI). Data citations should include the minimum information recommended by  DataCite :

[dataset]* Authors, Year, Title, Publisher (repository or archive name), Identifier

*The inclusion of the [dataset] tag at the beginning of the citation helps us to correctly identify and tag the citation. This tag will be removed from the citation published in the reference list.

Author Contributions/CRediT

The Journal uses the contributor roles taxonomy (CRediT), which allows authors to describe the contributor roles in a standardized, transparent, and accurate way. Authors should choose from the contributor roles outlined on the CRediT website and supply this information upon submission. You may choose multiple contributor roles per author.

List of Contributors

If you are acknowledging the work of non-author contributors or listing members of a collaborative group or consortium, they should be listed under this heading with their affiliations. See “ Authorship .”

Details of all funding sources for the work in question should be given in a separate section entitled “Funding.” This should appear before the “Notes” section. The following rules should be observed:

  • The sentence should begin: ‘This work was supported by …’
  • The full official funding agency name should be given (ie, ‘the National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health’ or simply 'National Institutes of Health' not ‘NCI' [one of the 27 sub-institutions] or 'NCI at NIH’)
  • Grant numbers should be complete and accurate and provided in parentheses as follows: ‘(grant number ABX CDXXXXXX)’
  • Multiple grant numbers should be separated by a comma as follows: ‘(grant numbers ABX CDXXXXXX, EFX GHXXXXXX)’
  • Agencies should be separated by a semi-colon (plus ‘and’ before the last funding agency)
  • Where individuals need to be specified for certain sources of funding the following text should be added after the relevant agency or grant number 'to [author initials]'.

An example is given here: ‘This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (P50 CA098252 and CA118790 to R.B.S.R); and the Alcohol & Education Research Council (HFY GR667789). Oxford Journals will deposit all NIH-funded articles in PubMed Central. Further details is available on the Author resources page. Authors must ensure that manuscripts are clearly indicated as NIH-funded using the guidelines above.

CrossRef Funding Data Registry

In order to meet your funding requirements authors are required to name their funding sources, or state if there are none, during the submission process. For further information on this process or to find out more about CHORUS, visit CHORUS initiative.

Conflicts of Interest

Author disclosures (or a statement that none exist) is required in the main text files of all submissions. Authors’ names should be used. Please note the journal’s policy (see " Conflicts of Interest ") on requiring Editorial Leadership to include a statement that they were not involved in the editorial review or decision to publish manuscripts for which they are a coauthor.

Acknowledgements

A statement detailing the role of the funder must be included in this section. This statement is required even if there was no funding for the study, by indicating this is not applicable. The standard statement is “The funder did not play a role in the design of the study; the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; the writing of the manuscript; and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.”

Reference List

For reference citation, the Journal follows the style guidelines of the American Medical Association Manual of Style, 11th Edition . The reference list should be typed as a separate section at the end of the manuscript. Each reference should be double-spaced. Number references in the order in which they are cited in the text. Use Index Medicus abbreviations of periodical names. For each periodical article, provide author(s), title, journal, year, volume, issue, and first and last page numbers; if a manuscript has more than six authors, list the first three and add 'et al.' For a book chapter or section, name author(s) and title of the pertinent part, the book's editor(s), the book's title, the publisher and location, the year, and the page numbers. Papers still "in press" also may be listed. However, citation of manuscripts in preparation or submitted for publication, unpublished observations, and personal communications should be noted parenthetically in the text, not in the reference list; in each case, cite the names of the first six investigators only and add 'et al.' Permission must be obtained in writing from one author of papers still in press, in preparation, or submitted for publication and for use of unpublished data and personal communications. EndNote and Reference Manager programs for publishing and managing references/bibliographies. If you use EndNote or Reference Manager to facilitate referencing citations, this journal's style is available for use. 

The EndNote program and relevant information is available .

Please follow the instructions on this page regarding purchasing, downloading, and using the software.

