paper manuscript research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Biochem Res Int
• v.2022; 2022

Essential Guide to Manuscript Writing for Academic Dummies: An Editor's Perspective

Syed sameer aga.

1 Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Quality Assurance Unit, College of Medicine, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences (KSAU-HS), King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC), Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs (MNGHA), King Abdulaziz Medical City, Jeddah 21423, Saudi Arabia

2 Molecular Diseases & Diagnostics Division, Infinity Biochemistry Pvt. Ltd, Sajad Abad, Chattabal, Srinagar, Kashmir 190010, India

Saniya Nissar

Associated data.

No data were used in this review.

Writing an effective manuscript is one of the pivotal steps in the successful closure of the research project, and getting it published in a peer-reviewed and indexed journal adds to the academic profile of a researcher. Writing and publishing a scientific paper is a tough task that researchers and academicians must endure in staying relevant in the field. Success in translating the benchworks into the scientific content, which is effectively communicated within the scientific field, is used in evaluating the researcher in the current academic world. Writing is a highly time-consuming and skill-oriented process that requires familiarity with the numerous publishing steps, formatting rules, and ethical guidelines currently in vogue in the publishing industry. In this review, we have attempted to include the essential information that novice authors in their early careers need to possess, to be able to write a decent first scientific manuscript ready for submission in the journal of choice. This review is unique in providing essential guidance in a simple point-wise manner in conjunction with easy-to-understand illustrations to familiarize novice researchers with the anatomy of a basic scientific manuscript.

1. Background

Communication is the pivotal key to the growth of scientific literature. Successfully written scientific communication in the form of any type of paper is needed by researchers and academicians alike for various reasons such as receiving degrees, getting a promotion, becoming experts in the field, and having editorships [ 1 , 2 ].

Here, in this review, we present the organization and anatomy of a scientific manuscript enlisting the essential features that authors should keep in their mind while writing a manuscript.

2. Types of Manuscripts

Numerous types of manuscripts do exist, which can be written by the authors for a possible publication ( Figure 1 ). Primarily, the choice is dependent upon the sort of communication authors want to make. The simplest among the scientific manuscripts is the “Letter to an Editor,” while “Systematic Review” is complex in its content and context [ 3 ].

Types of manuscripts based on complexity of content and context.

3. Anatomy of the Manuscript

Writing and publishing an effective and well-communicative scientific manuscript is arguably one of the most daunting yet important tasks of any successful research project. It is only through publishing the data that an author gets the recognition of the work, gets established as an expert, and becomes citable in the scientific field [ 4 ]. Among the numerous types of scientific manuscripts which an author can write ( Figure 1 ), original research remains central to most publications [ 4 – 10 ].

A good scientific paper essentially covers the important criteria, which define its worth such as structure, logical flow of information, content, context, and conclusion [ 5 ]. Among various guidelines that are available for the authors to follow, IMRAD scheme is the most important in determining the correct flow of content and structure of an original research paper [ 4 , 11 – 13 ]. IMRAD stands for introduction, methods, results, and discussion ( Figure 2 ). Besides these, other parts of the manuscript are equally essential such as title, abstract, keywords, and conclusion ( Figure 3 ).

Generalized anatomy of manuscript based on IMRAD format.

Three important contents of the title page—title, abstract, and keywords.

IMRAD scheme was introduced in the early 1900 by publishers to standardize the single format of the scientific manuscript and since then is the universal format used by most the publishing houses [ 6 , 14 – 17 ]. In the next sections, the contents and criteria of each of them are explained in detail. A list of the most common mistakes, which the author makes in these sections, is also provided in the tabulated form [ 18 ] ( Table 1 ).

Common mistakes authors make in their manuscripts.

• The title is the most important element of the paper, the first thing readers encounter while searching for a suitable paper [ 1 ]. It reflects the manuscript's main contribution and hence should be simple, appealing, and easy to remember [ 7 ].
• A good title should not be more than 15 words or 100 characters. Sometimes journals ask for a short running title, which should essentially be no more than 50% of the full title. Running titles need to be simple, catchy, and easy to remember [ 19 , 20 ].
• Keeping the titles extremely long can be cumbersome and is suggestive of the authors' lack of grasp of the true nature of the research done.
• It usually should be based on the keywords, which feature within the main rationale and/or objectives of the paper. The authors should construct an effective title from keywords existing in all sections of the main text of the manuscript [ 19 ].
• Having effective keywords within the title helps in the easy discovery of the paper in the search engines, databases, and indexing services, which ultimately is also reflected by the higher citations they attract [ 1 ].
• It is always better for the title to reflect the study's design or outcome [ 21 ]; thus, it is better for the authors to think of a number of different titles proactively and to choose the one, which reflects the manuscript in all domains, after careful deliberation. The paper's title should be among the last things to be decided before the submission of the paper for publication [ 20 ].
• Use of abbreviations, jargons, and redundancies such as “a study in,” “case report of,” “Investigations of,” and passive voice should be avoided in the title.

5. Abstract

• The abstract should essentially be written to answer the three main questions—“What is new in this study?” “What does it add to the current literature?” and “What are the future perspectives?”
• A well-written abstract is a pivotal part of every manuscript. For most readers, an abstract is the only part of the paper that is widely read, so it should be aimed to convey the entire message of the paper effectively [ 1 ].

Two major types of abstract—structured and unstructured. Structured abstracts are piecemealed into five different things, each consisting of one or two sentences, while unstructured abstracts consist of single paragraph written about the same things.

• An effective abstract is a rationalized summary of the whole study and essentially should contain well-balanced information about six things: background, aim, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion [ 6 , 19 ].

Three C concept followed while writing the manuscript.

• An abstract should be written at the end, after finishing the writing of an entire manuscript to be able to stand-alone from the main text. It should reflect your study completely without any reference to the main paper [ 19 ].
• The authors need to limit/write their statements in each section to two or three sentences. However, it is better to focus on results and conclusions, as they are the main parts that interest the readers and should include key results and conclusions made thereof.
• Inclusion of excessive background information, citations, abbreviations, use of acronyms, lack of rationale/aim of the study, lack of meaningful data, and overstated conclusions make an abstract ineffective.

6. Keywords

• Keywords are the important words, which feature repeatedly in the study or else cover the main theme/idea/subject of the manuscript. They are used by indexing databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Embase in categorizing and cross-indexing the published article.
• It is always wise to enlist those words which help the paper to be easily searchable in the databases.
• Keywords can be of two types: (a) general ones that are provided by the journal or indexing services called as medical subject headings (MeSH) as available in NCBI ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.gov/mesh/ ) and (b) custom ones made by authors themselves based on the subject matter of the study [ 6 , 20 ].
• Upon submission, journals do usually ask for the provision of five to ten keywords either to categorize the paper into the subject areas or to assign it to the subspecialty for its quick processing.

7. Introduction

• (i) The whole idea of writing this section is to cover two important questions—“What are the gaps present in the current literature?” and “Why is the current study important?”
• (ii) Introduction provides an opportunity for the authors to highlight their area of study and provide rationale and justification as to why they are doing it [ 20 , 22 , 23 ].
• (iii) An effective introduction usually constitutes about 10–15% of the paper's word count [ 22 ].
• The first paragraph of the introduction should always cover “What is known about the area of study?” or “What present/current literature is telling about the problem?” All relevant and current literature/studies, i.e., original studies, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews, should be covered in this paragraph.
• The second paragraph should cover “What is unknown or not done about this issue/study area?” The authors need to indicate the aspects of what has not been answered about the broader area of the study until now.
• The third paragraph should identify the gaps in the current literature and answer “What gaps in the literature would be filled by their current study?” This part essentially identifies the shortcoming of the existing studies.
• The fourth paragraph should be dedicated to effectively writing “What authors are going to do to fill the gaps?” and “Why do they want to do it?” This paragraph contains two sections—one explains the rationale of the study and introduces the hypothesis of the study in form of questions “What did authors do? and Why they did do so?” and the second enlists specific objectives that the authors are going to explore in this study to answer “Why this study is going to be important?” or “What is the purpose of this study?”.

Funnel-down scheme followed while writing the introduction section of manuscript, moving from broader to specific information.

• (v) Introduction is regarded as the start of the storyline of manuscript, and hence, the three Cs' scheme ( Figure 5 ) becomes more relevant while writing it: the context in terms of what has been published on the current idea/problem around the world, content as to what you are going to do about the problem in hand (rationale), and conclusion as to how it is going to be done (specific objective of the study) [ 1 , 23 ].
• (vi) Introduction is the first section of the main manuscript, which talks about the story; therefore, while writing it authors should always try to think that “would this introduction be able to convince my readers?” [ 25 ]. To emphasize on the importance of the study in filling the knowledge gap is pivotal in driving the message through [ 23 ].
• (vii) Introduction should never be written like a review, any details, contexts, and comparisons should be dealt within the discussion part [ 16 ].
• (viii) While choosing the papers, it is wise to include the essential and recent studies only. Studies more than 10 years old should be avoided, as editors are inclined towards the recent and relevant ones only [ 20 , 22 ].
• (ix) In the last paragraph, enlisting the objectives has a good impact on readers. A clear distinction between the primary and secondary objectives of the study should be made while closing the introduction [ 22 ].
• (i) It is regarded as the skeleton of the manuscript as it contains information about the research done. An effective methods section should provide information about two essential aspects of the research—(a) precise description of how experiments were done and (b) rationale for choosing the specific experiments.
• Study Settings: describing the area or setting where the study was conducted. This description should cover the details relevant to the study topic.

Different guidelines available for perusal of the authors for writing an effective manuscript.

• Sample Size and Sampling Technique: mentioning what number of samples is needed and how they would be collected.
• Ethical Approvals: clearly identifying the study approval body or board and proper collection of informed consent from participants.
• Recruitment Methods: using at least three criteria for the inclusion or exclusion of the study subjects to reach an agreed sample size.
• Experimental and Intervention Details: exhaustively describing each and every detail of all the experiments and intervention carried out in the study for the readers to reproduce independently.
• Statistical Analysis: mentioning all statistical analysis carried out with the data which include all descriptive and inferential statistics and providing the analysis in meaningful statistical values such as mean, median, percent, standard deviation (SD), probability value (p), odds ratio (OR), and confidence interval (CI).

Methods and the seven areas which it should exhaustively describe.

• (iii) Methods should be elaborative enough that the readers are able to replicate the study on their own. If, however, the protocols are frequently used ones and are already available in the literature, the authors can cite them without providing any exhaustive details [ 26 ].
• (iv) Methods should be able to answer the three questions for which audience reads the paper—(1) What was done? (2) Where it was done? and (3) How it was done? [ 11 ].
• (v) Remember, methods section is all about “HOW” the data were collected contrary to “WHAT” data were collected, which should be written in the results section. Therefore, care should be taken in providing the description of the tools and techniques used for this purpose.
• (vi) Writing of the methods section should essentially follow the guidelines as per the study design right from the ideation of the project. There are numerous guidelines available, which author's must make use of, to streamline the writing of the methods section in particular (see Table xx for details).
• (vii) Provision of the information of the equipment, chemicals, reagents, and physical conditions is also vital for the readers for replication of the study. If any software is used for data analysis, it is imperative to mention it. All manufacturer's names, their city, and country should also be provided [ 6 , 11 ].
• The purpose of the results section of the manuscript is to present the finding of the study in clear, concise, and objective manner to the readers [ 7 , 27 , 28 ].
• Results section makes the heart of the manuscript, as all sections revolve around it. The reported findings should be in concordance with the objectives of the study and be able to answer the questions raised in the introduction [ 6 , 20 , 27 ].
• Results should be written in past tense without any interpretation [ 6 , 27 ].

Interdependence between methods and results of the manuscript.

• It is always better to take refuge in tables and figures to drive the exhaustive data through. Repetition of the data already carried in tables, figures, etc., should be avoided [ 4 , 6 , 20 ].
• Proper positioning and citations of the tables and figures within the main text are also critical for the flow of information and quality of the manuscript [ 6 , 11 ].
• Results section should carry clear descriptive and inferential statistics in tables and/or figures, for ease of reference to readers.
• Provision of the demographic data of the study participants takes priority in the results section; therefore, it should be made as its first paragraph. The subsequent paragraphs should introduce the inferential analysis of the data based on the rationale and objectives of the study. The last paragraphs mention what new results the study is going to offer [ 6 , 11 , 20 ].
• authors should not attempt to report all analysis of the data. Discussing, interpreting, or contextualizing the results should be avoided [ 20 ].

10. Discussion

• (i) The main purpose of writing a discussion is to fill the gap that was identified in the introduction of the manuscript and provide true interpretations of the results [ 6 , 11 , 20 ].

Pyramid scheme followed while writing the discussion section of manuscript, moving from the key results of the study to the specific conclusions.

• (iii) Discussion section toggles between two things—content and context. The authors need to exhaustively describe their interpretation of the analyzed data (content) and then compare it with the available relevant literature (context) [ 1 , 29 ]. Finally, it should justify everything in conclusion as to what all this means for the field of study.
• (iv) The comparison can either be concordant or discordant, but it needs to highlight the uniqueness and importance of the study in the field. Care should be taken not to cover up any deviant results, which do not gel with the current literature [ 30 ].
• (v) In discussion it is safe to use words such as “may,” “might,” “show,” “demonstrate,” “suggest,” and “report” while impressing upon your study's data and analyzed results.
• (vi) Putting results in context helps in identifying the strengths and weakness of the study and enables readers to get answers to two important questions—one “what are the implications of the study?” Second “how the study advance the field further?” [ 1 , 30 ].
• The first paragraph of the discussion is reserved for highlighting the key results of the study as briefly as possible [ 4 , 6 ]. However, care should be taken not to have any redundancy with the results section. The authors should utilize this part to emphasize the originality and significance of their results in the field [ 1 , 4 , 11 , 20 ].
• The second paragraph should deal with the importance of your study in relationship with other studies available in the literature [ 4 ].
• Subsequent paragraphs should focus on the context, by describing the findings in comparison with other similar studies in the field and how the gap in the knowledge has been filled [ 1 , 4 ].
• In the penultimate paragraph, authors need to highlight the strengths and limitations of the study [ 4 , 6 , 30 ].
• Final paragraph of the discussion is usually reserved for drawing the generalized conclusions for the readers to get a single take-home message.
• (viii) A well-balanced discussion is the one that effectively addresses the contribution made by this study towards the advancement of knowledge in general and the field of research in particular [ 7 ]. It essentially should carry enough information that the audience knows how to apply the new interpretation presented within that field.

