Frontiers | Author guidelines (2023)

General standards

Article type

Frontiers requires authors to select the appropriate article type for their manuscript and to comply with the article type descriptions defined in the journal's 'Article types' page, which can be seen from the 'For authors' menu on every Frontiers journal page. Please pay close attention to the word count limits.

Templates

If working with Word please use ourWord templates. If you wish to submit your article as LaTeX, we recommend ourLaTeX templates.

For LaTeX files, please ensure all relevant manuscript files are uploaded: .tex file, PDF, and .bib file (if the bibliography is not already included in the .tex file).

During theinteractive review, authors are encouraged to upload versions using track changes. Editors and reviewers can only download the PDF file of the submitted manuscript.

Manuscript length

Frontiers encourages the authors to closely follow the article word count lengths given in the 'Article types' page of the journals. The manuscript length includes only the main body of the text, footnotes, and all citations within it, and excludes the abstract, section titles, figure and table captions, funding statement, acknowledgments, and references in the bibliography. Please indicate the number of words and the number of figures and tables included in your manuscript on the first page.

Language editing

Frontiers requires manuscripts submitted to meet international English language standards to be considered for publication.

For authors who would like their manuscript to receive language editing or proofreading to improve the clarity of the manuscript and help highlight their research, Frontiers recommends the language-editing services provided by the following external partners.

Note that sending your manuscript for language editing does not imply or guarantee that it will be accepted for publication by a Frontiers journal. Editorial decisions on the scientific content of a manuscript are independent of whether it has received language editing or proofreading by these partner services or other services.

Editage
Frontiers recommends the language-editing service provided by our external partner Editage. These services may be particularly useful for researchers for whom English is not the primary language. They can help to improve the grammar, syntax, and flow of your manuscript prior to submission. Frontiers authors will receive a 10% discount by visiting the following link:editage.com/frontiers.

The Charlesworth Group
Frontiers recommends the Charlesworth Group's author services, who has a long-standing track record in language editing and proofreading. This is a third-party service for which Frontiers authors will receive a 10% discount by visiting the following link:www.cwauthors.com/frontiers.

Frontiers推荐您使用在英语语言编辑和校对领域具有悠久历史和良好口碑的查尔斯沃思作者服务。此项服务由第三方为您提供,Frontiers中国作者通过此链接提交稿件时可获得10%的特别优惠:www.cwauthors.com.cn/frontiers.

Language style

The default language style at Frontiers is American English. If you prefer your article to be formatted in British English, please specify this on the first page of your manuscript. For any questions regarding style, Frontiers recommends authors to consult the Chicago Manual of Style.

Search engine optimization (SEO)

There are a few simple ways to maximize your article's discoverability and search results.

  • Include a few of your article's keywords in the title of the article

  • Do not use long article titles

  • Pick 5-8 keywords using a mix of generic and more specific terms on the article subject(s)

  • Use the maximum amount of keywords in the first two sentences of the abstract

  • Use some of the keywords in level 1 headings

CrossMark policy

Title

The title should be concise, omitting terms that are implicit and, where possible, be a statement of the main result or conclusion presented in the manuscript. Abbreviations should be avoided within the title.

Witty or creative titles are welcome, but only if relevant and within measure. Consider if a title meant to be thought-provoking might be misinterpreted as offensive or alarming. In extreme cases, the editorial office may veto a title and propose an alternative.

Authors should avoid:

  • titles that are a mere question without giving the answer

  • unambitious titles, for example starting with 'Towards,' 'A description of,' 'A characterization of' or 'Preliminary study on'

  • vague titles, for example starting with 'Role of', 'Link between', or 'Effect of' that do not specify the role, link, or effect

  • including terms that are out of place, for example the taxonomic affiliation apart from species name.

For Corrigenda, General Commentaries, and Editorials, the title of your manuscript should have the following format.

  • 'Corrigendum: [Title of original article]'

    (Video) Frontiers: The Voluntary Guidelines on Tenure, Ten Years Later

  • General Commentaries:
    'Commentary: [Title of original article]'
    'Response: Commentary: [Title of original article]'

  • 'Editorial: [Title of Research Topic]'

The running title should be a maximum of five words in length.

Authors and affiliations

All names are listed together and separated by commas. Provide exact and correct author names as these will be indexed in official archives. Affiliations should be keyed to the author's name with superscript numbers and be listed as follows:

  • Laboratory, Institute, Department, Organization, City, State abbreviation (only for United States, Canada, and Australia), and Country (without detailed address information such as city zip codes or street names).

Example: Max Maximus1
1Department of Excellence, International University of Science, New York, NY, United States.

Correspondence

The corresponding author(s) should be marked with an asterisk in the author list. Provide the exact contact email address of the corresponding author(s) in a separate section.

Example: Max Maximus*
maximus@iuscience.edu

If any authors wish to include a change of address, list the present address(es) below the correspondence details using a unique superscript symbol keyed to the author(s) in the author list.

Equal contributions

The authors who have contributed equally should be marked with a symbol (†) in the author list of the doc/latex and pdf files of the manuscript uploaded at submission.