Figures, Tables, and Boxes

Manuscripts may contain a specific, limited number of figures and tables. Some manuscripts may include Boxes which will also count towards this limit. Each panel of a figure will be counted as a separate illustration, unless the panels represent a logical sequence of closely related items; dissimilar panels should not be grouped together (eg, a graph and a photo) unless they present closely related data in different forms. The maximum numbers of figures plus tables are as follows: Articles and Reviews, eight (8); Commentaries and MiniReviews, four (4); Brief Communications, two (2); Correspondences, one (1). An exception to these limitations will be allowed when clinical trials are reported. (See more on requirements for clinical trials under “ Human Subjects. ”) Revised manuscripts from authors will not be further processed unless these requirements are met.

For a simple guide to preparing figure files, please see the short guidelines here . Where possible, artwork should be in black and white for good reproduction. Gray shading in figures may not reproduce well for publication and should be avoided; do not use overall background shading or bullet points in figures; do not use gray-shaded bars in graphs—use bars with solid, open, or hatched fill (but avoid exotic varieties of hatching); using lines only to define axes (not across the top or right or as ruler guides) is preferred for the clearest presentation. Please report all legend information in the text legend rather than next to or inside the graph. Avoid fine lines and very small type and symbols in figures: Lines should be reasonably dark, and type and symbols should be easily read if the figure is reduced for publication. Label separate figure parts with capital letters A, B, C, etc. Capitalize only the first word in a group of words (eg, in an axis label) unless capitalization is used in the text of the paper. Do not include figure legends in the figure files. A legend should begin with the title of the figure; do not include the title on the figure. Identify in each legend any symbols or letters in the figure and define all abbreviations.

For tables, the type must be large enough and the lines of type sufficiently well-spaced to be easily read. Provide table titles, footnotes (as appropriate), and headings for all columns. Indicate units of measurement used and define all abbreviations, preferably in the first footnote. When providing numbers and the corresponding percentages in tables, put the percentages in parentheses and keep the numbers in the same column. Use the same formatting for HR (95% CI) and OR (95% CI). Confidence intervals (CIs) should be formatted as (X to Y). Tables must be provided in Microsoft Word Table format and should not be provided as images or as Microsoft Excel worksheets. Each table should be created as a new Word table rather than re-using previously used table formats. Tables should not include bold or italicized text, shading, or color. If bold, italics, shading, and/or color cannot be avoided, please convert your table into a figure. Please do not use bullet points in your tables. Gene symbols should be italicized in tables and are an exception to this rule. Please refer to the tables in a recently published corrected article PDF to see how tables should be presented and present yours accordingly.

Boxes should contain text only. The type must be large enough and the lines of type sufficiently well-spaced to be easily read They should have a title and may contain footnotes. Bullet points and numbered lists are allowed in boxes. They should be placed at the end of the manuscript file. Boxes should be created in Word and should not be inserted as images. Boxes should not include bold or italicized text, shading, or color.

Figure accessibility and alt text

Incorporating alt text (alternative text) when submitting your paper helps to foster inclusivity and accessibility. Good alt text ensures that individuals with visual impairments or those using screen readers can comprehend the content and context of your figures. The aim of alt text is to provide concise and informative descriptions of your figure so that all readers have access to the same level of information and understanding, and that all can engage with and benefit from the visual elements integral to scholarly content. Including alt text demonstrates a commitment to accessibility and enhances the overall impact and reach of your work.

Good alt text should be objective and:

  • Concise: Given the time-consuming nature of screen reader use, strive for alt text under 100 words, and preferably around 25 to 30 words.
  • Consistent: Maintain language consistency with the main body of text.
  • Unique: Avoid repeating information found in captions or surrounding text. For images entirely explained by captions or text, consider labeling them as decorative indicating that their purpose is primarily ornamental rather than conveying additional information.
  • Clear: Spell out contractions, abbreviations, numbers, and non-Latin characters. Present information in a logical and consistent sequence.
  • Relevant: Align descriptions with the image's context, intent, and the focus of the text, and title. Different purposes within a work may warrant distinct alt text descriptions.
  • Simple: Because screen readers don't interpret formatting, refrain from using formatting (e.g., bullet points) in alt text.
  • Inclusive: Ensure your text doesn't contain additional information that a sighted person would miss.
  • Standalone: Screen readers indicate that alt text replaces an image, so avoid phrases like "Image of..." or "Graphic of..."
  • Complete: Conclude alt text with a full stop/period, allowing for a pause before the screen reader continues.