11. Conclusion

• It usually makes the last part of the manuscript, if not already covered within the discussion part [ 6 , 20 ].
• Being the last part of the main text, it has a long-lasting impact on the reader and hence should be very clear in presenting the chief findings of the paper as per the rationale and objectives of the study [ 4 , 20 ].

Crux of the conclusion section.

12. References or Bibliography

• Every article needs a suitable and relevant citation of the available literature to carry the contextual message of their results to the readers [ 31 ].
• Inclusion of proper references in the required format, as asked by the target journal, is necessary.

A Google Scholar screenshot of different styles of formatting of references.

• Depending upon the journal and publishing house, usually, 30–50 citations are allowed in an original study, and they need to be relevant and recent.

13. Organization of the Manuscript Package

Ideally, all manuscripts, no matter where they have to be submitted, should follow an approved organization, which is universally used by all publication houses. “Ready to submit” manuscript package should include the following elements:

• (i) Cover letter, addressed to the chief editor of the target journal.
• (ii) Authorship file, containing the list of authors, their affiliations, emails, and ORCIDs.
• (iii) Title page, containing three things—title, abstract, and keywords.
• Main text structured upon IMRAD scheme.
• References as per required format.
• Legends to all tables and figures.
• Miscellaneous things such as author contributions, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest, funding body, and ethical approvals.
• (v) Tables as a separate file in excel format.
• (vi) Figures or illustrations, each as a separate file in JPEG or TIFF format [ 32 ].
• (vii) Reviewers file, containing names of the suggested peer reviewers working or publishing in the same field.
• (viii) Supplementary files, which can be raw data files, ethical clearance from Institutional Review Board (IRBs), appendixes, etc.

14. Overview of an Editorial Process

Each scientific journal has a specific publication policies and procedures, which govern the numerous steps of the publication process. In general, all publication houses process the submission of manuscripts via multiple steps tightly controlled by the editors and reviewers [ 33 ]. Figure 12 provides general overview of the six-step editorial process of the scientific journal.

An overview of the journal's editorial process.

15. Summary

The basic criteria for writing any scientific communication are to know how to communicate the information effectively. In this review, we have provided the critical information of do's and don'ts for the naive authors to follow in making their manuscript enough impeccable and error-free that on submission manuscript is not desk rejected at all. but this goes with mentioning that like any other skill, and the writing is also honed by practicing and is always reflective of the knowledge the writer possesses. Additionally, an effective manuscript is always based on the study design and the statistical analysis done. The authors should always bear in mind that editors apart from looking into the novelty of the study also look at how much pain authors have taken in writing, following guidelines, and formatting the manuscript. Therefore, the organization of the manuscript as per provided guidelines such as IMRAD, CONSORT, and PRISMA should be followed in letter and spirit. Care should be taken to avoid the mistakes, already enlisted, which can be the cause of desk rejection. As a general rule, before submission of the manuscript to the journal, sanitation check involving at least two reviews by colleagues should be carried out to ensure all general formatting guidelines are followed.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all academicians and researchers who have actively participated in the “Writing Manuscript Workshops” at the College of Medicine, KSAU-HS, Jeddah, which prompted them to write this review.

Data Availability

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Authors' Contributions

Both authors have critically reviewed and approved the final draft and are responsible for the content and similarity index of the manuscript. SSA conceptualized the study, designed the study, surveyed the existing literature, and wrote the manuscript. SN edited, revised, and proofread the final manuscript.

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
• CAREER FEATURE
• 28 February 2018
• Correction 16 March 2018

How to write a first-class paper

• Virginia Gewin 0

Virginia Gewin is a freelance writer in Portland, Oregon.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Manuscripts may have a rigidly defined structure, but there’s still room to tell a compelling story — one that clearly communicates the science and is a pleasure to read. Scientist-authors and editors debate the importance and meaning of creativity and offer tips on how to write a top paper.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Nature 555 , 129-130 (2018)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-02404-4

Interviews have been edited for clarity and length.

Updates & Corrections

Correction 16 March 2018 : This article should have made clear that Altmetric is part of Digital Science, a company owned by Holtzbrinck Publishing Group, which is also the majority shareholder in Nature’s publisher, Springer Nature. Nature Research Editing Services is also owned by Springer Nature.

Related Articles

How researchers in remote regions handle the isolation

Career Feature 24 MAY 24

What steps to take when funding starts to run out

Brazil’s plummeting graduate enrolments hint at declining interest in academic science careers

Career News 21 MAY 24

Who will make AlphaFold3 open source? Scientists race to crack AI model

News 23 MAY 24

Egypt is building a $1-billion mega-museum. Will it bring Egyptology home?

News Feature 22 MAY 24

Pay researchers to spot errors in published papers

World View 21 MAY 24

Professor, Division Director, Translational and Clinical Pharmacology

Cincinnati Children’s seeks a director of the Division of Translational and Clinical Pharmacology.

Cincinnati, Ohio

Cincinnati Children's Hospital & Medical Center

Data Analyst for Gene Regulation as an Academic Functional Specialist

The Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn is an international research university with a broad spectrum of subjects. With 200 years of his...

53113, Bonn (DE)

Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität

Recruitment of Global Talent at the Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (IOZ, CAS)

The Institute of Zoology (IOZ), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), is seeking global talents around the world.

Beijing, China

Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (IOZ, CAS)

Full Professorship (W3) in “Organic Environmental Geochemistry (f/m/d)

The Institute of Earth Sciences within the Faculty of Chemistry and Earth Sciences at Heidelberg University invites applications for a   FULL PROFE...

Heidelberg, Brandenburg (DE)

Universität Heidelberg

Postdoc: deep learning for super-resolution microscopy

The Ries lab is looking for a PostDoc with background in machine learning.

Vienna, Austria

University of Vienna

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

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

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

• PLOS Biology
• PLOS Climate
• PLOS Complex Systems
• PLOS Computational Biology
• PLOS Digital Health
• PLOS Genetics
• PLOS Global Public Health
• PLOS Medicine
• PLOS Mental Health
• PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
• PLOS Pathogens
• PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
• PLOS Collections
• About This Blog
• Official PLOS Blog
• EveryONE Blog
• Speaking of Medicine
• PLOS Biologue
• Absolutely Maybe
• DNA Science
• PLOS ECR Community
• All Models Are Wrong
• About PLOS Blogs

A Brief Guide To Writing Your First Scientific Manuscript

I’ve had the privilege of writing a few manuscripts in my research career to date, and helping trainees write them. It’s hard work, but planning and organization helps. Here’s some thoughts on how to approach writing manuscripts based on original biomedical research.

Getting ready to write

Involve your principal investigator (PI) early and throughout the process. It’s our job to help you write!

Write down your hypothesis/research question. Everything else will be spun around this.

Gather your proposed figures and tables in a sequence that tells a story. This will form the basis of your Results section. Write bulleted captions for the figures/tables, including a title that explains the key finding for each figure/table, an explanation of experimental groups and associated symbols/labels, and details on biological and technical replicates and statements (such as “one of four representative experiments are shown.”)

Generate a bulleted outline of the major points for each section of the manuscript. This depends on the journal, but typically, and with minor variations: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion. Use Endnote, Reference Manager, Mendeley, or other citation software to start inserting references to go with bullets. Decide from the beginning what word processing software you’ll use (Word, Google Docs, etc.). Google Docs can be helpful for maintaining a single version of the manuscript, but citation software often doesn’t play well with Google Docs (whereas most software options can automatically update citation changes in Word). Here’s what should go in each of these sections:

Introduction: What did you study, and why is it important? What is your hypothesis/research question?

Methods: What techniques did you use? Each technique should be its own bullet, with sub-bullets for key details. If you used animal or human subjects, include a bullet on ethics approval. Important methodologies and materials, i.e., blinding for subjective analyses, full names of cell lines/strains/reagents and your commercial/academic sources for them.

Results: What were your findings? Each major finding should be its own bullet, with sub-bullets going into more detail for each major finding. These bullets should refer to your figures.

Discussion: Summarize your findings in the context of prior work. Discuss possible interpretations. It is important to include a bullet describing the limitations of the presented work. Mention possible future directions.

Now read the entire outline (including the figures). Is it a complete story? If so, you’re ready to prepare for submission. If not, you should have a good idea of what it will take to finish the manuscript.

Writing your manuscript

You first need to decide where you want to submit your manuscript. I like to consider my ideal target audience. I also like to vary which journals I publish in, both to broaden the potential readers of my papers and to avoid the appearance of having an unfair “inside connection” to a given journal. Your academic reputation is priceless.

Once you’ve chosen your journal, look at the journal’s article types. Decide which article type you would like to submit and reformat your outline according to the journal’s standards (including citation style).

Convert your outline (including the figure captions) to complete sentences. Don’t focus on writing perfect prose for the first draft. Write your abstract after the first draft is completed. Make sure the manuscript conforms to the target journal’s word and figure limits.

Discuss all possible authors with your PI. If the study involved many people, create a table of possible authors showing their specific contributions to the manuscript. (This is helpful to do in any case as many journals now require this information.) Assigning authorship is sometimes complicated, but keep in mind that the Acknowledgements can be used to recognize those who made minor contributions (including reading the manuscript to provide feedback). “Equal contribution” authorship positions for the first and last authors is a newer option for a number of journals. An alternative is to generate the initial outline or first draft with the help of co-authors. This can take a lot more work and coordination, but may make sense for highly collaborative and large manuscripts.

Decide with your PI who will be corresponding author. Usually you or the PI.

Circulate the manuscript draft to all possible authors. Thank them for their prior and ongoing support. Inform your co-authors where you would like to send the manuscript and why. Give them a reasonable deadline to provide feedback (minimum of a few weeks). If you use Microsoft Word, ask your co-authors to use track changes.

Collate comments from your co-authors. The Combine Documents function in Word can be very helpful. Consider reconciling all comments and tracked changes before circulating another manuscript draft so that co-authors can read a “clean” copy. Repeat this process until you and your PI (and co-authors) are satisfied that the manuscript is ready for submission.

Some prefer to avoid listing authors on manuscript drafts until the final version is generated because the relative contributions of authors can shift during manuscript preparation.

Submit your manuscript

Write a cover letter for your manuscript. Put it on institutional letterhead, if you are permitted by the journal’s submission system. This makes the cover letter, and by extension, the manuscript, more professional. Some journals have required language for cover letters regarding simultaneous submissions to other journals. It’s common for journals to require that cover letters include a rationale explaining the impact and findings of the manuscript. If you need to do this, include key references and a citation list at the end of the cover letter.

Most journals will require you to provide keywords, and/or to choose subject areas related to the manuscript. Be prepared to do so.

Conflicts of interest should be declared in the manuscript, even if the journal does not explicitly request this. Ask your co-authors about any such potential conflicts.

Gather names and official designations of any grants that supported the work described in your manuscript. Ask your co-authors and your PI. This is very important for funding agencies such as the NIH, which scrutinize the productivity of their funded investigators and take this into account when reviewing future grants.

It’s common for journals to allow you to suggest an editor to handle your manuscript. Editors with expertise in your area are more likely to be able to identify and recruit reviewers who are also well-versed in the subject matter of your manuscript. Discuss this with your PI and co-authors.

Likewise, journals often allow authors to suggest reviewers. Some meta-literature indicates that manuscripts with suggested reviewers have an overall higher acceptance rate. It also behooves you to have expert reviewers that can evaluate your manuscript fairly, but also provide feedback that can improve your paper if revisions are recommended. Avoid suggesting reviewers at your own institution or who have recently written papers or been awarded grants with you. Savvy editors look for these types of relationships between reviewers and authors, and will nix a suggested reviewer with any potential conflict of interest. Discuss suggested reviewers with your PI and co-authors.

On the flip side, many journals will allow you to list opposed reviewers. If you believe that someone specific will provide a negatively biased review for non-scientific reasons, that is grounds for opposing them as your manuscript’s reviewer. In small fields, it may not be possible to exclude reviewers and still undergo expert peer review. Definitely a must-discuss with your PI and co-authors.

Generate a final version of the manuscript. Most journals use online submission systems that mandate uploading individual files for the manuscript, cover letter, etc. You may have to use pdf converting software (i.e., Adobe Acrobat) to change Word documents to pdf’s, or to combine documents into a single pdf. Review the final version, including the resolution and appearance of figures. Make sure that no edges of text or graphics near page margins are cut off (Adobe Acrobat sometimes does this with Microsoft Word). Send the final version to your PI and co-authors. Revise any errors. Then submit! Good luck!

Edited by Bill Sullivan, PhD, Indiana University School of Medicine.

Michael Hsieh is the Stirewalt Scientific Director of the Biomedical Research Institute and an Associate Professor at the George Washington University, where he studies host-pathogen interactions in the urinary tract. Michael has published over 90 peer-reviewed scientific papers. His work has been featured on PBS and in the New York Times.

Your article is wonderful. just read it. you advise very correctly. I am an experienced writer. I write articles on various scientific topics. and even I took some information for myself, who I have not used before. Your article will help many novice writers. I’m sure of it. You very well described all the points of your article. I completely agree with them. most difficult to determine the target audience. Thanks to your article, everyone who needs some kind of help can get it by reading your article. Thanks you

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Save my name and email for the next time I comment.

Written by Jessica Rech an undergraduate student at IUPUI and coauthored by Brandi Gilbert, director of LHSI. I am an undergraduate student…

As more learning occurs online and at home with the global pandemic, keeping students engaged in learning about science is a challenge…

By Brad Parks A few years back, while driving to my favorite daily writing haunt, the local radio station spit out one…

A Guide on How to Write a Manuscript for a Research Paper

This article teaches how to write a manuscript for a research paper and recommended practices to produce a well-written manuscript.