Please use the appropriate standard statement(s) to indicate equal contributions:

  • Equal contribution: These authors contributed equally to this work

  • First authorship: These authors share first authorship

  • Senior authorship: These authors share senior authorship

  • Last authorship: These authors share last authorship

  • Equal contribution and first authorship: These authors contributed equally to this work and share first authorship

  • Equal contribution and senior authorship: These authors contributed equally to this work and share senior authorship

  • Equal contribution and last authorship: These authors contributed equally to this work and share last authorship

Example: Max Maximus 1†, John Smith2†and Barbara Smith1
†These authors contributed equally to this work and share first authorship

Consortium/group and collaborative authors

Consortium/group authorship should be listedin the manuscriptwith the other author(s).

In cases where authorship is retained by the consortium/group, the consortium/group should be listed as an author separated by a comma or 'and'. The consortium/group name will appear in the author list, in the citation, and in the copyright. If provided, the consortium/group members will be listed in a separate section at the end of the article.

For the collaborators of the consortium/group to be indexed in PubMed, they do not have to be inserted in the Frontiers submission system individually. However, in the manuscript itself, provide a section with the name of the consortium/group as the heading followed by the list of collaborators, so they can be tagged accordingly and indexed properly.

Example: John Smith, Barbara Smith and The Collaborative Working Group.

In cases where work is presented by the author(s) on behalf of a consortium/group, it should be included in the author list separated with the wording 'for' or 'on behalf of.' The consortium/group will not retain authorship and will only appear in the author list.

Example: John Smith and Barbara Smith on behalf of The Collaborative Working Group.

Abstract

As a primary goal, the abstract should render the general significance and conceptual advance of the work clearly accessible to a broad readership. In the abstract, minimize the use of abbreviations and do not cite references, figures or tables.

For Clinical Trial articles, please include the Unique Identifier and the URL of the publicly accessible website on which the trial is registered.

Keywords

All article types require a minimum of five and a maximum of eight keywords.

Text

The entire document should be single-spaced and must contain page and line numbers in order to facilitate the review process. The manuscript should be written using either Word or LaTeX. See above for templates.

Nomenclature

The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum. Non-standard abbreviations should be avoided unless they appear at least four times, and must be defined upon first use in the main text. Consider also giving a list of non-standard abbreviations at the end, immediately before the acknowledgments.

(Video) How to find author guidelines for writing a research Article

Equations should be inserted in editable format from the equation editor.

Italicize gene symbols and use the approved gene nomenclature where it is available. For human genes, please refer to the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC). New symbols for human genes should be submittedto the HGNC here. Common alternative gene aliases may also be reported, but should not be used alone in place of the HGNC symbol. Nomenclature committees for other species are listedhere. Protein products are not italicized.

We encourage the use of Standard International Units in all manuscripts.

Chemical compounds and biomolecules should be referred to using systematic nomenclature, preferably using the recommendations by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC).

Astronomical objects should be referred to using the nomenclature given by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) providedhere.

Life Science Identifiers (LSIDs) for ZOOBANK registered names or nomenclatural acts should be listed in the manuscript before the keywords. An LSID is represented as a uniform resource name (URN) with the following format: urn:lsid:<Authority>:<Namespace>:<ObjectID>[:<Version>]

For more information on LSIDs please see the'Code'section of our polices and publication ethics.

Sections

The manuscript is organized by headings and subheadings. The section headings should be those appropriate for your field and the research itself. You may insert up to 5 heading levels into your manuscript (i.e.,: 3.2.2.1.2 Heading Title).

For Original Research articles, it is recommended to organize your manuscript in the following sections or their equivalents for your field.

Introduction
Succinct, with no subheadings.

Materials and methods
This section may be divided by subheadings and should contain sufficient detail so that when read in conjunction with cited references, all procedures can be repeated. For experiments reporting results on animal or human subject research, an ethics approval statement should be included in this section (for further information, see the'Bioethics'section of our polices and publication ethics.)

Results
This section may be divided by subheadings. Footnotes should not be used and must be transferred to the main text.

Discussion
This section may be divided by subheadings. Discussions should cover the key findings of the study: discuss any prior research related to the subject to place the novelty of the discovery in the appropriate context, discuss the potential shortcomings and limitations on their interpretations, discuss their integration into the current understanding of the problem and how this advances the current views, speculate on the future direction of the research, and freely postulate theories that could be tested in the future.

For further information, please check the descriptions defined in the journal's 'Article types' page, in the 'For authors' menu on every journal page.

Acknowledgements

This is a short text to acknowledge the contributions of specific colleagues, institutions, or agencies that aided the efforts of the authors. Should the content of the manuscript have previously appeared online, such as in a thesis or preprint, this should be mentioned here, in addition to listing the source within the reference list.

Contribution to the field statement

When you submit your manuscript, you will be required to briefly summarize in 200 words your manuscript's contribution to, and position in, the existing literature in your field. This should be written avoiding any technical language or non-standard acronyms. The aim should be to convey the meaning and importance of this research to a non-expert.