Additional considerations:

  • Grouped images and multi-panel figures: When images are grouped, provide alt text for individual figures rather than a collective description.
  • Punctuation: Screen readers are unable to interpret all types of punctuation, so only use the following: periods, commas, semi-colons, colons, parentheses, brackets, quotation mark, and sashes
  • Art works: Although starting with a generic "picture of" or "image of" is redundant, it can be beneficial to specify a particular type of image in art works (sculpture, painting, drawing, etc.).
  • Graphs: Summarize the graph by emphasizing key details, trends, and relationships in the data. If significant, explicitly list underlying values in a logical order. Avoid redundancy if key values have already been discussed in the text. Use full units like "kilometers" for accurate pronunciation by screen readers.

To submit alt text with your article, include it alongside figure captions as in the example below:

Decorative photograph of a vintage French journal cover featuring an article from 1932.

Figure 1 caption: L’Exposition Manet au Musée de l’Orangerie in ‘Une Rétrospective d’Édouard Manet a Été Inaugurée Hier au Musée de l’Orangerie’,  L’Excelsior , 19 June 1932. (Photo: Bibliothèque Nationale de France.). Published in Michela Passini, A Microhistory of Heritage Creation Processes: The Impressionists Exhibited at the Orangerie (1930–1937), Oxford Art Journal , Volume 46, Issue 2, August 2023, Pages 241-259, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxartj/kcad023

Alt text: Decorative photograph of a vintage French journal cover featuring an article from 1932.

You can find more guidelines on how to draft good alt text at the following links:

  • Are there guidelines for describing complex images? | DO-IT (washington.edu)
  • Accessibility at Penn State | Charts & Accessibility (psu.edu)

Supplementary Materials

Material that substantially enhances a manuscript but cannot, for practical reasons, be printed in the Journal will be considered for placement on the Journal's Web site as Supplementary Material. Data supplements may include large data sets, videos, three-dimensional structures, extensive sequence comparisons, survey instruments, or ancillary data that are useful to readers but not integral to the printed version of a paper. If methods are extensive, general methods not describing specific experiments and analyses (acquisition, maintenance and verification of cell lines, animal models, antibodies, etc.; primer sequences; computer code; lengthy statistical and mathematical models) may be moved to a Supplementary Methods section. Supplementary files should be included with the manuscript submission and will generally be subject to peer review. Authors may not alter a Supplementary Materials file after a manuscript is accepted. The total number of supplementary figures plus supplementary tables per manuscript should not exceed the total number of figures and tables allowed for the specific manuscript type submitted. If more supplementary tables and/or figures are submitted, a statement to justify why these are necessary must be included in the submission questionnaire. Supplementary files will not be copyedited before publication.

Third-Party Content in Open Access Papers

If you will be publishing your paper under an Open Access license but it contains material for which you do not have Open Access re-use permissions, please state this clearly by supplying the following credit line alongside the material: Title of content Author, original publication, year of original publication, by permission of [rights holder] This image/content is not covered by the terms of the Creative Commons license of this publication. For permission to reuse, please contact the rights holder.

Licensing and charges

After your manuscript is accepted the corresponding author will be required to accept a mandatory license to publish agreement. As part of the licensing process you will be asked to indicate whether or not you wish to pay for open access. If you do not select the open access option, your paper will be published with standard subscription-based access and you will not be charged. Open access articles are published under Creative Commons licenses.

RCUK/Wellcome Trust funded authors publishing in this journal can use the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY) for their articles.

JNCI  offers the option of publishing under either a standard license or an open access license. Please note that some funders require open access publication as a condition of funding. If you are unsure whether you are required to publish open access, please do clarify any such requirements with your funder or institution.

Should you wish to publish your manuscript open access, you should select your choice of open access license in our online system after your manuscript has been accepted for publication. You will need to pay an open access charge to publish under an open access license.

Details of the open access licenses and open access charges .

OUP has a growing number of Read and Publish agreements with institutions and consortia which provide funding for open access publishing. This means authors from participating institutions can publish open access, and the institution may pay the charge.  Find out if your institution is participating .

Please note that these charges are in addition to any color charges that may apply.

Orders from the UK will be subject to the current UK VAT charge. For orders from the rest of the European Union, OUP will assume that the service is provided for business purposes. Please provide a VAT number for yourself or your institution, and ensure you account for your own local VAT correctly.