For scientists, publishing a research paper is a huge accomplishment; they typically spend a large amount of time researching the appropriate subject, the right material, and, most importantly, the right place to publish their hard work. To be successful in publishing a research paper, it must be well-written and meet all of the high standards.

Although there is no quick and easy method to get published, there are certain manuscript writing strategies that can help earn the awareness and visibility you need to get it published.

In this Mind The Graph step-by-step tutorial, we give practical directions on how to write a manuscript for a research paper, to increase your research as well as your chances of publishing.

What is the manuscript of a research paper?

A manuscript is a written, typed, or word-processed document submitted to a publisher by the researcher. Researchers meticulously create manuscripts to communicate their unique ideas and fresh findings to both the scientific community and the general public. 

Overall, the manuscript must be outstanding and deeply represent your professional attitude towards work; it must be complete, rationally structured, and accurate. To convey the results to the scientific community while complying with ethical rules, scientific articles must use a specified language and structure.

Furthermore, the standards for title page information, abstract structure, reference style, font size, line spacing, margins, layout, and paragraph style must also be observed for effective publishing. This is a time-consuming and challenging technique, but it is worthwhile in the end.

How to structure a manuscript?

The first step in knowing how to write a manuscript for a research paper is understanding how the structure works. 

Title or heading

A poorly chosen title may deter a potential reader from reading deeper into your manuscript. When an audience comes across your manuscript, the first thing they notice is the title, keep in mind that the title you choose might impact the success of your work.

Abstracts are brief summaries of your paper. The fundamental concept of your research and the issues you intend to answer should be contained within the framework of the abstract. The abstract is a concise summary of the research that should be considered a condensed version of the entire article.

Introduction

The purpose of the research is disclosed in the body of the introduction. Background information is provided to explain why the study was conducted and the research’s development.

Methods and materials

The technical parts of the research have to be thoroughly detailed in this section. Transparency is required in this part of the research. Colleagues will learn about the methodology and materials you used to analyze your research, recreate it, and expand concepts further. 

This is the most important portion of the paper. You should provide your findings and data once the results have been thoroughly discussed. Use an unbiased point of view here; but leave the evaluation for your final piece, the conclusion.

Finally, explain why your findings are meaningful. This section allows you to evaluate your results and reflect on your process. Remember that conclusions are expressed in a succinct way using words rather than figures. The content presented in this section should solely be based on the research conducted.

The reference list contains information that readers may use to find the sources you mentioned in your research. Your reference page is at the end of your piece. Keep in mind that each publication has different submission criteria. For effective reference authentication, journal requirements should be followed.

Steps on how to write a manuscript for a research paper

It is not only about the format while writing a successful manuscript, but also about the correct strategy to stand out above other researchers trying to be published. Consider the following steps to a well-written manuscript:

1. Read the author’s guide

Many journals offer a Guide for Authors kind of document, which is normally printed yearly and is available online. In this Guide for Authors, you will discover thorough information on the journal’s interests and scope, as well as information regarding manuscript types and more in-depth instructions on how to do the right formatting to submit your research.

2. Pay special attention to the methods and materials section

The section on methods and materials is the most important part of the research. It should explain precisely what you observed in the research. This section should normally be less than 1,000 words long. The methods and materials used should be detailed enough that a colleague could reproduce the study.

3. Identify and describe your findings

The second most crucial aspect of your manuscript is the findings. After you’ve stated what you observed (methods and materials), you should go through what you discovered. Make a note to organize your findings such that they make sense without further explanation.

4. The research’s face and body

In this part you need to produce the face and body of your manuscript, so do it carefully and thoroughly. 

Ensure that the title page has all of the information required by the journal. The title page is the public face of your research and must be correctly structured to meet publication requirements. 

Write an introduction that explains why you carried out the research and why anybody should be interested in the results (ask yourself “so what?”). 

Concentrate on creating a clear and accurate reference page. As stated in step 1, you should read the author’s guide for the journal you intend to submit to thoroughly to ensure that your research reference page is correctly structured.

The abstract should be written just after the manuscript is finished. Follow the author’s guide and be sure to keep it under the word limit.

5. Rapid Rejection Criteria double-check

Now that you’ve completed the key aspects of your research, it’s time to double-check everything according to the Rapid Rejection Criteria. The “Rapid Rejection Criteria” are errors that lead to an instantaneous rejection. The criteria are:

• The answered question was not interesting enough
• The question has been satisfactorily answered before
• Wrong hypothesis
• The method cannot address the hypothesis
• Research is underpowered
• Contradictory manuscript
• The conclusion doesn’t support the data

Rewrite your manuscript now that you’ve finished it. Make yourself your fiercest critic. Consider reading the document loudly to yourself, keeping an ear out for any abrupt breaks in the logical flow or incorrect claims.

Your Creations, Ready within Minutes!

Aside from a step-by-step guide to writing a decent manuscript for your research, Mind The Graph includes a specialized tool for creating and providing templates for infographics that may maximize the potential and worth of your research. Check the website for more information. 

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Unlock Your Creativity

Create infographics, presentations and other scientifically-accurate designs without hassle — absolutely free for 7 days!

About Jessica Abbadia

Jessica Abbadia is a lawyer that has been working in Digital Marketing since 2020, improving organic performance for apps and websites in various regions through ASO and SEO. Currently developing scientific and intellectual knowledge for the community's benefit. Jessica is an animal rights activist who enjoys reading and drinking strong coffee.

Content tags

How to Write a Successful Scientific Manuscript

Writing a scientific manuscript is an endeavor that challenges the best minds, yet it is very rewarding once the body of work comes to fruition. Researchers carefully draft manuscripts allowing them to share their original ideas and new discoveries with the scientific community as well as to the general population. A significant amount of time and effort is spent during the investigative stages conducting the required research before it is released into the public domain. Therefore, the manuscript drafted to present this research must be thorough, logically presented, and factual. Scientific manuscripts must adhere to a specific language and format to communicate the results to the scientific community whilst adhering to ethical guidelines. When completed the final written product will allow colleagues to debate and reflect on the newly minted work embedded in the manuscript.

Organization

Scientific manuscripts are organized in a logical format, which fits specific criteria as determined by the scientific community. This methodology has been standardized in journals which communicate information to those in the field being discussed. Since the researcher has a storyline he or she is trying to transmit, it must be clear and upfront on the exact question and or problem that his research answers. Readers of the manuscript will be energized to review this work when its content is spelled out early in the paper. A well-written manuscript has the following components included: a clear title, abstract, introductory paragraph, methods and materials section, discussion of results, conclusion and a list of references. Each component of a journal article should follow a logical sequence, which members of the science community have become accustomed.

Related: Need some tips on manuscript drafting? Check out this section today!

Structural Contents

Title or heading.

Titles are extremely important. A crisp detailed title is the first element an audience notices when encountering your manuscript. The significance of a title cannot be overstated in that it introduces your reader to the subject matter you intend to discuss in the next thousand or more words. A poorly formatted title could dissuade a potential reader from delving into your manuscript further. In addition, your paper is indexed in a certain manner, which search engine algorithms will track. To rise to the top of the search index, keywords should be emphasized. Thinking of the right title could determine the size of your audience and the eventual success of your work.

Abstracts are abbreviated versions of your manuscript. Contained within the abstract’s structure should be the major premise of your research and the questions you seek to answer. Also included in the context of the abstract is a brief summary of the methods taken to achieve your goals along with a short version of the results. The abstract may be the only part of the paper read, therefore, it should be considered a concise version of your complete manuscript.

Introduction

The Introduction amplifies certain aspects of the abstract. Within the body of the introduction, the rationale for the research is revealed. Background material is supplied indicating why the research performed is important along with the direction the research took. A brief summary (in a few sentences) discussing the technical aspects of the experimental approach utilized to reach the article’s stated conclusions is included here. Written well the introduction will influence readers to delve further into the body of the paper.

Methodology and Materials

In this section, the technical aspects of the research are described extensively. Clarity in this part of the manuscript is mandatory. Fellow researchers will glean from this section the methods and materials you utilized either to validate your work, reproduce it, and/or develop the concepts further. Detailed protocols are presented here, similar to a road map, explaining the experiments performed, agents or technologies used, and any biology involved. Statistical analysis and tests should be presented here. Do not approximate anything in this part of the manuscript. Suspicion may be cast in your direction questioning the validity of the research if too many approximations are detected.

Discussion of Results

This part of the manuscript may be considered its core. Elaboration on data generated, utilizing tables and graphs, communicating the essence of the research and the outcomes they generate. Once the results are given a lengthy discussion, it should follow by including the interpretation of data, implications of these findings, and potential future research to follow. Ambiguous findings and current controversies in this type of research should be analyzed and examined in this section.

Conclusions

This is the endpoint in the manuscript. Conclusions are written in a concise manner utilizing words not numbers. Information conveyed in this section should only be taken from the research performed. Do not place your references here. Full and complete interpretation of your findings in this part of the manuscript is imperative. Clarity of thought is also essential because misinterpretation of the results is always a possibility. Comparisons to similar work in your field may be discussed here. Absolutely avoid interpretation of your results that cannot be justified by the work performed.

Every journal has submission requirements. Journal guidelines should be followed for proper authentication of references. There exist several formats for reference creation. Familiarize yourself with them. In addition, the sequence of references listed should be in the order in which they appear in the research paper . A number, usually in parenthesis, follows the sentence where they are noted.

Production of a scientific manuscript is a necessity to introduce your research to a wide audience. The complexity of the research and the results generated must be written in a manner that is clear and concise, follows the current journal formats, and is verifiable. The guidelines embedded in this paper will help the researcher place his work in the best light possible. Never write anything that cannot be justified by the research performed. With these simple rules in mind, your scientific manuscript will be a success.

Thanks for the succinct guidance on successful scientific manuscript

I found that your notes are quite joined up! But my query is what should be the scientific content of a discussion section? what if our data are the pioneer?

Thanks for it

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

Improving Research Manuscripts Using AI-Powered Insights: Enago reports for effective research communication

Language Quality Importance in Academia AI in Evaluating Language Quality Enago Language Reports Live Demo…

• Reporting Research

Beyond Spellcheck: How copyediting guarantees error-free submission

Submitting a manuscript is a complex and often an emotional experience for researchers. Whether it’s…

How to Find the Right Journal and Fix Your Manuscript Before Submission

Selection of right journal Meets journal standards Plagiarism free manuscripts Rated from reviewer's POV

• Manuscripts & Grants

Research Aims and Objectives: The dynamic duo for successful research

Picture yourself on a road trip without a destination in mind — driving aimlessly, not…

How Academic Editors Can Enhance the Quality of Your Manuscript

Avoiding desk rejection Detecting language errors Conveying your ideas clearly Following technical requirements

Top 4 Guidelines for Health and Clinical Research Report

Top 10 Questions for a Complete Literature Review

Sign-up to read more

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

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

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

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

As a researcher, what do you consider most when choosing an image manipulation detector?

• Open access
• Published: 16 November 2020

Navigating the qualitative manuscript writing process: some tips for authors and reviewers

• Chris Roberts   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8613-682X 1 ,
• Koshila Kumar   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8504-1052 2 &
• Gabrielle Finn   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0419-694X 3  

BMC Medical Education volume  20 , Article number:  439 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

10k Accesses

10 Citations

27 Altmetric

Metrics details

An Editorial to this article was published on 04 August 2022

Qualitative research explores the ‘black box’ of how phenomena are constituted. Such research can provide rich and diverse insights about social practices and individual experiences across the continuum of undergraduate, postgraduate and continuing education, sectors and contexts. Qualitative research can yield unique data that can complement the numbers generated in quantitative research, [ 1 ] by answering “how” and “why” research questions. As you will notice in this paper, qualitative research is underpinned by specific philosophical assumptions, quality criteria and has a lexicon or a language specific to it.

A simple search of BMC Medical Education suggests that there are over 800 papers that employ qualitative methods either on their own or as part of a mixed methods study to evaluate various phenomena. This represents a considerable investment in time and effort for both researchers and reviewers. This paper is aimed at maximising this investment by helping early career researchers (ECRs) and reviewers new to the qualitative research field become familiar with quality criteria in qualitative research and how these can be applied in the qualitative manuscript writing process. Fortunately, there are numerous guidelines for both authors and for reviewers of qualitative research, including practical “how to” checklists [ 2 , 3 ]. These checklists can be valuable tools to confirm the essential elements of a qualitative study for early career researchers (ECRs). Our advice in this article is not intended to replace such “how to” guidance. Rather, the suggestions we make are intended to help ECRs increase their likelihood of getting published and reviewers to make informed decisions about the quality of qualitative research being submitted for publication in BMC Medical Education. Our advice is themed around long-established criteria for the quality of qualitative research developed by Lincoln and Guba [ 4 ]. (see Table  1 ) Each quality criterion outlined in Table 1 is further expanded in Table  2 in the form of several practical steps pertinent to the process of writing up qualitative research.

As a general starting point, the early career writer is advised to consult previously published qualitative papers in the journal to identify the genre (style) and relative emphasis of different components of the research paper. Patton [ 5 ] advises researchers to “FOCUS! FOCUS! FOCUS!” in deciding which components to include in the paper, highlighting the need to exclude side topics that add little to the narrative and reduce the cognitive load for readers and reviewers alike. Authors are also advised to do significant re-writing, rephrasing, re-ordering of initial drafts, to remove faulty grammar, and addresses stylistic and structural problems [ 6 ]. They should be mindful of “the golden thread,” that is their central argument that holds together the literature review, the theoretical and conceptual framework, the research questions, methodology, the analysis and organisation of the data and the conclusions. Getting a draft reviewed by someone outside of the research/writing team is one practical strategy to ensure the manuscript is well presented and relates to the plausibility element.