While Frontiers evaluates articles using objective criteria, rather than impact or novelty, your statement should frame the question(s) you have addressed in your work in the context of the current body of knowledge, providing evidence that the findings – whether positive or negative – contribute to progress in your research discipline. This will help the chief editors to determine whether your manuscript fits within the scope of a specialty as defined in its mission statement; a detailed statement will also facilitate the identification of the editors and reviewers most appropriate to evaluate your work, ultimately expediting your manuscript's initial consideration.

Example statement on: Markram K and Markram H (2010) The Intense World Theory – a unifying theory of the neurobiology of autism. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 4:224. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2010.00224

Autism spectrum disorders are a group of neurodevelopmental disorders that affect up to 1 in 100 individuals. People with autism display an array of symptoms encompassing emotional processing, sociability, perception and memory, and present as uniquely as the individual. No theory has suggested a single underlying neuropathology to account for these diverse symptoms. The Intense World Theory, proposed here, describes a unifying pathology producing the wide spectrum of manifestations observed in autists. This theory focuses on the neocortex, fundamental for higher cognitive functions, and the limbic system, key for processing emotions and social signals. Drawing on discoveries in animal models and neuroimaging studies in individuals with autism, we propose how a combination of genetics, toxin exposure and/or environmental stress could produce hyper-reactivity and hyper-plasticity in the microcircuits involved with perception, attention, memory and emotionality. These hyper-functioning circuits will eventually come to dominate their neighbors, leading to hyper-sensitivity to incoming stimuli, over-specialization in tasks and a hyper-preference syndrome. We make the case that this theory of enhanced brain function in autism explains many of the varied past results and resolves conflicting findings and views and makes some testable experimental predictions.

Figure and table guidelines

CC-BY license

All figures, tables, and images will be published under a Creative Commons CC-BY license, and permission must be obtained for use of copyrighted material from other sources (including re-published/adapted/modified/partial figures and images from the internet). It is the responsibility of the authors to acquire the licenses, follow any citation instructions requested by third-party rights holders, and cover any supplementary charges.

For additional information, please see the'Image manipulation'section of our polices and publication ethics.

Figure requirements and style guidelines

Frontiers requires figures to be submitted individually, in the same order as they are referred to in the manuscript; the figures will then be automatically embedded at the end of the submitted manuscript. Kindly ensure that each figure is mentioned in the text and in numerical order.

For figures with more than one panel, panels should be clearly indicated using labels (A), (B), (C), (D), etc. However, do not embed the part labels over any part of the image, these labels will be replaced during typesetting according to Frontiers' journal style. For graphs, there must be a self-explanatory label (including units) along each axis.

For LaTeX files, figures should be included in the provided PDF. In case of acceptance, our production office might require high-resolution files of the figures included in the manuscript in EPS, JPEG or TIF/TIFF format.

To upload more than one figure at a time, save the figures (labeled in order of appearance in the manuscript) in a zip file and upload them as 'Supplementary Material Presentation.'

Please note that figures not in accordance with the guidelines will cause substantial delay during the production process.

Captions

Captions should be preceded by the appropriate label, for example 'Figure 1.' Figure captions should be placed at the end of the manuscript. Figure panels are referred to by bold capital letters in brackets: (A), (B), (C), (D), etc.

Image size and resolution requirements

Figures should be prepared with the PDF layout in mind. Individual figures should not be longer than one page and with a width that corresponds to 1 column (85 mm) or 2 columns (180 mm).

All images must have a resolution of 300 dpi at final size. Check the resolution of your figure by enlarging it to 150%. If the image appears blurry, jagged, or has a stair-stepped effect, the resolution is too low.

The text should be legible and of high quality. The smallest visible text should be no less than eight points in height when viewed at actual size.

Solid lines should not be broken up. Any lines in the graphic should be no smaller than two points wide.

Please note that saving a figure directly as an image file (JPEG, TIF) can greatly affect the resolution of your image. To avoid this, one option is to export the file as PDF, then convert into TIFF or EPS using a graphics software.

(Video) Elsevier: Author submission process overview

Format and color image mode

The following formats are accepted: TIF/TIFF (.tif/.tiff), JPEG (.jpg), and EPS (.eps) (upon acceptance). Images must be submitted in the color mode RGB.

Chemical structures

Chemical structures should be prepared using ChemDraw or a similar program. If working with ChemDraw please use ourChemDraw template. If working with another program please follow the guidelines below.

  • Drawing settings: chain angle, 120° bond spacing, 18% width; fixed length, 14.4 pt; bold width, 2.0 pt; line width, 0.6 pt; margin width, 1.6 pt; hash spacing, 2.5 pt. Scale 100% Atom Label settings: font, Arial; size, 8 pt

  • Assign all chemical compounds a bold, Arabic numeral in the order in which the compounds are presented in the manuscript text.

Table requirements and style guidelines

Tables should be inserted at the end of the manuscript in an editable format. If you use a word processor, build your table in Word. If you use a LaTeX processor, build your table in LaTeX. An empty line should be left before and after the table.