Color Figures

The print charge for color figures in JNCI  is $600 per figure. There is no charge to publish figures in color online. You will be asked to agree to charges relating to color figures at the time of manuscript submission and acceptance.

Accessing and Ordering Copies of Your Article

All corresponding authors will be provided with a free access link to their article upon publication.  The link will be sent via email to the article’s corresponding author who is free to share the link with any co-authors.  Please see OUP’s Author Self-Archiving policy for more information regarding how this link may be publicly shared depending on the type of license under which the article has published.   All authors have the option to purchase up to 10 print copies of the issue in which they publish at a 50% discount. Orders should be placed through this order form . Orders must be made within 12 months of the online publication date.

  • Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

  • Online ISSN 1460-2105
  • Print ISSN 0027-8874
  • Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
  • About Oxford Academic
  • Publish journals with us
  • University press partners
  • What we publish
  • New features  
  • Open access
  • Institutional account management
  • Rights and permissions
  • Get help with access
  • Accessibility
  • Advertising
  • Media enquiries
  • Oxford University Press
  • Oxford Languages
  • University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

  • Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
  • Cookie settings
  • Cookie policy
  • Privacy policy
  • Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Instructions for Authors

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

Original Investigation

Brief report, research letter, systematic review (without meta-analysis), narrative review, special communication, clinical challenge, diagnostic test interpretation, clinical evidence synopsis, cancer care chronicles, 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

Open access, 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
  • Permission to Republish Material
  • AMA Manual of Style
  • EQUATOR Network
  • About This Journal

Contact Information

JAMA Oncology , Mary L. (Nora) Disis, MD, Editor, Cancer Vaccine Institute, University of Washington, 850 Republican St, Box 358050, Seattle, WA 98109-4714; email: [email protected] . Manuscripts should be submitted online at http://manuscripts.jamaonc.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

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.

  • No more than 7 authors
  • ≤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

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 Is Your Diagnosis?" with 4 single-phrase plausible diagnosis options 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

Clinical Evidence Synopsis full info

Synopsis is intended to help clinicians apply evidence to practice by summarizing new evidence from recently published data-driven reviews and reports.

  • Begins with 1-sentence clinical question and 1-sentence clinical application statement
  • 1 Evidence Profile box
  • 1 table or figure
  • ≤7 references

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

Cancer Care Chronicles 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 online.

  • ≤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.

Study Types

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 ). A study type is required. Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study type and 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 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. Research Letters may have no more than 7 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. 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.

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.

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. 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. 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 .

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

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 diagnosis options with one of these being the most correct response for the question "What Is Your Diagnosis?" Manuscripts should include a brief discussion of the relevant clinical issues and provide well-supported (evidence-based) explanations for why 1 of the 4 potential diagnoses is correct and the other options are not. For a recently published example, see JAMA Oncology . 2021;7(9):1392-1393. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.1707 .

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? Include: CAR,ONC Exclude: JAMA, DER, IMD, NEU, OPH, PED, OTO, PSY, SUR, 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 the 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). 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 Oncology . 2017;3(7):991-992. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.0257 .

Clinical Evidence Synopsis is intended to help clinicians apply evidence to practice by summarizing new evidence from recently published data-driven reviews and reports, such as the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews or the US Preventive Services Task Force Reports. Manuscripts submitted for the Clinical Evidence Synopsis section should begin with a 1-sentence Clinical Question (such as, "Clinical Question: What hemoglobin threshold for prescribing red blood cell transfusions is best for minimizing both red blood cell use and adverse clinical outcomes in anemic patients?") and a 1-sentence Clinical Application statement (such as, "Clinical Application: Compared with higher hemoglobin thresholds, a hemoglobin threshold of 7 g/dL or 8 g/dL reduces the number of red blood cell units transfused without adverse associations with mortality, cardiac morbidity, functional recovery, or length of hospital stay."). The manuscript should include the following main headings and subsections:

Introduction: 1 brief paragraph of background and context for the clinical question Evidence Profile: In a Box or list include the following bulleted sections: No. of studies overall No. of randomized controlled trials Study years (eg, 1956 to 2012) (not years of publication) No. of patients Men XX% Women XX% Race/ethnicity Age (mean XX and range xx-xxx) Setting Countries Comparison (eg, higher vs lower hemoglobin threshold for transfusion of patients with anemia) Primary outcomes Secondary outcomes

If the manuscript summarizes a Cochrane Collaboration review, please indicate at the bottom of the Evidence Profile whether the full review represents an original review or an update. The original publication (eg, Cochrane review or US Preventive Services Task Force) should be referenced.