The introduction of a qualitative paper can be seen as beginning a conversation. Lingard advises that in this conversation, authors need to persuade the reader and reviewer of the strength, originality and contributions of their work [ 7 ]. In constructing a persuasive rationale, ECRs need to clearly distinguish between the qualitative research phenomenon (i.e. the broad research issue or concept under investigation) and the research context (i.e. the local setting or situation) [ 5 ]. The introduction section needs to culminate in a qualitative research question/s. It is important that ECRs are aware that qualitative research questions need to be fine-tuned from their original state to reflect gaps in the literature review, the researcher/s’ philosophical stance, the theory used, or unexpected findings [ 8 ]. This links to the elements of plausibility and consistency outlined in Table 1 .

Also, in the introduction of a qualitative paper, ECRs need to explain the multiple “lenses” through which they have considered complex social phenomena; including the underpinning research paradigm and theory. A research paradigm reveals the researcher/s’ values and assumptions about research and relates to axiology (what do you value?), ontology (what is out there to know?) epistemology (what and how can you know it?), and methodology (how do you go about acquiring that knowledge?) [ 9 ] ECRs are advised to explicitly state their research paradigm and its underpinning assumptions. For example, Ommering et al., state “We established our research within an interpretivist paradigm, emphasizing the subjective nature in understanding human experiences and creation of reality.” [ 10 ] Theory refers to a set of concepts or a conceptual framework that helps the writer to move beyond description to ‘explaining, predicting, or prescribing responses, events, situations, conditions, or relationships.’ [ 11 ] Theory can provide comprehensive understandings at multiple levels, including: the macro or grand level of how societies work, the mid-range level of how organisations operate; and the micro level of how people interact [ 12 ]. Qualitative studies can involve theory application or theory development [ 5 ]. ECRs are advised to briefly summarise their theoretical lens and identify what it means to consider the research phenomenon, process, or concept being studied with that specific lens. For example, Kumar and Greenhill explain how the lens of workplace affordances enabled their paper to draw “attention to the contextual, personal and interactional factors that impact on how clinical educators integrate their educational knowledge and skills into the practice setting, and undertake their educational role.” [ 13 ] Ensuring that the elements of theory and research paradigm are explicit and aligned, enhances plausibility, consistency and transparency of qualitative research. The use of theory can also add to the currency of research by enabling a new lens to be cast on a research phenomenon, process, or concept and reveal something previously unknown or surprising.

Moving to the methods, methodology is a general approach to studying a research topic and establishes how one will go about studying any phenomenon. In contrast, methods are specific research techniques and in qualitative research, data collection methods might include observation or interviewing, or photo elicitation methods, while data analysis methods may include content analysis, narrative analysis, or discourse analysis to mention a few [ 8 ]. ECRs will need to ensure the philosophical assumptions, methodology and methods follow from the introduction of a manuscript and the research question/s, [ 3 ] and this enhances the consistency and transparency elements. Moreover, triangulation or the combining of multiple observers, theories, methods, and data sources, is vital to overcome the limitation of singular methods, lone analysts, and single-perspective theories or models [ 8 ]. ECRs should report on not only what was triangulated but also how it was performed, thereby enhancing the elements of plausibility and consistency. For example, Touchie et al., describe using three researchers, three different focus groups, and representation of three different participant cohorts to ensure triangulation [ 14 ]. When it comes to the analysis of qualitative data, ECRs may claim they have used a specific methodological approach (e.g. interpretative phenomenological approach or a grounded theory approach) whereas the analytical steps are more congruent with a more generalist approach, such as thematic analysis [ 15 ]. ECRs are advised that such methodological approaches are founded on a number of philosophical considerations which need to inform the framing and conduct of a study, not just the analysis process. Alignment between the methodology and the methods informs the consistency, transparency and plausibility elements.

Comprehensively describing the research context in a way that is understandable to an international audience helps to illuminate the specific ‘laboratory’ for the research, and how the processes applied or insights generated in this ‘laboratory’ can be adapted or translated to other contexts. This addresses the relevancy element. To further enhance plausibility and relevance, ECRs should situate their work clearly on the evaluation–research continuum. Although not a strictly qualitative research consideration, evaluation focuses mostly on understanding how specific local practices may have resulted in specific outcomes for learners. While evaluation is vital for quality assurance and improvement, research has a broader and strategic focus and rates more highly against the currency and relevancy criteria. ECRs are more likely to undertake evaluation studies aimed at demonstrating the impact and outcomes of an educational intervention in their local setting, consistent with level one of Kirkpatrick’s criteria [ 16 ]. For example, Palmer and colleagues explain that they aimed to “develop and evaluate a continuing medical education (CME) course aimed at improving healthcare provider knowledge” [ 17 ]. To be competitive for publication, evaluation studies need to (measure and) report on at least level two and above of Kirkpatrick’s criteria. Learning how to problematise and frame the investigation of a problem arising from practice as research, provides ECRs with an opportunity to adopt a more critical and scholarly stance.

Also, in the methods, ECRs may provide detail about the study context and participants but little in the way of personal reflexive statements. Unlike quantitative research which claims that knowledge is objective and seeks to remove subjective influences, qualitative research recognises that subjectivity is inherent and that the researcher is directly involved in interpreting and constructing meanings [ 8 ]. For example, Bindels and colleagues provide a clear and concise description about their own backgrounds making their ‘lens’ explicit and enabling the reader to understand the multiple perspectives that have informed their research process [ 18 ]. Therefore, a clear description of the researcher/s position and relationship to the research phenomenon, context and participants, is vital for transparency, relevance and plausibility. We three are all experienced qualitative researchers, writers, reviewers and are associate editors for BMC Medical Education. We are situated in this research landscape as consumers, architects, and arbiters and we engage in these roles in collaboration with others. This provides a useful vantage point from which to provide commentary on key elements which can cause frustration for would-be authors and reviewers of qualitative research papers [ 19 ].

In the discussion of a qualitative paper, ECRs are encouraged to make detailed comments about the contributions of their research and whether these reinforce, extend, or challenge existing understandings based on an analysis that is theoretically or socially significant [ 20 ]. As an example, Barratt et al., found important data to inform the training of medical interns in the use of personal protective equipment during the COVID 19 pandemic [ 21 ]. ECRs are also expected to address the “so what” question which relates to the the consequence of findings for policy, practice and theory. Authors will need to explicitly outline the practical, theoretical or methodological implications of the study findings in a way that is actionable, thereby enhancing relevance and plausibility. For example, Burgess et al., presented their discussion according to four themes and outlined associated implications for individuals and institutions [ 22 ]. A balanced view of the research can be presented by ensuring there is congruence between the data and the claims made and searching the data and/or literature for evidence that disconfirms the findings. ECRs will also need to put forward the sources of uncertainty (rather than limitations) in their research and argue what these may mean for the interpretations made and how the contributions to knowledge could be adopted by others in different contexts [ 23 ]. This links to the plausibility and transparency elements.

In conclusion

Qualitative research is underpinned by specific philosophical assumptions, quality criteria and a lexicon, which ECRs and reviewers need to be mindful of as they navigate the qualitative manuscript writing and reviewing processes. We hope that the guidance provided here is helpful for ECRs in preparing submissions and for reviewers in making informed decisions and providing quality feedback.

Silverman D. Introducing Qualitative Research in Silverman D (Ed) Qualitative Research, 4th Edn. London: Sage; 1984. p. 3–14.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.

Article   Google Scholar  

Tai J, Ajjawi R. Undertaking and reporting qualitative research. Clin Teach. 2016;13(3):175–82.

Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications; 1985. p. 1995.

Google Scholar  

Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods: integrating theory and practice. 4th Edn. Thousan Oaks: Sage publications; 2014.

Braun V, Clarke V. Successful qualitative research: a practical guide for beginners. London: Sage; 2013.

Lingard L. Joining a conversation: the problem/gap/hook heuristic. Perspect Med Educ. 2015;4(5):252–3.

Cohen L, Manion L, Morrison K. Research Methods in Education. 8th Edn. Abingdon: Routledge; 2019.

Brown MEL, Dueñas AN. A medical science Educator’s guide to selecting a research paradigm: building a basis for better research. Med Sci Educ. 2020;30(1):545–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-019-00898-9 .

Ommering BWC, Wijnen-Meijer M, Dolmans DHJM, Dekker FW, van Blankenstein FM. Promoting positive perceptions of and motivation for research among undergraduate medical students to stimulate future research involvement: a grounded theory study. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):204. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02112-6 .

Bradbury-Jones C, Taylor J, Herber O. How theory is used and articulated in qualitative research: development of a new typology. Soc Sci Med. 2014;120:135–41.

Reeves S, Albert M, Kuper A, Hodges BD. Why use theories in qualitative research? BMJ. 2008;7;337:a949. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a949 .

Kumar K, Greenhill J. Factors shaping how clinical educators use their educational knowledge and skills in the clinical workplace: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2016;16(1):68. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0590-8 .

Touchie C, Humphrey-Murto S, Varpio L. Teaching and assessing procedural skills: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13(1):69. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-13-69 .

Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.

Yardley S, Dornan T. Kirkpatrick’s levels and education ‘evidence’. Med Educ. 2012;46(1):97–106.

Palmer RC, Samson R, Triantis M, Mullan ID. Development and evaluation of a web-based breast cancer cultural competency course for primary healthcare providers. BMC Med Educ. 2011;11(1):59.

Bindels E, Verberg C, Scherpbier A, Heeneman S, Lombarts K. Reflection revisited: how physicians conceptualize and experience reflection in professional practice – a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18(1):105. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1218-y .

Finlay L. “Outing” the researcher: the provenance, process, and practice of reflexivity. Qual Health Res. 2002;12:531–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973202129120052 .

Watling CJ, Lingard L. Grounded theory in medical education research: AMEE guide no. 70. Med Teach. 2012;34(10):850–61. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.704439 .

Barratt R, Wyer M, Hor S-y, Gilbert GL. Medical interns’ reflections on their training in use of personal protective equipment. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):328. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02238-7 .

Burgess A, Roberts C, Clark T, Mossman K. The social validity of a national assessment Centre for selection into general practice training. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14(1):261.

Lingard L. The art of limitations. Perspect Med Educ. 2015;4(3):136–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-015-0181-0 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Education Office, Sydney Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Chris Roberts

Prideaux Centre for Research in Health Professions Education, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

Koshila Kumar

Division of Medical Education, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, M13 9NT, Manchester, UK

Gabrielle Finn

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

CR and KK wrote the first draft. All three authors contributed to severally revising the manuscript. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chris Roberts .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Roberts, C., Kumar, K. & Finn, G. Navigating the qualitative manuscript writing process: some tips for authors and reviewers. BMC Med Educ 20 , 439 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02370-4

Download citation

Published : 16 November 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02370-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Preparing your manuscript.

What are you submitting? The main manuscript document The title page How do I format my article? Sage Author Services

What are you submitting? 

Sage journals publish a variety of different article types, from original research, review articles, to commentaries and opinion pieces. Please view your chosen journal’s submission guidelines for information on what article types are published and what the individual requirements are for each. Below are general guidelines for submitting an original research article. 

Whatever kind of article you are submitting, remember that the language you use is important. We are committed to promoting equity throughout our publishing program, and we believe that using language is a simple and powerful way to ensure the communities we serve feel welcomed, respected, safe, and able to fully engage with the publishing process and our published content. Inclusive language considerations are especially important when discussing topics like age, appearance, disability, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, race, religion, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, emigration status, and weight. We have produced an Inclusive Language Guide that recommends preferred terminology on these topics. We recognize that language is constantly evolving and we’re committed to ensuring that this guide is continuously updated to reflect changing practices. The guide isn't exhaustive, but we hope it serves as a helpful starting point.  

The main manuscript document 

Have a look at your chosen journal’s submission guidelines for information on what sections should be included in your manuscript. Generally there will be an Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgments, Statements and Declarations section, and References. Be sure to remove any identifying information from the main manuscript if you are submitting to a journal that has a double-anonymized peer review policy and instead include this on a separate title page. See the Sage Journal Author Gateway for detailed guidance on making an anonymous submission .   

Your article title, keywords, and abstract all contribute to its position in search engine results, directly affecting the number of people who see your work. For details of what you can do to influence this, visit How to help readers find your article online .

Title: Your manuscript’s title should be concise, descriptive, unambiguous, accurate, and reflect the precise contents of the manuscript. A descriptive title that includes the topic of the manuscript makes an article more findable in the major indexing services.  

Abstract: Your abstract should concisely state the purpose of the research, major findings, and conclusions. If your research includes clinical trials, the trial registry name and URL, and registration number must be included at the end of the abstract. Submissions that do not meet this requirement will not be considered. Please see your chosen journal’s guidelines for information on how to set out your abstract.  

Keywords: You will be asked to list a certain number of keywords after the abstract. Keywords should be as specific as possible to the research topic.   

Acknowledgements: If you are including an Acknowledgements section, this will be published at the end of your article. The Acknowledgments section should include all contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship. Per ICMJE recommendations , it is best practice to obtain consent from non-author contributors who you are acknowledging in your manuscript.   

Writing assistance and third-party submissions: if you have received any writing or editing assistance from a third-party, for example a specialist communications company, this must be clearly stated in the Acknowledgements section and in the covering letter. Please see the Sage Author Gateway for what information to include in your Acknowledgements section. If your submission is being made on your behalf by someone who is not listed as an author, for example the third-party who provided writing/editing assistance, you must state this in the Acknowledgements and also in your covering letter. Please note that the journal editor reserves the right to not consider submissions made by a third party rather than by the author/s themselves.   

Author contributions statement: As part of our commitment to ensuring an ethical, transparent and fair peer review and publication process, some journals have adopted CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) . CRediT is a high-level taxonomy, including 14 roles, which is used to describe each author’s individual contributions to the work. Other journals may require you to list the contribution of each author as part of the submission process. If so, please include an Author Contributions heading within your submission after the Acknowledgements section. The information you give on submission will then show under the Author Contributions heading later at the proofing stage.  