Table captions must be placed immediately before the table. Captions should be preceded by the appropriate label, for example 'Table 1.' Please use only a single paragraph for the caption.

Ensure that each table is mentioned in the text and in numerical order.

Large tables covering several pages cannot be included in the final PDF for formatting reasons. These tables will be published as supplementary material.

Tables which are not according to the above guidelines will cause substantial delay during the production process.

Accessibility

We encourage authors to make the figures and visual elements of their articles accessible for the visually impaired. An effective use of color can help people with low visual acuity, or color blindness, understand all the content of an article.

These guidelines are easy to implement and are in accordance with the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.1), the standard for web accessibility best practices.

Ensure sufficient contrast between text and its background
People who have low visual acuity or color blindness could find it difficult to read text with low contrast background color. Try using colors that provide maximum contrast.

WC3 recommends the following contrast ratio levels:

  • Level AA, contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1

  • Level AAA, contrast ratio of at least 7:1

Frontiers | Author guidelines (1)

You can verify the contrast ratio of your palette with these online ratio checkers:

Avoid using red or green indicators
More than 99% of color-blind people have a red-green color vision deficiency.

Avoid using only color to communicate information
Elements with complex information like charts and graphs can be hard to read when only color is used to distinguish the data. Try to use other visual aspects to communicate information, such as shape, labels, and size. Incorporating patterns into the shape fills also make differences clearer; for an example please see below:

Frontiers | Author guidelines (2)

Supplementary material

Data that are not of primary importance to the text, or which cannot be included in the article because they are too large or the current format does not permit it (such as videos, raw data traces, and PowerPoint presentations), can be uploaded as supplementary material during the submission procedure and will be displayed along with the published article. All supplementary files are deposited to figshare for permanent storage and receive a DOI.

Supplementary material is not typeset, so please ensure that all information is clearly presented without tracked changes/highlighted text/line numbers, and the appropriate caption is included in the file. To avoid discrepancies between the published article and the supplementary material, please do not add the title, author list, affiliations or correspondence in the supplementary files.

The supplementary material can be uploaded as:

Technical requirements for supplementary images:

  • 300 DPIs

  • RGB color mode.

For supplementary material templates (LaTeX and Word), see oursupplementary material templates.

References

Frontiers' journals use one of two reference styles, either Harvard (author-date) or Vancouver (numbered). Please checkour help centerto find the correct style for the journal to which you are submitting.

(Video) How to Read Author's Guidelines of Selected Research Journal

  • All citations in the text, figures, or tables must be in the reference list and vice-versa

  • The names of the first six authors followed by et al. and the DOI (when available) should be provided

  • Given names of authors should be abbreviated to initials (e.g., Smith, J., Lewis, C.S., etc.)

  • The reference list should only include articles that are published or accepted

  • Unpublished data, submitted manuscripts, or personal communications should be cited within the text only, for article types that allow such inclusions

  • For accepted but unpublished works use 'in press' instead of page numbers

  • Data sets that have been deposited to an online repository should be included in the reference list. Include the version and unique identifier when available

  • Personal communications should be documented by a letter of permission

  • Website URLs should be included as footnotes

  • Any inclusion of verbatim text must be contained in quotation marks and clearly reference the original source

  • Preprints can be cited as long as a DOI or archive URL is available, and the citation clearly mentions that the contribution is a preprint. If a peer-reviewed journal publication for the same preprint exists, the official journal publication is the preferred source. See thepreprintssection for each reference style below for more information.

Harvard reference style (author-date)

Many Frontiers journals use the Harvard referencing system; to find the correct reference style and resources for the journal you are submitting to, please visit our help center. Reference examples are found below, for more examples of citing other documents and general questions regarding the Harvard reference style, please refer to the Chicago Manual of Style.

In-text citations

  • For works by a single author, include the surname, followed by the year

  • For works by two authors, include both surnames, followed by the year

  • For works by more than two authors, include only the surname of the first author followed by et al., followed by the year

  • For humanities and social sciences articles, include the page numbers.

Reference list examples

Article in a print journal
Sondheimer, N., and Lindquist, S. (2000). Rnq1: an epigenetic modifier of protein function in yeast. Mol. Cell. 5, 163-172.

Article in an online journal
Tahimic, C.G.T., Wang, Y., Bikle, D.D. (2013). Anabolic effects of IGF-1 signaling on the skeleton. Front. Endocrinol. 4:6. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2013.00006

Article or chapter in a book
Sorenson, P. W., and Caprio, J. C. (1998). "Chemoreception," in The Physiology of Fishes, ed. D. H. Evans (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press), 375-405.

Book
Cowan, W. M., Jessell, T. M., and Zipursky, S. L. (1997). Molecular and Cellular Approaches to Neural Development. New York: Oxford University Press.

Abstract
Hendricks, J., Applebaum, R., and Kunkel, S. (2010). A world apart? Bridging the gap between theory and applied social gerontology. Gerontologist 50, 284-293. Abstract retrieved from Abstracts in Social Gerontology database. (Accession No. 50360869)

Website
World Health Organization. (2018). E. coli.https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/e-coli[Accessed March 15, 2018].