Summary of Findings: a brief summary of the results of the review or report with no more than 1 simple table or figure. Results must include absolute rates or absolute differences and number needed to treat. Discussion: a brief summary of the key results placed in context for the clinician. This section should include 3 subheadings: Limitations; Comparison of Findings With Current Practice Guidelines (if applicable); and Areas in Need of Future Study.

The text length (complete manuscript and Evidence Profile excluding the title, references, and acknowledgment section) should have a maximum length of 800 words with 1 table or figure and no more than 7 references. Manuscripts submitted for the Clinical Evidence Synopsis section should have no more than 3 authors. For an example, see JAMA . 2013;309(1):83-84 . Please submit the original full review at the time the Clinical Evidence Synopsis is submitted.

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 Cancer Care Chronicles 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. 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.

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

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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 .

Please verify that all information and materials in the manuscript are original. The journal generally does not republish text, tables, figures, or other material from other publishers, except in rare circumstances. If you believe that you must include content that is owned by a third party, please let us know and provide information about all material that has been previously published and, when applicable, include author(s), title of article, title of journal or book or other publication, and complete citation, doi, and/or URL. The publisher or other third party's permission to reproduce in print and online and in licensed versions of this journal should be submitted when the manuscript is submitted.

See Permission to Reproduce Copyright-Protected Material Form .

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

Table 4. Patient Data by Study Group

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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)

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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.

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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

clinical cancer research author guidelines

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.

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 generally published Online First and then again in a print/online issue.

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 .

Authors have the option to choose the type of Publishing Agreement, either (1) a free no-fee public access option or (2) one of two author-pay open access options. These options will be available for authors to request at the time of manuscript submission. Reviewers and editors will be unaware of the request for open access until after a final decision is made. For detailed information on public access, open access (including fees, waivers, and discounts), copyright, and licensing, please see below.

  • Copyright Transfer. In consideration of the action of the American Medical Association (AMA) in reviewing and editing this submission (manuscript, tables, figures, video, audio, and other supplemental files for publication), I hereby transfer, assign, or otherwise convey all copyright ownership, including any and all rights incidental thereto, exclusively to the AMA, in the event that such work is published by the AMA.
  • Federal Employment. I was an employee of the US federal government or that of another nation when this work was conducted and prepared for publication; therefore, it is not protected by the Copyright Act, and copyright ownership cannot be transferred.
  • Work for Hire. I am employed by an institution that considers this submission a "work made for hire" and that requires an authorized representative of the institution to assign copyright on my behalf.
  • Eligibility: Available only for authors of manuscripts reporting research funded by a not-for-profit foundation or agency or unfunded research. Note: If your open access funding source is commercial, only a CC-BY-NC-ND license is available.
  • Author requirements: Payment of $5000 and transfer of a publication license to the journal.
  • License rights: Immediate open access on journal website on the day of publication, retention of copyright, and a CC-BY license that permits others to distribute, remix, tweak, and build on the work, even commercially, without permission, provided that credit is given to the original authors and journal.
  • Eligibility: Available for authors of manuscripts reporting research funded by a commercial funding source.
  • Author requirements: Payment of $5000 and grant of a publication license to the journal.
  • License rights: Immediate open access on journal website on the day of publication and a CC-BY-NC-ND license that permits others to distribute the work without permission, provided that credit is given to the original authors and journal and that the article is not altered or used commercially.
  • Open Access Waivers and Discounts Waivers and discounts on open access article processing charges are available for eligible authors from Hinari Core Offer countries with limited resources.

The journal makes all research articles free public access 12 months after publication on the journal website or immediately for articles published under an open access license.