Statements and declarations: You’ll be asked to provide various statements and declarations regarding the research you’re submitting. These will vary by journal so do make sure you read your chosen journal’s guidelines carefully to see what is required. Please include a section with the heading ‘Statements and Declarations’ at the end of your submitted article, after the Acknowledgements section (and Author Contributions section if applicable) including the relevant sub-headings listed below. If a declaration is not applicable to your submission, you must still include the heading and state ‘Not applicable’ underneath. Please note that you may be asked to justify why a declaration was not applicable to your submission by the Editorial Office.

• Ethical considerations: Please include your ethics approval statements under this heading, even if you have already included ethics approval information in your methods section. If ethical approval was not required, you need to state this. You can find information on what to say in your ethical statements as well as example statements on our Publication ethics and research integrity policies page    
• Consent to participate: Please include any participant consent information under this heading and state whether informed consent to participate was written or verbal. If the requirement for informed consent to participate has been waived by the relevant Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board (i.e. where it has been deemed that consent would be impossible or impracticable to obtain), please state this. If this is not applicable to your manuscript, please state ‘Not applicable’ in this section. More information and example statements can be found on our Publication ethics and research integrity policies page   
• Consent for publication: Submissions containing any data from an individual person (including individual details, images or videos) must include a statement confirming that informed consent for publication was provided by the participant(s) or a legally authorized representative. Non-essential identifying details should be omitted.  Please do not submit the participant’s actual written informed consent with your article, as this in itself breaches the patient’s confidentiality. The Journal requests that you confirm to us, in writing, that you have obtained written informed consent to publish but the written consent itself should be held by the authors/investigators themselves, for example in a patient’s hospital record. The confirmatory letter may be uploaded with your submission as a separate file in addition to the statement confirming that consent to publish was obtained within the manuscript text. If this is not applicable to your manuscript, please state ‘Not applicable’ in this section. If you need one you can download this template participant consent form . 
• Declaration of conflicting interest: All journals require a declaration of conflicting interests from all authors so that a statement can be included in your article. For guidance on conflict of interest statements, see our policy on conflicting interest declarations and the ICMJE recommendations . If no conflict exists, your statement should read: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
• Funding statement: All articles need to include a funding statement, under a separate heading, even if you did not receive funding .  You’ll find guidance and examples on our Funding statements page .  
• Data availability statement: We are committed to helping ensure you reach as many readers as possible, always in a spirit of openness and transparency. We encourage you to share your research to a public repository and cite this data in your research (please note that this is a requirement for some journals). You will need to publish a data availability statement with your article under this heading. More information on how to write one can be found on the Sage Gateway: Research Data Sharing FAQs | SAGE Publications Ltd   

Artwork, figures, and other graphics: Illustrations, pictures and graphs, should be supplied in the highest quality and in an electronic format that helps us to publish your article in the best way possible. Please follow the guidelines below to enable us to prepare your artwork for the printed issue as well as the online version. 

• Format: TIFF, JPEG: Common format for pictures (containing no text or graphs). 
• EPS: Preferred format for graphs and line art (retains quality when enlarging/zooming in). 
• Placement: Figures/charts and tables created in MS Word should be included in the main text rather than at the end of the document. 
• Figures and other files created outside Word (i.e. Excel, PowerPoint, JPG, TIFF and EPS) should be submitted separately. Please add a placeholder note in the running text (i.e. “[insert Figure 1.]") 
• Resolution: Rasterized based files (i.e. with .tiff or .jpeg extension) require a resolution of at least 300 dpi (dots per inch). Line art should be supplied with a minimum resolution of 800 dpi. 
• Colour: Please note that images supplied in colour will be published in colour online and black and white in print (unless otherwise arranged). Therefore, it is important that you supply images that are comprehensible in black and white as well (i.e. by using colour with a distinctive pattern or dotted lines). The captions should reflect this by not using words indicating colour. If you have requested colour reproduction in the print version, we will advise you of any costs on receipt of your accepted article. 
• Dimension: Check that the artworks supplied match or exceed the dimensions of the journal. Images cannot be scaled up after origination 
• Fonts: The lettering used in the artwork should not vary too much in size and type (usually sans serif font as a default). 

Please ensure that you have obtained any necessary permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures, or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere. For further information including guidance on fair dealing for criticism and review, please see the Frequently Asked Questions page on the Sage Journal Author Gateway.   

References: Every in-text citation must have a corresponding citation in the reference list and vice versa. Corresponding citations must have identical spelling and year. Information about what reference style to use can be found in your chosen journal’s guidelines. 

Authors should update any references to preprints when a peer reviewed version is made available, to cite the published research. Citations to preprints are otherwise discouraged.  

Supplemental material Sage journals can host additional materials online (e.g. datasets, podcasts, videos, images etc.) alongside the full text of the article. Your supplemental material must be one of our accepted file types. For that list and more information please refer to our guidelines on submitting supplemental files .  

The title page  

You will also need to prepare a title page. This should include any information removed from the main manuscript document for the purposes of anonymity. The title page will not be sent to peer reviewers.  

Your title page should include:  

• Article title  
• The full list of authors including all names and affiliations. 
• The listed affiliation should be the institution where the research was conducted. If an author has moved to a new institution since completing the research, the new affiliation can be included in a note at the end of the manuscript – please indicate this on the title page.  
• Everybody eligible for authorship must be included at the time of submission (please see the authorship section for more information).
• Contact information for the corresponding author: name, institutional address, phone, email  
• Acknowledgments section  
• Statements and Declarations section  
• Any other identifying information related to the authors and/or their institutions, funders, approval committees, etc, that might compromise anonymity.   

How do I format my article? 

The preferred format is Word. There is no need to follow a specific template when submitting your manuscript in Word. However, please ensure your heading levels are clear, and the sections clearly defined. 

(La)TeX guidelines We welcome submissions of LaTeX files. Please download the  Sage LaTex Template , which contains comprehensive guidelines. The Sage LaTex template files are also available in  Overleaf , should you wish to write in an online environment. 

If you have used any .bib or .bst files when creating your article, please include these with your submission so that we can generate the reference list and citations in the journal-specific style. If you have any queries, please consult our  LaTex Frequently Asked Questions.  

When formatting your references, please ensure you check the reference style followed by your chosen journal. Here are quick links to the  Sage Harvard  reference style, the  Sage Vancouver  reference style and the  APA  reference style. 

Other styles available for certain journals are:  ACS Style Guide ,  AMA Manual of Style ,  ASA Style Guide ,  Chicago Manual of Style  and  CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Societies . 

Please refer to  your journal's manuscript submission guidelines  to confirm which reference style it conforms to and for other specific requirements. 

Equations should to be submitted using Office Math ML and Math type. 

Artwork guidelines   Illustrations, pictures and graphs, should be supplied in the highest quality and in an electronic format that helps us to publish your article in the best way possible. Please follow the guidelines below to enable us to prepare your artwork for the printed issue as well as the online version. 

• Format:  TIFF, JPEG: Common format for pictures (containing no text or graphs).  EPS: Preferred format for graphs and line art (retains quality when enlarging/zooming in). 
• Placement:  Figures/charts and tables created in MS Word should be included in the main text rather than at the end of the document.  Figures and other files created outside Word (i.e. Excel, PowerPoint, JPG, TIFF and EPS) should be submitted separately. Please add a placeholder note in the running text (i.e. “[insert Figure 1.]") 
• Resolution:  Rasterized based files (i.e. with .tiff or .jpeg extension) require a resolution of at least  300 dpi  (dots per inch). Line art should be supplied with a minimum resolution of  800 dpi . 
• Color:  Please note that images supplied in colour will be published in color online and black and white in print (unless otherwise arranged). Therefore, it is important that you supply images that are comprehensible in black and white as well (i.e. by using color with a distinctive pattern or dotted lines). The captions should reflect this by not using words indicating colour. 
• Dimension:  Check that the artworks supplied match or exceed the dimensions of the journal. Images cannot be scaled up after origination 
• Fonts:  The lettering used in the artwork should not vary too much in size and type (usually sans serif font as a default). 

Image integrity Figures should be minimally processed and should reflect the integrity of the original data in the image. Adjustments to images in brightness, contrast, or color balance should be applied equally to the entire image, provided they do not distort any data in the figure, including the background. Selective adjustments and touch-up tools used on portions of a figure are not appropriate. Images should not be layered or combined into a single image unless it is stated that the figure is a product of time-averaged data. All adjustments to image date should be clearly disclosed in the figure legend. Images may be additionally screened to confirm faithfulness to the original data. Authors should be able to supply raw image data upon request. Authors should also list tools and software used to collect image data and should document settings and manipulations in the Methods section. 

Sage Author Services 

Authors seeking assistance with English language editing, translation with editing, or figure and manuscript formatting, to fit the journal’s specifications should consider using Sage Author Services. Other additional services include creation of infographics and video summaries to promote your article with colleagues and over social media. Visit  Sage Author Services  on our Journal Author Gateway for further information. 

• Open access at Sage
• Top reasons to publish with Sage
• How to get published
• Open access and publishing fees
• Sage Author Services
• Help readers find your article
• Plain Language Summaries
• Inclusive language guide
• Registered reports author guidelines
• Publication ethics policies
• Supplemental material author guidelines
• Manuscript preparation for double-anonymized journals
• Advance: a Sage preprints community
• Submitting your manuscript
• During peer review
• During and post publication
• Sage editorial policies
• Help and support
• Journal Editor Gateway
• Journal Reviewer Gateway
• Ethics & Responsibility
• Publication Ethics Policies
• Sage Chinese Author Gateway 中国作者资源

• SpringerLink shop

Formatting your manuscript

It is important to format your manuscript according to your target journal’s requirements, which can be found in the Instructions for Authors. This will speed up the submission process because the journal’s editorial team will not have to send your manuscript back to you for formatting. It can also increase your chances of success because you will not omit materials that the journal might require.

TIP: Before writing a complete draft of your manuscript, it is a good idea to select an initial target journal. Read the formatting requirements for the journal on its website, then write your draft. This could save you a lot of time, as you won’t have to reformat an already-written manuscript after selecting the journal!

Review all guidelines and ensure that your manuscript meets them. Have you:

• Obeyed all wor d and character limits  (title, running title, abstract, manuscript text)?
• Included all  required  sections?
• Met  language  requirements (US or UK English)?
• Supplied all requested  contact information ?
• Inserted  figures  in the correct location (in text, end of manuscript, separate files)?
• Correctly formatted  references ?
• Used the correct  file format  for your images (.jpg, .png, .pdf, .ppt)?
• Stated  ANY conflicts of interest ?
• Included details of any required ethics and regulatory  permissions ?
• Obtained consent from ALL authors?

TIP: Some journals provide templates to assist authors. Also look for template style files for use with your reference manager.

Click to download the free 'Writing a Journal Article: Cheat Sheet'

Back │ Next

• Master Your Homework
• Do My Homework

The Difference Between a Research Paper and Manuscript

The research paper and manuscript are two distinct forms of academic writing that have many similarities, but also some key differences. This article will explore the main points of distinction between a research paper and a manuscript by examining their purpose, format, content organization, structure and length. Additionally, this article will provide an overview of the major components that compose both papers in order to further clarify any potential confusion for readers regarding these two genres. Finally, implications for writers when choosing one type over another will be discussed in detail with specific reference to areas such as audience appeal and marketability.

I. Introduction

Ii. definition of a research paper, iii. definition of a manuscript, iv. comparison between research papers and manuscripts, v. types of manuscripts, vi. variations in publication requirements for different genres of research papers and manuscripts, vii. conclusion.

When embarking on a scholarly writing journey, it is important to understand the distinction between two types of publications: research paper and manuscript.

• Research Paper : A research paper typically follows an academic format for presenting evidence in support of an argument. It may include data from primary sources such as surveys or interviews conducted by the author themselves, or secondary sources such as books or articles which analyze existing findings. Research papers generally draw upon more than one source when constructing their arguments.

A manuscript , however, can be thought of as more creative than its counterpart. While still containing factual information based on rigorous research methods and thorough analysis, manuscripts often contain narrative elements that help bring stories to life through vivid descriptions and engaging characters. Manuscripts also tend to focus much less heavily on citing other works; rather they are used primarily for conveying ideas in a compelling manner while providing background detail necessary for readers’ understanding.

A Research Paper Research papers are extended scholarly works that explore a specific topic in depth. They generally require an extensive research process, which may involve interviews and surveys as well as traditional library sources such as books or journal articles. These papers typically include the following:

The goal is to present evidence-based conclusions on the selected issue or topic; this will help inform and educate readers about it.

Manuscript vs Research Paper . Manuscripts can be quite similar to research papers, but they focus more narrowly on presenting work created by the author (as opposed to what has already been published). They often emphasize creativity rather than scientific inquiry, though manuscripts can certainly include both components depending on their intended audience and purpose. Manuscripts also usually have less stringent formatting requirements compared to formal research papers – while there may still be elements such as titles pages, these are not always necessary if submitting them in creative writing forums or contests where different rules apply.

Understanding a Manuscript A manuscript is an unpublished work, typically by one or more authors and can be in any medium such as handwritten, typed on a computer or created digitally. It differs from the traditional research paper because it does not need to include source citations; however it should still contain original thought and analysis. While manuscripts may follow established conventions for their form (ie poetry has specific styles), they are also highly creative works meant to draw out emotion.

Distinguishing Characteristics of Manuscripts – A unique product of creativity – Usually involves some level of personal reflection & insight – May have special formatting requirements depending on genre/type – Can take many forms including: book chapters, essays, stories, plays & poems – Not peer reviewed like research papers

In the world of academia, research papers and manuscripts occupy vastly different roles. Though both are written pieces that display an author’s findings or ideas, there is a great disparity in their individual characteristics.

• Scope : Research papers typically cover large amounts of information on a given subject matter; they often take much longer to write than manuscripts. Manuscripts may be shorter but should still present relevant data needed to support any conclusions made by the author.
• Audience : Research papers usually target specialists within a certain field who have advanced knowledge about what constitutes quality work in their specific discipline. On the other hand, manuscripts focus more heavily on general readership and aim to make complex topics easier for non-experts to understand.

There are several distinct types of manuscripts that authors may submit to journals for publication. These include research papers, review articles, and short reports.