Patent
Marshall, S. P. (2000). Method and apparatus for eye tracking and monitoring pupil dilation to evaluate cognitive activity. U.S. Patent No 6,090,051. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Data
Perdiguero P, Venturas M, Cervera MT, Gil L, Collada C. Data from: Massive sequencing of Ulms minor's transcriptome provides new molecular tools for a genus under the constant threat of Dutch elm disease. Dryad Digital Repository. (2015) http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.ps837

Theses and dissertations
Smith, J. (2008) Post-structuralist discourse relative to phenomological pursuits in the deconstructivist arena. [dissertation/master's thesis]. [Chicago (IL)]: University of Chicago

Preprint
Smith, J. (2008). Title of the document. Preprint repository name [Preprint]. Available at: https://persistent-url (Accessed March 15, 2018).

Vancouver reference style (numbered)

Many Frontiers journals use the numbered referencing system; to find the correct reference style and resources for the journal you are submitting to, please visit our help center.

Reference examples are found below, for more examples of citing other documents and general questions regarding the Vancouver reference style, please refer toCiting Medicine.

In-text citations

  • Please apply the Vancouver system for in-text citations

  • In-text citations should be numbered consecutively in order of appearance in the text – identified by Arabic numerals in the parenthesis (use square brackets for physics and mathematics articles).

Reference list examples

Article in a print journal
Sondheimer N, Lindquist S. Rnq1: an epigenetic modifier of protein function in yeast. Mol Cell (2000) 5:163-72.

Article in an online journal
Tahimic CGT, Wang Y, Bikle DD. Anabolic effects of IGF-1 signaling on the skeleton. Front Endocrinol (2013) 4:6. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2013.00006

Article or chapter in a book
Sorenson PW, Caprio JC. "Chemoreception". In: Evans DH, editor. The Physiology of Fishes. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press (1998). p. 375-405.

Book
Cowan WM, Jessell TM, Zipursky SL. Molecular and Cellular Approaches to Neural Development. New York: Oxford University Press (1997). 345 p.

Abstract
Christensen S, Oppacher F. An analysis of Koza's computational effort statistic for genetic programming. In: Foster JA, editor. Genetic Programming. EuroGP 2002: Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Genetic Programming; 2002 Apr 3–5; Kinsdale, Ireland. Berlin: Springer (2002). p. 182–91.

Website
World Health Organization. E. coli (2018).https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/e-coli[Accessed March 15, 2018].

Patent
Pagedas AC, inventor; Ancel Surgical R&D Inc., assignee. Flexible Endoscopic Grasping and Cutting Device and Positioning Tool Assembly. United States patent US 20020103498 (2002).

(Video) Author Guidelines

Data
Perdiguero P, Venturas M, Cervera MT, Gil L, Collada C. Data from: Massive sequencing of Ulms minor's transcriptome provides new molecular tools for a genus under the constant threat of Dutch elm disease. Dryad Digital Repository. (2015) http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.ps837

Theses and dissertations

Smith, J. (2008) Post-structuralist discourse relative to phenomological pursuits in the deconstructivist arena. [dissertation/master’s thesis]. [Chicago (IL)]: University of Chicago

Preprint
Smith, J. Title of the document. Preprint repository name [Preprint] (2008). Available at: https://persistent-url (Accessed March 15, 2018).

FAQs

How many reviewers usually see a paper Frontiers? ›

Most article types require at least two reviewers to complete a review. These reviewers can either be invited from the board of review editors or appropriately recruited among experts in the field. It is the prerogative of a handling editor to manage the reviewer recommendations of a manuscript.

How many reviewers usually see a paper? ›

Eight reviewers seems excessive - many good journals generically employ two - four reviewers, with three being the most common number that I have personally encountered. I think 2-3 is ideal. More than three is disappointing, and the comments will be the opposite in some cases.

How hard is it to get published in JAMA? ›

JAMA's acceptance rate is 10% of the more than 11,000 annual submissions and 4% of the more than 6,000 research papers received.

How long does Frontiers take to review? ›

The review process currently averages at 77 days from submission to acceptance across our 50+ journals. It varies across journals for a number of reasons (e.g. some fields have reviewers who are on field work and out of contact for a time, and some fields do more iterations in the discussion forum).

How long does it take for a paper to get accepted? ›

Typically the acceptance of a research article by any standard journal takes anywhere between 6 months to one year. There are some open access journals that can accept the research articles in two to three months of time. Actually, there are several websites reveal the journal review speed.

What makes Frontiers different from other publishers? ›

Frontiers was founded by scientists and our focus has always been to empower researchers in the publishing process. Our journals are driven and peer-reviewed by active researchers, who are experts in their fields and have been appointed to the editorial boards according to strict selection criteria.

Can a paper be rejected after minor revision? ›

Sometimes a revised manuscript goes out to a new reviewer, so although the minor revisions may have been done in a thorough manner, the new may identify other issues with the manuscript, which might result in a recommendation to reject.