Authors of research articles may deposit the accepted version of the manuscript (ie, the peer-reviewed manuscript that you submitted on which this decision is based) 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 12 months after publication or immediately if you have purchased an open access license. 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 article 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: April 25, 2024

Quick Links

  • About JAMA Oncology
  • Why Publish in JAMA Oncology
  • 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

IMAGES

  1. (PDF) Clinical Cancer Advances 2006: Major Research Advances in Cancer Treatment, Prevention

    clinical cancer research author guidelines

  2. (PDF) Evaluating Quality in Clinical Cancer Research: The MD Anderson Cancer Center Experience

    clinical cancer research author guidelines

  3. 解刊

    clinical cancer research author guidelines

  4. Types of Cancer Research

    clinical cancer research author guidelines

  5. Clinical Cancer Research Template

    clinical cancer research author guidelines

  6. Clinical Cancer Research Template

    clinical cancer research author guidelines

VIDEO

  1. Updates to Radiation Therapy in Breast Cancer for NCCN Guideline

  2. Dr. Campbell Discusses the Goals of the New RCC Guidelines

  3. Clinical cancer trial treatment becomes lifeline for patient

  4. Cancer Biomedicine BSc online Open Day

  5. Dr. Haigentz on Transforming Advancements in Oncology with Teamwork and Collaborative Research

  6. RCC: Establishing Particular Agents’ Roles in Sequencing

COMMENTS

  1. Clinical Cancer Research | American Association for Cancer Research">Clinical Cancer Research | American Association for Cancer ...

    Clinical Cancer Research publishes articles that focus on innovative clinical and translational research bridging the laboratory and the clinic. Topics include targeted therapies; mechanisms of drug sensitivity and resistance; pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics; personalized medicine; immunotherapy; gene therapy; diagnostic biomarkers ...

  2. Clinical Cancer Research | American ...">Categories of Articles | Clinical Cancer Research | American ...

    Clinical Cancer Research prioritizes the mechanistic evaluation of novel compounds and rational combinations for cancer therapy. Due to the overwhelming number of submissions in this Section of the Journal, guidelines are listed below to assist authors in their preparation of the manuscript.

  3. Authors | American Association for Cancer Research">Information for Authors | American Association for Cancer ...

    This page contains detailed general style and formatting requirements for manuscripts published in the AACR journals. Requirements for initial submission are very flexible and authors are encouraged, at initial submission only, to format manuscripts in a manner that makes it easier for peer reviewers to read and assess the manuscript.

  4. Author Center | ASCO Publications">Author Center | ASCO Publications

    JCO is the primary forum of scientific discourse for the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Published three times a month, JCO is the foremost peer-reviewed journal focusing on clinical cancer research and the authoritative source for current information on the diagnosis and treatment of patients with cancer.

  5. guidelines | Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research">Submission guidelines | Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer...

    Ready to submit. To give your manuscript the best chance of publication, follow these policies and formatting guidelines. Check the quality of your writing - Free Language check. General formatting rules for all article types - Preparing your manuscript.

  6. For Authors | Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology">For Authors | Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology

    These guidelines are intended to help you at all stages, from deciding whether to accept an invitation to write for Nature Reviews, to writing, revising and checking the proofs of your manuscript.

  7. Submission guidelines | Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology">Submission guidelines | Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical...

    Authors are strongly advised to ensure the author group, the Corresponding Author, and the order of authors are all correct at submission. Adding and/or deleting authors during the revision stages is generally not permitted, but in some cases may be warranted.

  8. Instructions to Authors | JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer ...">Instructions to Authors | JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer...

    For clinical trials, authors should clearly define and explain the purpose of the study, study design, numbers of patients, clinical staging of disease, type and sequence of treatments given before and during the study, time points for evaluation of response, duration of follow-up, end points used (eg, overall survival, disease-free survival ...

  9. Cancer : Author Guidelines - American Cancer Society Journals">Cancer : Author Guidelines - American Cancer Society Journals

    In accordance with Wiley’s Best Practice Guidelines on Research Integrity and Publishing Ethics and the Committee on Publication Ethics ’ guidance, Cancer will allow authors to correct authorship on a submitted, accepted, or published article if a valid reason exists to do so. All authors – including those to be added or removed – must ...

  10. Authors | JAMA Oncology | JAMA Network">Instructions for Authors | JAMA Oncology | JAMA Network

    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.