• Research Papers : The most common type of manuscript submitted is the research paper . This typically includes an introduction section that outlines the purpose or hypothesis of the experiment followed by a discussion on related work from other authors in this field. Research methods used to carry out experiments should be detailed including how data was collected and analyzed. Finally, results should be presented in graphs and tables with associated interpretations before moving onto a conclusion section.
• Review Articles : A review article , also known as survey paper or literature review provides readers with a comprehensive summary of all significant studies pertaining to particular areas within a given topic while discussing recent developments such as trends, patterns, controversies etc., Such papers aim at helping scientists keep up-to-date with advances in their field.

Research papers and manuscripts are two different types of written works used to convey information. They both require a high level of accuracy, but they differ in their structure and publication requirements.

• A research paper is an academic piece that focuses on the analysis or interpretation of data collected from relevant sources.
• It should include an abstract summarizing your study’s main points; introduction to the topic, thesis statement, body paragraphs with evidence-based claims supported by research; discussion section for drawing conclusions; endnotes or footnotes providing additional information about cited resources.

In summary, this paper has presented a comprehensive comparison between the two major forms of academic writing: research papers and manuscripts. It is clear that both formats have their advantages and disadvantages when it comes to effectively conveying scholarly work, yet they are very distinct from one another in terms of purpose and structure. While research papers focus on presenting findings or conclusions through an empirical approach, manuscripts provide authors with opportunities to explore theoretical questions and ideas through more creative means.

It is important for aspiring scholars to understand the differences between these two mediums before deciding which format best fits their project objectives. Each form requires different levels of time investment as well as unique challenges during composition. For those wishing to present new knowledge in an innovative way without being bound by strict guidelines may find greater success with manuscript submissions; however if providing quantitative data-driven evidence is desired then a research paper might be better suited.

• Research Paper : Focuses primarily on empirical investigation & reporting results
• Manuscript : Explores theoretical concepts & presents alternative views

• Manuscript Review

Learn More About Manuscript Review on Scientific Publishing Process with Elsevier Author Services

Manuscript review has one key goal for authors: How to make reviewers fall in love with your paper at first read? Of course, it is essential to go through a careful proofreading of the paper. That is why Elsevier understands the great role proofreading plays. By providing professional language editing services, we can help you eliminate obstacles in your paper writing, whether you are working on journal papers, scientific research papers or medical papers.

Essential for High-Quality Paper Editing: Three Tips to Efficient Spellchecks

If You’re a Researcher, Remember These Before You Are Submitting Your Manuscript to Journals!

Navigating “Chinglish” Errors in Academic English Writing

Is The Use of AI in Manuscript Editing Feasible? Here’s Three Tips to Steer Clear of Potential Issues

A profound editing experience with English-speaking experts: Elsevier Language Services to learn more!

Research Fraud: Falsification and Fabrication in Research Data

Professor Anselmo Paiva: Using Computer Vision to Tackle Medical Issues with a Little Help from Elsevier Author Services

What is the main purpose of proofreading a paper?

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

AI Generator

A manuscript is a handwritten or typed document that contains the original text of a work, such as a novel, screenplay, or script. It serves as the first version of a piece of writing before it gets edited, published, or produced. Authors and playwrights use manuscripts to draft and refine their ideas, ensuring the final product is polished and ready for an audience. Whether it’s an English essay, a gripping screenplay , or a compelling script , a manuscript is the crucial starting point for any written work.

What is Manuscript?

Manuscript format, 1.title page.

• Title : Place the title of your manuscript in the center of the page.
• Author’s Name : Add your name below the title.
• Contact Information : Include your address, phone number, and email in the upper left corner.
• Word Count : Note the word count in the upper right corner.

2. Margins and Spacing

• Margins : Use 1-inch margins on all sides of the page.
• Line Spacing : Double-space the entire manuscript for readability.
• Font : Use a readable font like Times New Roman, 12-point size.
• Page Numbers : Insert page numbers in the upper right corner.
• Author’s Last Name and Title : Include your last name and a shortened title of the manuscript in the header.

4. Body Text

• Indentation : Indent the first line of each paragraph by 0.5 inches.
• Alignment : Use left alignment and do not justify the text.
• Scene Breaks : Insert a blank line or use three asterisks (***).

5. Dialogue

• Quotation Marks : Enclose dialogue in quotation marks.
• New Paragraphs : Start a new paragraph for each new speaker.

6. Chapters

• Chapter Titles : Center the chapter title or number one-third down the page.
• Page Breaks : Begin each chapter on a new page.

7. End Matter

• Author Bio : Include a short biography at the end if requested.
• Acknowledgments : Add any acknowledgments or thank-yous.

8. Proofreading

• Grammar and Spelling : Check for and correct any grammatical or spelling errors.
• Consistency : Ensure consistency in formatting, font, and style throughout the manuscript.

Examples of Manuscript

• Medieval Religious Text : Handwritten copies of the Bible or the Quran.
• Ancient Greek Philosophical Works : Original writings of Plato or Aristotle.
• Medieval Illuminated Manuscripts : Decorative and colorful manuscripts, like the Book of Kells.
• Literary Manuscripts : Early drafts of novels by famous authors, such as “Pride and Prejudice” by Jane Austen.
• Historical Letters : Correspondence from significant historical figures, like letters written by Abraham Lincoln.
• Scientific Papers : Original manuscripts of groundbreaking scientific discoveries, such as Isaac Newton’s “Principia Mathematica.”
• Playscripts : Original scripts of plays by renowned playwrights, such as Shakespeare’s “Hamlet.”
• Poetry Collections : Handwritten collections of poems by poets like Emily Dickinson.
• Travel Diaries : Personal accounts of travels, like Marco Polo’s “The Travels of Marco Polo.”
• Historical Chronicles : Manuscripts detailing historical events, like “The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.”
• Ancient Legal Documents : Early versions of legal codes, such as Hammurabi’s Code.
• Medical Texts : Original medical treatises, like Hippocrates’ “Corpus Hippocraticum.”
• Philosophical Essays : Handwritten essays by philosophers, such as Michel de Montaigne’s “Essays.”
• Autobiographies : Manuscripts of personal life stories, like “The Diary of Anne Frank.”
• Music Scores : Original sheet music composed by musicians like Beethoven.
• Epic Poems : Manuscripts of long narrative poems, such as Homer’s “The Iliad.”
• Art Sketchbooks : Artists’ original sketchbooks, like those of Leonardo da Vinci.
• Cookbooks : Early handwritten recipe collections, like “The Forme of Cury.”
• Scientific Journals : Personal scientific journals, such as those of Charles Darwin.
• Mythological Texts : Manuscripts of ancient myths, like the “Epic of Gilgamesh.”

Examples of Manuscript for Students

• Essay Drafts : Early versions of an essay on Shakespeare’s works.
• Science Fair Reports : Initial reports on a student’s science project.
• History Papers : Drafts of research papers on historical events.
• Creative Writing Stories : Handwritten or typed stories for a creative writing class.
• Classroom Journals : Daily entries in a student’s journal.
• Book Reports : First drafts of book summaries and analyses.
• Research Proposals : Preliminary proposals for a research project.
• Thesis Papers : Early drafts of a student’s thesis or dissertation.
• Lab Reports : Initial versions of laboratory experiment reports.
• Poetry Collections : Handwritten collections of original poems.

Examples of Manuscripts in a Sentence

• The manuscript of her novel was accepted by the publisher.
• He discovered an ancient manuscript in the library archives.
• She spent months revising her manuscript before submitting it.
• The manuscript contained detailed illustrations and maps.
• His latest research manuscript will be published next year.
• They found a medieval manuscript hidden in the monastery.
• She lost her original manuscript in a computer crash.
• The professor reviewed the manuscript for scientific accuracy.
• The manuscript was written in beautiful calligraphy.
• He donated his personal manuscript collection to the university.

Examples of Manuscripts for Research

• Thesis Drafts : Early versions of a PhD thesis.
• Research Articles : Preliminary manuscripts of journal articles.
• Grant Proposals : Initial drafts of research funding proposals.
• Literature Reviews : Manuscripts reviewing existing research.
• Case Studies : Detailed reports on specific research cases.
• Conference Papers : Drafts of papers to be presented at academic conferences.
• Field Notes : Original observations recorded during field research.
• Dissertation Proposals : Early drafts of dissertation plans.
• Experimental Reports : Manuscripts documenting research experiments.
• Annotated Bibliographies : Manuscripts compiling sources with annotations.

1. Manuscript Template Instructions

2. Manuscript Format

3. Manuscript Format Template

4. Steps to Create Manuscript

How to Write a Manuscript for Your Story

A well-written manuscript will allow readers to comprehend and understand the text written as if it was a published book. The completed manuscript will undergo a process where it will be reviewed and edited to a certain extent. The complete manuscript will have all the necessary parts of a book, this will include the cover page , references, and dedication.

Create an Outline of The Story

Begin by creating an outline that will detail the overarching plot of the story you want to write. This should follow a specific flow and should be comprised of three arcs with multiple chapters in between. The outline will act as the structure of your story, which is very important as it can help minimize and prevent writer’s block.

Write the Chapters, and Finish the Manuscript

After creating your outline, you must begin writing the chapters using the outline as the base of said chapters. Do note, this will be the longest part of the manuscript and it will take some time and effort to finish writing the manuscript.

Edit the Manuscript

When you have finished writing the manuscript, it must undergo a couple of revisions and test-read to improve the overall quality of the manuscript. Doing this will increase the chances of a publication accepting your manuscript.

Publish the Manuscript

After you have finished the editing process of the manuscript you can opt to publish your manuscript in a variety of ways. You may self-publish the manuscript, though this will be the hardest to market and sell. Alternatively, you may approach various publications to try and vet your manuscript to them.

How to Read Manuscript

• Find a Quiet Space : Choose a quiet and comfortable place where you can focus without distractions.
• Understand the Context : Research the background of the manuscript, including the author, the time period, and the purpose of the work.
• Skim the Manuscript : Quickly skim through the manuscript to get a general sense of its structure and main points.
• Read the Introduction : Carefully read the introduction to understand the main theme and objectives of the manuscript.
• Annotate as You Read : Make notes, highlight important points, and write down any questions or comments in the margins.
• Break It into Sections : Divide the manuscript into manageable sections and read each part thoroughly.
• Focus on Key Arguments : Identify and focus on the main arguments or points presented in the manuscript.
• Look Up Unfamiliar Terms : Research any unfamiliar terms or references to ensure you fully understand the content.
• Summarize Each Section : Write a brief summary of each section to reinforce your understanding and retention.
• Review and Reflect : After reading, review your notes and summaries, and reflect on the overall message and implications of the manuscript.

How Long is a Manuscript?

A manuscript typically ranges from 50,000 to 100,000 words, depending on the genre and purpose.

How to Publish a Manuscript?

Submit your manuscript to literary agents or publishers, or self-publish through platforms like Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing.

What is Another Word for Manuscript Writing?

Another term for manuscript writing is “drafting.”

What is a Manuscript vs Book?

A manuscript is the original, unpublished version of a work, while a book is the final, published version.

What Does the Word Manuscript Literally Mean?

The word “manuscript” literally means “written by hand.”

How Do I Make My Own Manuscript?

Write your content, format it according to guidelines, and revise it thoroughly before submission.

What Not to Do When Writing a Manuscript?

Avoid plagiarism, poor formatting, inconsistent style, and ignoring submission guidelines.

Is a Manuscript a Full Book?

Yes, a manuscript can be a full book, but it is in its unpublished form.

What is the Manuscript of a Paper?

The manuscript of a paper is the original version submitted for publication in an academic journal.

What to Write on the First Page of a Manuscript?

Include the title, author’s name, contact information, and word count on the first page of a manuscript.

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

Current status and future research imperatives of self-healing metal matrix composites

• Invited Feature Paper-Review
• MRS Fellows Focus
• Published: 21 May 2024

Cite this article

• Pradeep Rohatgi 1 ,
• Masum Bellah   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0000-1092-8863 2 &
• Vaibhav Srivastava 1  

Explore all metrics

Self-healing Metal Matrix Composites (SHMMCs) have emerged as an important field of research in materials engineering. This paper critically examines the current state of the art of SHMMCs, including matrix alloys, reinforcements, crack orientation, and stress states under which self-healing has been studied. The significance of characteristics of SMA reinforcement, including size, length, distribution, and interface strength, is presented. Challenges in synthesizing SHMMCs, including achieving wetting, bonding, and load transfer between the metal matrix and the reinforcement, overcoming the problem due to oxidation, and irregularities of cracked surfaces, are discussed. Needs of future research directions are outlined, including examining thermodynamics and kinetics of self-healing, design of microstructure based on mechanics for targeted self-healing, and developing capabilities of autonomous and capacity for multicycle healing in metals, especially in high temperatures metals and alloys. The need for developing self-healing and shape-changing capabilities in man-made materials similar to biological living materials is discussed.

Graphical abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Data availability

Not applicable.