How do editors pick reviewers? ›

Editors select reviewers based on their expertise on the topic of thepaper. Most journals ask authors, at submission stage, to suggest potentialreviewers which can really help the editor. However, you need to make sure thatthe reviewers you suggest are truly independent people, i.e. not your friendsor close colleagues.

How many reviewers usually see a paper in Elsevier? ›

Most papers receive feedback from three peer reviewers. Shorter papers, such as brief reports or current issues, may receive feedback from two peer reviewers.

What journal has the highest impact factor? ›

List of Top 100 Journals with Highest Impact Factor
RankJournal PublicationJournal Home page
1.Nature – Impact Factor: 42.78View
2.The New England Journal of Medicine – Impact Factor: 74.7View
3.Science – Impact Factor: 41.84View
4.IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition – Impact Factor: 45.17View
96 more rows

What is a good impact factor? ›

In most fields, the impact factor of 10 or greater is considered an excellent score while 3 is flagged as good and the average score is less than 1.

How do I stop getting JAMA? ›

Contact us via the phone number at (800) 621-8335 or contact form on our website, or via email at any time to:
  1. See and receive the data we have about you, if any;
  2. Correct or update any data we have about you;
  3. Ask us to stop using or sharing information about you;
  4. Ask us to delete any data we have about you; and/or.

Does a direct decision in process status indicate rejection? ›

Normally, a direct change from "With editor" to "Decision in process" implies a desk rejection. You have not mentioned whether your paper has been through any other status before this.

What happens after paper acceptance? ›

Once your manuscript has been accepted, all correspondence will be sent to the email address of your corresponding author. The editorial office will give a final check of your manuscript. Your manuscript will go to our production team to prepare your proof.

What does review finalized mean Frontiers? ›

Updated : May 28, 2020 06:00. During the Interactive Review process, the handling editor can finalize the review only after all reviewers have concluded their reports (by either endorsing the manuscript for publication, withdrawing from the review process, or recommending rejection of the manuscript).

How long after an article is accepted is it published? ›

The typical time from acceptance to publication in Newly Published (ePub Ahead of Issue) is approximately 3 months. Forum and Special Issue articles are typically published only in their scheduled issue. You can learn more about the post-review journal production process and timeline on the Production Steps page.

How can I publish my research paper fast? ›

Whether you are currently performing experiments or are in the midst of writing, the following tips may help to increase your publication speed:
  1. Keep your figures in mind. ...
  2. Start writing early. ...
  3. Write clearly. ...
  4. Use reference formatting software. ...
  5. Know when to submit. ...
  6. Seek pre-publication peer review. ...
  7. Choose the right journal.

How long is a paper under review? ›

The time it takes for a journal to get the review process completed varies across journals and fields. While some take a month or two, others can take up to 6 months or more. As you have correctly observed, Statistics/Mathematics journals usually take a longer time, and may at times, take even up to a year to complete.

Is Frontiers a high impact journal? ›

Frontiers journals lead in citations & rank in the top Impact Factor and CiteScore percentiles. Frontiers journals rank among the world's most-cited in their fields — including top most-cited in neurosciences, microbiology, plant science and psychology.

Is Frontiers a reliable journal? ›

Frontiers is the 3rd most-cited and 6th largest research publisher and open science platform. Our research journals are community-driven and peer-reviewed by editorial boards of over 202,000 top researchers.

How can you tell if something is peer-reviewed? ›

How can I determine if an article I find online is peer-reviewed?
  • Use the Journals and Newspaper Listing.
  • Look up the journal title to find the journal's location.
  • Find a database that contains the article full text and follow the link. ...
  • Search for your article by Title with "Scholarly (Peer-Reviewed)" checked.

Is it normal to have paper rejected? ›

Getting a paper rejected isn't unusual. However, you need to understand why the journal editor didn't send it out to peer review in order to decide how to proceed from there.

Is getting a revise and resubmit good? ›

Just as “Revise and Resubmit” is not a rejection, revising and resubmitting your manuscript isn't a guarantee of acceptance. Some consider a Revise/Resubmit decision as a tacit acceptance, but really there are no promises here, particularly if you are called upon to make major revisions to your manuscript.

Does minor revisions mean accepted? ›

Minor revision means that your paper accepted by about 70 % but not final acceptance until you fix further comments. Time varies from journal to others, but within one month.

What do editors look for in a manuscript? ›

What are these 'little things' that editors look for? The format, novelty of research subject, brevity, language, clarity, message and quality of presentation do matter for the editors. At submission, the editors consider the relevance of the manuscript for the journal and send it to the appropriate reviewers.

How do I get reviewers to suggest? ›

Finding peer reviewers – our top tips
  1. Check the references in the article. ...
  2. Use search tools and databases to find researchers working on similar topics. ...
  3. Use your editorial board. ...
  4. Consider previous authors and guest editors. ...
  5. Ask reviewers who decline for suggestions. ...
  6. Use predefined keywords. ...
  7. Use previous reviewers.

Should I suggest reviewers? ›

DON'T suggest experts whom you know personally. DON'T list potential reviewers who work for your target journal. DON'T suggest reviewers because they will agree with your work. DON'T suggest reviewers who work at the same institution as you do.