M. Nosonovsky, P.K. Rohatgi, Biomimetics in materials science: self-healing, self-lubricating, and self-cleaning materials (Springer, New York, 2012)

Book   Google Scholar  

M. Bellah, M. Nosonovsky, P. Rohatgi, Recent advances in self-healing metal matrix composites, in Metal-matrix composites . ed. by T.S. Srivatsan, P.K. Rohatgi, S. Hunyadi Murph (Springer, Cham, 2022), pp.297–310

Chapter   Google Scholar  

M. Bellah, M. Nosonovsky, P. Rohatgi, Shape memory alloy reinforced self-healing metal matrix composites. Appl. Sci. 13 (12), 6884 (2023)

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Y. Wang, D. Jiang, L. Zhang, B. Li, C. Sun, H. Yan, Z. Wu, H. Liu, J. Zhang, J. Fan, H. Hou, T. Ding, Z. Guo, Hydrogen bonding derived self-healing polymer composites reinforced with amidation carbon fibers. Nanotechnology 31 (2), 025704 (2019)

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

B.J. Blaiszik, S.L.B. Kramer, S.C. Olugebefola, J.S. Moore, N.R. Sottos, S.R. White, Self-healing polymers and composites. Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 40 (1), 179–211 (2010)

S. Wang, M.W. Urban, Self-healing polymers. Nat. Rev. Mater. 5 (8), 562–583 (2020)

C.-H. Li, J.-L. Zuo, Self-healing polymers based on coordination bonds. Adv. Mater. 32 (27), 1903762 (2020)

L. Zhai, A. Narkar, K. Ahn, Self-healing polymers with nanomaterials and nanostructures. Nano Today 30 , 100826 (2020)

M. Goyal, S.N. Agarwal, N. Bhatnagar, A review on self-healing polymers for applications in spacecraft and construction of roads. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 139 (37), e52816 (2022)

S.R. White, N.R. Sottos, P.H. Geubelle, J.S. Moore, M.R. Kessler, S.R. Sriram, E.N. Brown, S. Viswanathan, Autonomic healing of polymer composites. Nature 409 (6822), 794–797 (2001)

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

V.K. Thakur, M.R. Kessler, Self-healing polymer nanocomposite materials: a review. Polymer 69 , 369–383 (2015)

R.S. Trask, H.R. Williams, I.P. Bond, Self-healing polymer composites: mimicking nature to enhance performance. Bioinspir. Biomim. 2 (1), P1 (2007)

I.L. Hia, V. Vahedi, P. Pasbakhsh, Self-healing polymer composites: prospects, challenges, and applications. Polym. Rev. 56 (2), 225–261 (2016)

M. Amran, A.M. Onaizi, R. Fediuk, N.I. Vatin, R.S. Muhammad Rashid, H. Abdelgader, T. Ozbakkaloglu, Self-healing concrete as a prospective construction material: a review. Materials 15 (9), 3214 (2022)

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

C. Xue, W. Li, J. Li, V.W.Y. Tam, G. Ye, A review study on encapsulation-based self-healing for cementitious materials. Struct. Concr. 20 (1), 198–212 (2019)

Article   Google Scholar  

G. Perrot, G. Couégnat, M. Ricchiuto, G.L. Vignoles, Image-based numerical modeling of self-healing in a ceramic-matrix minicomposite. Ceramics 2 (2), 308–326 (2019)

P. Greil, Self-healing engineering ceramics with oxidation-induced crack repair. Adv. Eng. Mater. 22 (9), 1901121 (2020)

B. Wang, R. Tu, Y. Wei, H. Cai, Self-healing of SiC–Al 2 O 3 –B4C ceramic composites at low temperatures. Materials 15 (2), 652 (2022)

I. Justo-Reinoso, A. Heath, S. Gebhard, K. Paine, Aerobic non-ureolytic bacteria-based self-healing cementitious composites: a comprehensive review. J. Build. Eng. 42 , 102834 (2021)

K.W. Shah, G.F. Huseien, Biomimetic self-healing cementitious construction materials for smart buildings. Biomimetics 5 (4), 47 (2020)

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

C. Fernandez, M. Correa, M.-T. Nguyen, K. Rod, G. Dai, L. Cosimbescu, R. Rousseau, V.-A. Glezakou, Progress and challenges in self-healing cementitious materials. J. Mater. Sci. 56 , 1–30 (2021)

V.C. Li, Y.M. Lim, Y.-W. Chan, Feasibility study of a passive smart self-healing cementitious composite. Compos. Part B Eng. 29 (6), 819–827 (1998)

X.F. Wang, Z.H. Yang, C. Fang, N.X. Han, G.M. Zhu, J.N. Tang, F. Xing, Evaluation of the mechanical performance recovery of self-healing cementitious materials—its methods and future development: a review. Constr. Build. Mater. 212 , 400–421 (2019)

J.B. Ferguson, B.F. Schultz, P.K. Rohatgi, Self-healing metals and metal matrix composites. JOM 66 (6), 866–871 (2014)

V. Kilicli, X. Yan, N. Salowitz, P.K. Rohatgi, Recent advancements in self-healing metallic materials and self-healing metal matrix composites. JOM 70 (6), 846–854 (2018)

M. Arseenko, J. Gheysen, F. Hannard, N. Nothomb, A. Simar, Self-healing in metal-based systems, in Self-healing construction materials: fundamentals, monitoring and large scale applications . ed. by A. Kanellopoulos, J. Norambuena-Contreras (Springer, Cham, 2022), pp.43–78

B. Grabowski, C.C. Tasan, Self-healing metals, in Self-healing materials . ed. by M.D. Hager, S. van der Zwaag, U.S. Schubert (Springer, Cham, 2016), pp.387–407

N. van Dijk, S. van der Zwaag, Self-healing phenomena in metals. Adv. Mater. Interfaces 5 (17), 1800226 (2018)

J. Martinez-Lucci, R.S. Amano, P. Rohatgi, Review in self healing in metal matrix composites. J. Aeronaut. Astronaut. Aviat. 53 (4), 441–472 (2021)

Google Scholar  

E.N. Brown, N.R. Sottos, S.R. White, Fracture testing of a self-healing polymer composite. Exp. Mech. 42 (4), 372–379 (2002)

A.C. Balazs, Modeling self-healing materials. Mater. Today 10 (9), 18–23 (2007)

A.C. de Oliveira Gonzalez, T.F. Costa, Z. de Araújo Andrade, A.R.A.P. Medrado, Wound healing—a literature review. An. Bras. Dermatol. 91 (5), 614–620 (2016)

K.S. Toohey, N.R. Sottos, J.A. Lewis, J.S. Moore, S.R. White, Self-healing materials with microvascular networks. Nat. Mater. 6 (8), 581–585 (2007)

Hastrich, C., “Self healing materials|bouncing ideas” [Online]. Available: https://bouncingideas.wordpress.com/2012/02/01/self-healing-materials/ . [Accessed: 13-Nov-2023].

W.A. Muller, Getting leukocytes to the site of inflammation. Vet. Pathol. 50 (1), 7–22 (2013)

M. Leick, V. Azcutia, G. Newton, F.W. Luscinskas, Leukocyte recruitment in inflammation: basic concepts and new mechanistic insights based on new models and microscopic imaging technologies. Cell Tissue Res. 355 (3), 647–656 (2014)

I. Gebeshuber, B. Majlis, H. Stachelberger, Tribology in biology: biomimetic studies across dimensions and across fields. Int. J. Mech. Mater. Eng. IJMME 4 , 321–327 (2009)

R. Verberg, A.T. Dale, P. Kumar, A. Alexeev, A.C. Balazs, Healing substrates with mobile, particle-filled microcapsules: designing a ‘repair and go’ system. J. R. Soc. Interface 4 (13), 349–357 (2007)

J.Y. Lee, G.A. Buxton, A.C. Balazs, Using nanoparticles to create self-healing composites. J. Chem. Phys. 121 (11), 5531–5540 (2004)

S. Tyagi, J.Y. Lee, G.A. Buxton, A.C. Balazs, Using nanocomposite coatings to heal surface defects. Macromolecules 37 (24), 9160–9168 (2004)

K.A. Smith, S. Tyagi, A.C. Balazs, Healing surface defects with nanoparticle-filled polymer coatings: effect of particle geometry. Macromolecules 38 (24), 10138–10147 (2005)

Y. Yang, L. Gao, J. Xie, Y. Zhou, J. Hu, Q. Li, J. He, Defect-targeted self-healing of multiscale damage in polymers. Nanoscale 12 (6), 3605–3613 (2020)

M.A. Ganjei, E. Aflaki, Application of nano-silica and styrene-butadiene-styrene to improve asphalt mixture self healing. Int. J. Pavement Eng. 20 (1), 89–99 (2019)

P.G. Kumar, Application of nano silica to improve self-healing of bitumen mixtures. Comput. Res. Prog. Appl. Sci. Eng. 6 (4), 276–280 (2020)

P.E. Leser, J.A. Newman, S.W. Smith, W.P. Leser, R.A. Wincheski, T.A. Wallace, E.H. Glaessgen, R.S. Piascik, Mitigation of crack damage in metallic materials (Langley Research Center, Hampton, 2014)

X.G. Zheng, Y.-N. Shi, K. Lu, Electro-healing cracks in nickel. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 561 , 52–59 (2013)

A. Ruzek, Synthesis and characterization of metallic systems with potential for self-healing (Univerity of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, 2009)

S. van der Zwaag, An introduction to material design principles: damage prevention versus damage management, in Self healing materials: an alternative approach to 20 centuries of materials science . ed. by S. van der Zwaag (Springer, Dordrecht, 2007), pp.1–18

S. van der Zwaag, Routes and mechanisms towards self healing behaviour in engineering materials. Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Tech. Sci. 58 (2), 227 (2010)

S. van der Zwaag, N.H. van Dijk, H.M. Jonkers, S.D. Mookhoek, W.G. Sloof, Self-healing behaviour in man-made engineering materials: bioinspired but taking into account their intrinsic character. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 367 (1894), 1689–1704 (2009)

N. Shinya, J. Kyono, Effect of boron nitride precipitation at cavity surface on rupture properties. Mater. Trans. 47 (9), 2302–2307 (2006)

N. Shinya, J. Kyono, K. Laha, C. Masuda, Self-healing of creep damage through autonomous boron segregation and boron nitride precipitation during high temperature use of austenitic stainless steels, in Proceedings of the first international conference on self-healing materials . ed. by J. Smith (Trans Tech Publications Ltd, Stafa, 2007)

M.V. Manuel, Design of a biomimetic self-healing alloy composite (Northwestern University, Evanston, 2007)

N. Salowitz, S. Misra, M.I. Haider, M. Povolo, P. Rohatgi, Investigation into the performance of NiTi shape memory alloy wire reinforced Sn–Bi self-healing metal matrix composite. Materials 15 (9), 2970 (2022)

J. Martinez Lucci, R.S. Amano, P. Rohatgi, B. Schultz, Experiment and computational analysis of self-healing in an aluminum alloy. ASME Int. Mech. Eng. Congress Expos. (2008). https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2008-68304

J. Martinez Lucci, R.S. Amano, P. Rohatgi, B. Schultz, Self-healing in an aluminum alloy reinforces with microtubes. Energy Nanotechnol. Int. Conf. (2008). https://doi.org/10.1115/ENIC2008-53011

O.P. Oladijo, M.O. Bodunrin, K. Sobiyi, N.B. Maledi, K.K. Alaneme, Investigating the self-healing behaviour of under-aged and 60Sn–40Pb alloy reinforced aluminium hybrid composites. Thin Solid Films 620 , 201–205 (2016)

M.V. Manuel, G.B. Olson, Biomimetic self-healing metals. Proc. Int. Conf. Self-Heal. Mater. 1 , 18–20 (2007)

S.K. Misra, Shape memory alloy reinforced self-healing metal matrix composites (The University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, 2013)

M.C. Wright, M. Manuel, T. Wallace, Fatigue resistance of liquid-assisted selfrepairing aluminum alloys reinforced with shape memory alloys, 2013

C.R. Fisher, H.B. Henderson, M.S. Kesler, P. Zhu, G.E. Bean, M.C. Wright, J.A. Newman, L.C. Brinson, O. Figueroa, M.V. Manuel, Repairing large cracks and reversing fatigue damage in structural metals. Appl. Mater. Today 13 , 64–68 (2018)

J.B. Ferguson, B.F. Schultz, P.K. Rohatgi, Zinc alloy ZA-8/shape memory alloy self-healing metal matrix composite. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 620 , 85–88 (2015)

M.A. Poormir, S.M.R. Khalili, R. Eslami-Farsani, Investigation of the self-healing behavior of Sn–Bi metal matrix composite reinforced with NiTi shape memory alloy strips under flexural loading. JOM 70 (6), 806–810 (2018)

M.A. Poormir, S.M.R. Khalili, R. Eslami-Farsani, Optimal design of a bio-inspired self-healing metal matrix composite reinforced with NiTi shape memory alloy strips. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 29 (20), 3972–3982 (2018)

V. Srivastava, M. Gupta, Experimental assessment of self-healing characteristics in AA2014matrix with nitinol wire and solder alloy as healing agents. Mater. Res. Express 6 (8), 085704 (2019)

V. Srivastava, M. Gupta, Experimental assessment of self-healing nature in aluminum-based smart composites with NiTi wires and solder alloy as healing agents through taguchi approach. J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 31 (18), 2101–2116 (2020)

V. Srivastava, M. Gupta, Impact of post hardening mechanism on self-healing assessment of AA2014 nitinol-based smart composites. Met. Mater. Int. 27 (8), 2666–2681 (2021)

V. Srivastava, M. Gupta, Parametric assessments of self-healing characteristics in AA2014–NiTi-based metallic composites through destructive and nondestructive evaluation. Russ. J. Nondestruct. Test. 56 , 1064–1082 (2020)

V. Srivastava, M. Gupta, Design and prediction of healing assessment for AA2014-nitinol strip-solder alloy based hybrid self-healing composite structure via taguchi analysis and fuzzy logic approach. Mech. Adv. Mater. Struct. 30 , 1–20 (2022)

V. Srivastava, M. Gupta, Evaluation and prediction of self-healing assessments for AA2014 based hybrid smart composite structures: a novel fuzzy logic approach. Int. J. Eng. 35 (10), 1841–1857 (2022)

S. Sharma, G. Nandan, R. Tyagi, P. Rohtagi, Fabrication, testing, and microstructural analysis of nitinol-based self-healing metal matrix composite of A356 alloy cast by semi-solid metal processing. Adv. Mater. Process Technol. (2023). https://doi.org/10.1080/2374068X.2023.2210932

P. Zhu, Z. Cui, M.S. Kesler, J.A. Newman, M.V. Manuel, M.C. Wright, L.C. Brinson, Characterization and modeling of three-dimensional self-healing shape memory alloy-reinforced metal-matrix composites. Mech. Mater. 103 , 1–10 (2016)

P. Zhu, Shape memory alloy modeling and applications to porous and composite structures (Northwestern University, Evanston, 2015)

M.V. Manuel, C.R., Fisher, M.C., Wright, 2020, Self-repairing metal alloy matrix composites, methods of manufacture and use thereof and articles comprising the same