Is Elsevier predatory? ›

Björn Brembs takes Elsevier through the new, five-part “predatory journal” definition: So as far as this exercise goes, at least one of the main legacy publishers fits the five criteria for being branded a “predatory” publisher.

Which is better Elsevier or Springer? ›

Professional Development Score at Elsevier vs Springer Nature. Employees at Elsevier rate their Professional Development Score a 80/100, with Customer Support and Legal as the two departments that rate their experience the highest. Employees at Springer Nature rate their Professional Development Score a /100.

How long does a manuscript stay with editor? ›

It is perfectly normal for a submission to remain with the editor for over two weeks. The time taken for the different stages varies from journal to journal, but it is not uncommon for the journal system to show a “with editor” status for over a month after submission.

How many citations is good for a paper? ›

For all researchers, 5-10 citations of their papers will be great! Publishing in good journals help the citations of our articles.

Is Elsevier a Q1 journal? ›

There are a total of 1460 Elsevier Q1 journals in 2022. The top 50 Q1 Elsevier journals are listed in this blog post. However, the researchers can download the complete list of Elsevier Q1 journals from the official website of Scopus.

What is a Tier 1 journal? ›

Tier 1. High category (3.5-4) Peer-reviewed publications in one of the following: • Journal with Impact factor that falls in the top 25 percentile ranking based on the impact. factor within the subject, discipline, or sub-disciplinary category (refer to APPENDIX.

What is considered high impact journal? ›

The top 5% of journals have impact factors approximately equal to or greater than 6 (610 journals or 4.9% of the journals tracked by JCR). Approximately two-thirds of the journals tracked by JCR have a 2017 impact factor equal to or greater than 1.

Is MDPI a good journal? ›

Yes, MDPI is a popular, Reputable, highly standard journals and publish quality Research articles. Otherside the article processing charges are very high, which is not affordable by every Researcher especially from developing and developing countries. MDPI is a reputable publisher.

What is a good journal h-index? ›

What is a Good h-Index? Hirsch reckons that after 20 years of research, an h-index of 20 is good, 40 is outstanding, and 60 is truly exceptional. In his paper, Hirsch shows that successful scientists do, indeed, have high h-indices: 84% of Nobel prize winners in physics, for example, had an h-index of at least 30.

Is JAMA reputable? ›

The Journal of the American Medical Association (J.A.M.A) is a reputable international peer reviewed medical journal.

Is JAMA reliable? ›

According to Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2021 impact factor of 157.335, ranking it 3rd out of 172 journals in the category "Medicine, General & Internal".

How much is a JAMA subscription? ›

JAMA Internal Medicine's 2021 Journal Impact Factor is 44.46, ranking high among internal medicine journals. Individual subscription full price: $293.00 (Promotions and special offers will be calculated during checkout.) A print + online subscription includes: 12 print issues a year.

Does decision in process mean under review? ›

If the status of your paper has changed to "decision in process" without first changing to "under review", it possibly means that the journal editor is yet to make a decision about whether or not to send the paper for review. It does not necessarily imply rejection, so you need not lose hope just yet.

What does it mean decision in process after under review? ›

Answer: The status “Decision in process” after “Under review” means that all the reviews have come in and the editor is evaluating your paper based on the reviewer's comments. After going through the reviewers' comments, the editor will make a decision about your manuscript.

How long does it take for decision in process status? ›

Answer: Most journals normally take 4-8 weeks to review manuscripts. The 'decision in process' status implies that your manuscript has passed through peer review and the editorial board is now making a decision.

What does it mean when a paper is under review? ›

Under consideration means the editor hasn't read it yet. Under review means it is being peer-reviewed. Once a paper is submitted to a journal, it is assigned to a handling editor who conducts an initial screening of the paper to see if it meets the basic requirements of the journal.

What does it mean when a paper is accepted? ›

What is an accepted manuscript? This is the version of a journal article that has been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication, and includes changes made by the author during the peer-review process.

Is a letter to the editor considered a publication? ›

“Letter to the Editor” or “Correspondence” is considered a “post publication peer review”. It is a powerful forum of discussion between the researchers to show the errors and deficits of the study which were overlooked in the pre-publication peer review process.

How many reviewers usually see a paper? ›

Eight reviewers seems excessive - many good journals generically employ two - four reviewers, with three being the most common number that I have personally encountered. I think 2-3 is ideal. More than three is disappointing, and the comments will be the opposite in some cases.

What does it mean when your paper is rejected by a journal? ›

Manuscript does not fall within the journal's aim and scope

This means that anything falling outside their scope will be rejected by the journal editor. This doesn't mean that your research is unworthy, but simply that you've picked the wrong avenue for publication.

How long does the review process take Frontiers? ›

We offer one of the fastest systems among academic publishers. Our collaborative review forum guides authors, reviewers, and editors smoothly through the review process and alerts them when any action is required. This has shortened the average time from submission to final decision to 61 days.