J.A. Monroe, J.S. McAllister, D.S. Content, J. Zgarba, X. Huerta, I. Karaman, Negative thermal expansion ALLVAR alloys for telescopes. Adv. Opt. Mech. Technol. Telesc. Instrument. 10706 , 107060 (2018)

T. Hisashige, T. Yamaguchi, T. Tsuji, Y. Yamamura, Phase transition of Zr 1 − x Hf x V 2 O 7 solid solutions having negative thermal expansion. J. Ceram. Soc. Jpn. 114 (1331), 607 (2006)

B.K. Greve, K.L. Martin, P.L. Lee, P.J. Chupas, K.W. Chapman, A.P. Wilkinson, Pronounced negative thermal expansion from a simple structure: cubic ScF3. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132 (44), 15496–15498 (2010)

M.P. Attfield, Strong negative thermal expansion in siliceous faujasite. Chem. Commun. 5 , 601–602 (1998)

P. Lightfoot, D.A. Woodcock, M.J. Maple, L.A. Villaescusa, P.A. Wright, The widespread occurrence of negative thermal expansion in zeolites basis of a presentation given at materials discussion. J. Mater. Chem. 11 (1), 212–216 (2001)

P. Rohatgi, Self healing metals and alloys—including structural alloys and self-healing solders. 2013, U.S. Patent 8,518,531

P. Rohatgi, Self-healing aluminum alloys incorporating shape metal alloys and reactive particles. 2013, U.S. Patent 9,435,014

P. Rohatgi, Self healing lead, tin, and their alloys, and solders, incorporating shape memory alloys, reactive particles and hollow vascular networks. 2018, U.S. Patent 10,161,026

G.Q. Xu, M.J. Demkowicz, Healing of nanocracks by disclinations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (14), 145501 (2013)

C.M. Barr, T. Duong, D.C. Bufford, Z. Milne, A. Molkeri, N.M. Heckman, D.P. Adams, A. Srivastava, K. Hattar, M.J. Demkowicz, B.L. Boyce, Autonomous healing of fatigue cracks via cold welding. Nature 620 (7974), 552–556 (2023)

Amano, R., Rohatgi, P., Martínez Lucci, J., Schultz, B., and Ruzek, A., 2009, “Design and Demonstration of Self-Healing Behavior in a Lead-Free Solder Alloy,” 7th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference , p. 4514.

J. Martínez Lucci, R.S. Amano, P.K. Rohatgi, Heat transfer and fluid flow analysis of self-healing in metallic materials. Heat Mass Transf. 53 , 825–848 (2017)

J. Martinez-Lucci, A. Ruzek, S.K. Misra, P.K. Rohatgi, R.S. Amano, Self-healing in metal castings (11-051). AFS Trans.-Am. Foundry Soc. 119 , 187 (2011)

CAS   Google Scholar  

J. Martinez-Lucci, A. Ruzek, S. Misra, P. Rohatgi, R. Amano, Can castings heal themselves? Mod. Cast. 101 (7), 24–27 (2011)

J. Martínez Lucci, R.S. Amano, P.K. Rohatgi, Heat transfer and fluid flow analysis of self-healing in metallic materials. Heat Mass Transf. 53 (3), 825–848 (2017)

K.K. Alaneme, O.I. Omosule, Experimental studies of self healing behaviour of under-aged Al–Mg–Si alloys and 60Sn–40Pb alloy reinforced aluminium metal-metal composites. J. Miner. Mater. Charact. Eng. 3 (1), 1–8 (2014)

J. Kim, H.J. Kim, S.H. Hong, H.J. Park, Y.S. Kim, Y.J. Hwang, Y.B. Jeong, J.-Y. Park, J.M. Park, B. Sarac, W.-M. Wang, J. Eckert, K.B. Kim, Thermally-triggered dual in-situ self-healing metallic materials. Sci. Rep. 8 (1), 2120 (2018)

K. Mysore, D., Chan, D., Bhate, G., Subbarayan, I., Dutta, V., Gupta, J., Zhao, D., Edwards Aging-informed behavior of Sn 3.8 Ag 0.7 Cu solder alloys: 2008 11th IEEE intersociety conference on thermal and thermomechanical phenomena in electronic systems, I-THERM. 2008 11th IEEE Intersoc. Conf. Therm. Thermomechanical Phenom. Electron. Syst. -THERM, 2008, pp. 870–875

I. Dutta, D. Pan, S. Ma, B.S. Majumdar, S. Harris, Role of shape-memory alloy reinforcements on strain evolution in lead-free solder joints. J. Electron. Mater. 35 (10), 1902–1913 (2006)

J.P. Coughlin, J.J. Williams, G.A. Crawford, N. Chawla, Interfacial reactions in model NiTi shape memory alloy fiber-reinforced sn matrix ‘smart’ composites. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 40 (1), 176–184 (2009)

J.P. Coughlin, J.J. Williams, N. Chawla, Mechanical behavior of niti shape memory alloy fiber reinforced sn matrix ‘smart’ composites. J. Mater. Sci. 44 (3), 700–707 (2009)

C.R. Fisher Jr., H.B. Henderson, M.S. Kesler, M.V. Manuel, A reactive element approach to improve fracture healing in metallic systems. Front. Mater. 6 , 210 (2019)

C.R. Fisher, Design of liquid-assisted self-healing metal-matrix composites (University of Florida, Gainesville, 2013)

L. Ren, X. Xu, Y. Du, K. Kalantar-Zadeh, S.X. Dou, Liquid metals and their hybrids as stimulus-responsive smart materials. Mater. Today 34 , 92–114 (2020)

T. Yu, D. Deng, G. Wang, H. Zhang, Crack healing in SUS304 stainless steel by electropulsing treatment. J. Clean. Prod. 113 , 989–994 (2016)

Q. Shengru, L. Yanli, L. Yun, Z. Chengyu, Damage healing of aluminum alloys by D. C. electropulsing and evaluation by resistance. Rare Met. Mater. Eng. 38 (4), 570–573 (2009)

H. Song, Z. Wang, X. He, J. Duan, Self-healing of damage inside metals triggered by electropulsing stimuli. Sci. Rep. 7 (1), 7097 (2017)

T. Jiang, M.J. Chollier Brym, G. Dubé, A. Lasia, G.M. Brisard, Electrodeposition of aluminium from ionic liquids: part I—electrodeposition and surface morphology of aluminium from aluminium chloride (AlCl3)–1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride ([EMIm]Cl) ionic liquids. Surf. Coat. Technol. 201 (1), 1–9 (2006)

Z. Hsain, J.H. Pikul, Low-energy room-temperature healing of cellular metals. Adv. Funct. Mater. 29 (43), 1905631 (2019)

D. Svetlizky, B. Zheng, X. Wang, S. Jiang, L. Valdevit, J.M. Schoenung, E.J. Lavernia, N. Eliaz, Towards a self-healing aluminum metal matrix composite: design, fabrication, and demonstration. Appl. Mater. Today 37 , 102148 (2024)

J.-N. Zhu, Z. Ding, E. Borisov, X. Yao, J.C. Brouwer, A. Popovich, M. Hermans, V. Popovich, Healing cracks in additively manufactured NiTi shape memory alloys. Virtual Phys. Prototyp. 18 (1), e2246437 (2023)

Download references

This research received no external funding.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Milwaukee, USA

Pradeep Rohatgi & Vaibhav Srivastava

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Milwaukee, USA

Masum Bellah

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Framework and conceptualization, P.R., and M.B.; outline, P.R., and M.B.; summary of self-healing using SMA wires and a column of low melting point alloy as healing agents in the matrix, V.S.; writing and manuscript preparation, P.R., M.B., and V.S.; table of self-healing systems, P.R., and M.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masum Bellah .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Rohatgi, P., Bellah, M. & Srivastava, V. Current status and future research imperatives of self-healing metal matrix composites. Journal of Materials Research (2024). https://doi.org/10.1557/s43578-024-01355-z

Download citation

Received : 17 November 2023

Accepted : 24 April 2024

Published : 21 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1557/s43578-024-01355-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Self-healing metals
• Metal matrix composites
• Smart composites
• Bioinspired composites
• Shape memory alloys
• Crack closure and sealing
• Phase transformation
• Compositional healing
• Encapsulated healing agents
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

How Much Research Is Being Written by Large Language Models?

New studies show a marked spike in LLM usage in academia, especially in computer science. What does this mean for researchers and reviewers?

In March of this year, a  tweet about an academic paper went viral for all the wrong reasons. The introduction section of the paper, published in  Elsevier’s  Surfaces and Interfaces , began with this line:  Certainly, here is a possible introduction for your topic. 

Look familiar? 

It should, if you are a user of ChatGPT and have applied its talents for the purpose of content generation. LLMs are being increasingly used to assist with writing tasks, but examples like this in academia are largely anecdotal and had not been quantified before now. 

“While this is an egregious example,” says  James Zou , associate professor of biomedical data science and, by courtesy, of computer science and of electrical engineering at Stanford, “in many cases, it’s less obvious, and that’s why we need to develop more granular and robust statistical methods to estimate the frequency and magnitude of LLM usage. At this particular moment, people want to know what content around us is written by AI. This is especially important in the context of research, for the papers we author and read and the reviews we get on our papers. That’s why we wanted to study how much of those have been written with the help of AI.”

In two papers looking at LLM use in scientific publishings, Zou and his team* found that 17.5% of computer science papers and 16.9% of peer review text had at least some content drafted by AI. The paper on LLM usage in peer reviews will be presented at the International Conference on Machine Learning.

Read  Mapping the Increasing Use of LLMs in Scientific Papers and  Monitoring AI-Modified Content at Scale: A Case Study on the Impact of ChatGPT on AI Conference Peer Reviews  

Here Zou discusses the findings and implications of this work, which was supported through a Stanford HAI Hoffman Yee Research Grant . 

How did you determine whether AI wrote sections of a paper or a review?

We first saw that there are these specific worlds – like commendable, innovative, meticulous, pivotal, intricate, realm, and showcasing – whose frequency in reviews sharply spiked, coinciding with the release of ChatGPT. Additionally, we know that these words are much more likely to be used by LLMs than by humans. The reason we know this is that we actually did an experiment where we took many papers, used LLMs to write reviews of them, and compared those reviews to reviews written by human reviewers on the same papers. Then we quantified which words are more likely to be used by LLMs vs. humans, and those are exactly the words listed. The fact that they are more likely to be used by an LLM and that they have also seen a sharp spike coinciding with the release of LLMs is strong evidence.

Some journals permit the use of LLMs in academic writing, as long as it’s noted, while others, including  Science and the ICML conference, prohibit it. How are the ethics perceived in academia?

This is an important and timely topic because the policies of various journals are changing very quickly. For example,  Science said in the beginning that they would not allow authors to use language models in their submissions, but they later changed their policy and said that people could use language models, but authors have to explicitly note where the language model is being used. All the journals are struggling with how to define this and what’s the right way going forward.

You observed an increase in usage of LLMs in academic writing, particularly in computer science papers (up to 17.5%). Math and  Nature family papers, meanwhile, used AI text about 6.3% of the time. What do you think accounts for the discrepancy between these disciplines? 

Artificial intelligence and computer science disciplines have seen an explosion in the number of papers submitted to conferences like ICLR and NeurIPS. And I think that’s really caused a strong burden, in many ways, to reviewers and to authors. So now it’s increasingly difficult to find qualified reviewers who have time to review all these papers. And some authors may feel more competition that they need to keep up and keep writing more and faster. 

You analyzed close to a million papers on arXiv, bioRxiv, and  Nature from January 2020 to February 2024. Do any of these journals include humanities papers or anything in the social sciences?  

We mostly wanted to focus more on CS and engineering and biomedical areas and interdisciplinary areas, like  Nature family journals, which also publish some social science papers. Availability mattered in this case. So, it’s relatively easy for us to get data from arXiv, bioRxiv, and  Nature . A lot of AI conferences also make reviews publicly available. That’s not the case for humanities journals.

Did any results surprise you?

A few months after ChatGPT’s launch, we started to see a rapid, linear increase in the usage pattern in academic writing. This tells us how quickly these LLM technologies diffuse into the community and become adopted by researchers. The most surprising finding is the magnitude and speed of the increase in language model usage. Nearly a fifth of papers and peer review text use LLM modification. We also found that peer reviews submitted closer to the deadline and those less likely to engage with author rebuttal were more likely to use LLMs. 

This suggests a couple of things. Perhaps some of these reviewers are not as engaged with reviewing these papers, and that’s why they are offloading some of the work to AI to help. This could be problematic if reviewers are not fully involved. As one of the pillars of the scientific process, it is still necessary to have human experts providing objective and rigorous evaluations. If this is being diluted, that’s not great for the scientific community.

What do your findings mean for the broader research community?

LLMs are transforming how we do research. It’s clear from our work that many papers we read are written with the help of LLMs. There needs to be more transparency, and people should state explicitly how LLMs are used and if they are used substantially. I don’t think it’s always a bad thing for people to use LLMs. In many areas, this can be very useful. For someone who is not a native English speaker, having the model polish their writing can be helpful. There are constructive ways for people to use LLMs in the research process; for example, in earlier stages of their draft. You could get useful feedback from a LLM in real time instead of waiting weeks or months to get external feedback. 

But I think it’s still very important for the human researchers to be accountable for everything that is submitted and presented. They should be able to say, “Yes, I will stand behind the statements that are written in this paper.”

*Collaborators include:  Weixin Liang ,  Yaohui Zhang ,  Zhengxuan Wu ,  Haley Lepp ,  Wenlong Ji ,  Xuandong Zhao ,  Hancheng Cao ,  Sheng Liu ,  Siyu He ,  Zhi Huang ,  Diyi Yang ,  Christopher Potts ,  Christopher D. Manning ,  Zachary Izzo ,  Yaohui Zhang ,  Lingjiao Chen ,  Haotian Ye , and Daniel A. McFarland .

Stanford HAI’s mission is to advance AI research, education, policy and practice to improve the human condition.  Learn more . 

More News Topics