How long does Frontiers take to publish? ›

It takes roughly 1-2 weeks from the acceptance of your article for your Author's Proof to be created by our typesetting team. Once you have approved the Author's Proof, it takes a further 1-2 weeks for us to implement any corrections, finalize the production process, and publish your article.

What is the impact factor of Frontiers? ›

The 2021 Journal Impact Factors, published in the 2022 Journal Citation Report, are based on citations in 2021 to articles published in 2019 and 2020.
...
Journal Impact Factor and CiteScore.
Journal2021 Impact Factor2021 CiteScore
Frontiers in Earth Science3.6613.2
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution4.4934.2
69 more rows

How long is Frontier editorial assignment? ›

Manuscript Revision Process
Journal TitleFrontiers in Immunology
Duration from Manuscripts Submission to First Editorial Decision12.0 Days
Duration from Manuscripts Submission to First Revision Report39.9 Days
Duration from Manuscripts Submission to Manuscripts Acceptance77.8 Days
4 more rows

How long does it take for journal to review manuscript? ›

Journals usually ask reviewers to complete their reviews within 3-4 weeks. However, few journals have a mechanism to enforce the deadline, which is why it can be hard to predict how long the peer review process will take.

Is Frontiers a high impact journal? ›

Frontiers journals lead in citations & rank in the top Impact Factor and CiteScore percentiles. Frontiers journals rank among the world's most-cited in their fields — including top most-cited in neurosciences, microbiology, plant science and psychology.

What happens after paper acceptance? ›

Once your manuscript has been accepted, all correspondence will be sent to the email address of your corresponding author. The editorial office will give a final check of your manuscript. Your manuscript will go to our production team to prepare your proof.

Why is peer review taking so long? ›

This time varies across different journals. Some journals indicate the time from submission to first decision and the time from submission to final decision on their websites. Lengthy peer review times can be indicative of non-availability of appropriate reviewers for a particular manuscript.

Is 3.7 a good Impact Factor? ›

In most fields, the impact factor of 10 or greater is considered an excellent score while 3 is flagged as good and the average score is less than 1.

Is Frontiers a Q1 journal? ›

Frontiers of Medicine is a journal covering the technologies/fields/categories related to Medicine (miscellaneous) (Q1). It is published by Springer Science + Business Media. The overall rank of Frontiers of Medicine is 1365. According to SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), this journal is ranked 1.905.

Is Frontiers A Scopus journal? ›

Information Systems Frontiers is indexed by Scopus and has a CiteScore of 10.3 for 2021.

How much does it cost to publish in Frontiers in Psychology? ›

Publishing fees
JournalA Type ArticlesC Type Articles
Frontiers in PsychologyUS$ 3,225US$ 490

What does review finalized mean frontiers? ›

Updated : May 28, 2020 06:00. During the Interactive Review process, the handling editor can finalize the review only after all reviewers have concluded their reports (by either endorsing the manuscript for publication, withdrawing from the review process, or recommending rejection of the manuscript).

What does initial validation mean? ›

Definition. Initial Model Validation is the first iteration of the Model Validation process for a particular model or model group that has not been previously validated, either because it is newly developed or because of updates in the Model Governance framework.

How long does it take for a paper to be rejected? ›

Desk rejects are usually quite quick (e.g., 1 to 4 weeks is common in my experience). Note that not all journals do desk rejects, and many journals vary in how much they filter at this stage. First round rejections: This is where the paper is rejected after the first round of external review.

How long it takes for desk rejection? ›

The thing is struggle with is when desk-rejections without comments appear to take anywhere from two to three months or longer.

How do you nudge a journal editor? ›

A proper and effective nudge adheres to the following structure:
  1. Greet the editor (“Hello [first name]”)
  2. Remind the editor (concisely) who the heck you are and why the editor should care (“This is Xauthor. ...
  3. Make your request clear (“I was wondering if you could mail me a few print copies.
6 Mar 2013

Videos

1. 'Frontiers in Allergy' Journal and the Success of EUFOREA Novel Guidelines (Teaser)
(EUFOREA)
2. So We Mad At Kanye West! Not The K*ll£rs! You can’t make this up!
(Kwame Brown Bust Life)
3. Drafting Your Full Paper using Author Guidelines
(Katina Michael)
4. Author Guidelines
(FlyBase TV)
5. [EN 95] Author guidelines SCDA
(Linnart Felkl M.Sc.)
6. Submitting? Find Author Guidelines for Submitting Content to DCR Didactic Video Collections
(Diseases of the Colon and Rectum Journal)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Patricia Veum II

Last Updated: 11/11/2022

Views: 5833

Rating: 4.3 / 5 (64 voted)

Reviews: 95% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Patricia Veum II

Birthday: 1994-12-16

Address: 2064 Little Summit, Goldieton, MS 97651-0862

Phone: +6873952696715

Job: Principal Officer

Hobby: Rafting, Cabaret, Candle making, Jigsaw puzzles, Inline skating, Magic, Graffiti

Introduction: My name is Patricia Veum II, I am a vast, combative, smiling, famous, inexpensive, zealous, sparkling person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.