manuscript format research paper

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

Formatting guide

This guide describes how to prepare contributions for submission. We recommend you read this in full if you have not previously submitted a contribution to Nature . We also recommend that, before submission, you familiarize yourself with Nature ’s style and content by reading the journal, either in print or online, particularly if you have not submitted to the journal recently.

Formats for Nature contributions

Articles are the main format for original research contributions to Nature . In addition, Nature publishes other submitted material as detailed below.

Articles are original reports whose conclusions represent a substantial advance in understanding of an important problem and have immediate, far-reaching implications. In print, physical sciences papers do not normally exceed 6 pages on average, and biological, clinical and social-sciences papers do not normally exceed 8 pages on average. However, the final print length is at the editor’s discretion.

Articles start with a fully referenced summary paragraph, ideally of no more than 200 words, which is separate from the main text and avoids numbers, abbreviations, acronyms or measurements unless essential. It is aimed at readers outside the discipline. This summary paragraph should be structured as follows: 2-3 sentences of basic-level introduction to the field; a brief account of the background and rationale of the work; a statement of the main conclusions (introduced by the phrase 'Here we show' or its equivalent); and finally, 2-3 sentences putting the main findings into general context so it is clear how the results described in the paper have moved the field forwards. Please refer to our annotated example   to see how the summary paragraph should be constructed.

The typical length of a 6-page article with 4 modest display items (figures and tables) is 2500 words (summary paragraph plus body text). The typical length of an 8-page article with 5-6 modest display items is 4300 words. A ‘modest’ display item is one that, with its legend, occupies about a quarter of a page (equivalent to ~270 words). If a composite figure (with several panels) needs to occupy at least half a page in order for all the elements to be visible, the text length may need to be reduced accordingly to accommodate such figures. Keep in mind that essential but technical details can be moved into the Methods or Supplementary Information.

As a guideline, articles typically have no more than 50 references. (There is no such constraint on any additional references associated with Methods or Supplementary Information.)

Sections are separated with subheadings to aid navigation. Subheadings may be up to 40 characters (including spaces).

Word counts refer to the text of the paper. Title, author list, acknowledgements and references are not included in total word counts.

Matters Arising and Corrections

Matters Arising are exceptionally interesting or important comments and clarifications on original research papers or other peer-reviewed material published within the past 18 months in Nature . They are published online but not in print.

For further details of and instructions for how to submit such comments on peer-reviewed material published in Nature — or to notify editors of the potential need for a correction — please consult our Matters Arising page.

Other contributions to Nature

Please access the other submitted material pages for further details on any of the contribution types below:

News and Comment

Correspondence

Books & Arts

News & Views

Insights, Reviews and Perspectives

Technology Features

The editorial process

See this section for an explanation of Nature 's editorial criteria for publication, refereeing policy and how editors handle papers after submission. Submission to a Nature journal is taken by the journal to mean that all the listed authors have agreed to all of the contents. See authorship policy for more details.

Presubmission enquiries

If you wish to enquire whether your Article might be suitable for consideration by Nature , please use our online presubmission enquiry service . All presubmission enquiries must include a cover paragraph to the editor stating the interest to a broad scientific readership, a fully referenced summary paragraph, and a reference list.

Readability

Nature is an international journal covering all the sciences. Contributions should therefore be written clearly and simply so that they are accessible to readers in other disciplines and to readers for whom English is not their first language. Thus, technical jargon should be avoided as far as possible and clearly explained where its use is unavoidable. Abbreviations, particularly those that are not standard, should also be kept to a minimum. The background, rationale and main conclusions of the study should be clearly explained. Titles and abstracts in particular should be written in language that will be readily intelligible to any scientist. Essential but specialized terms should be explained concisely but not didactically.

For gene, protein and other specialized names authors can use their preferred terminology so long as it is in current use by the community, but they must give all known names for the entity at first use in the paper. Nature prefers authors to use internationally agreed nomenclature. Papers containing new or revised formal taxonomic nomenclature for animals, whether living or extinct, are accepted conditional on the provision of LSIDs (Life Science Identifiers) by means of registration of such nomenclature with ZooBank, the proposed online registration system for the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN).

Even though no paper will be rejected because of poor language, non–native English speakers occasionally receive feedback from editors and reviewers regarding language and grammar usage in their manuscripts. You may wish to consider asking colleagues to read your manuscript and/or to use a professional editing service such as those provided by our affiliates Nature Research Editing Service or American Journal Experts . You can also get a fast, free grammar check of your manuscript that takes into account all aspects of readability in English. Please note that the use of a language editing service is not a requirement for publication in Nature .

Nature 's editors provide detailed advice about the expected print length when asking for the final version of the manuscript. Nature 's editors often suggest revised titles and rewrite the summary paragraphs of Articles so the conclusions are clear to a broad readership.

After acceptance, Nature 's subeditors (copyeditors) ensure that the text and figures are readable and clear to those outside the field, and edit papers into Nature 's house style. They pay particular attention to summary paragraphs, overall clarity, figures, figure legends and titles.

Proofs are sent before publication; authors are welcome to discuss proposed changes with Nature 's subeditors, but Nature reserves the right to make the final decision about matters of style and the size of figures.

A useful set of articles providing general advice about writing and submitting scientific papers can be found on the SciDev.Net website.

Format of Articles

Contributions should be double-spaced and written in English (spellings as in the Oxford English Dictionary ).

Contributions should be organized in the sequence: title, authors, affiliations (plus present addresses), bold first paragraph, main text, main references, tables, figure legends, methods (including separate data and code availability statements), methods references, acknowledgements, author contributions, competing interest declaration, additional information (containing supplementary information line (if any) and corresponding author line), extended data figure/table legends. In order to facilitate the review process, for initial submissions we encourage authors to present the manuscript text and figures together in a single file (Microsoft Word or PDF, up to 30 MB in size). The figures may be inserted within the text at the appropriate positions or grouped at the end, and each figure legend should be presented together with its figure. Also, please include line numbers within the text.

Titles do not exceed two lines in print. This equates to 75 characters (including spaces). Titles do not normally include numbers, acronyms, abbreviations or punctuation. They should include sufficient detail for indexing purposes but be general enough for readers outside the field to appreciate what the paper is about.

An uninterrupted page of text contains about 1250 words.

A typical 6-page Article contains about 2,500 words of text and, additionally, 4 modest display items (figures and/or tables) with brief legends, reference list and online-only methods section if applicable. A composite figure (with several panels) usually needs to take about half a page, equivalent to about 600 words, in order for all the elements to be visible (see section 5.9 for instructions on sizing figures).

A typical 8-page Article contains about 4300 words of text and, additionally, 5-6 modest display items (figures and/or tables) with brief legends, reference list and online-only methods section if applicable. A composite figure (with several panels) usually needs to take about half a page, equivalent to about 600 words, in order for all the elements to be visible (see section 5.9 for instructions on sizing figures).

Authors of contributions that significantly exceed the limits stated here (or as specified by the editor) will have to shorten their papers before acceptance, inevitably delaying publication.

Nature requires authors to specify the contribution made by their co-authors in the end notes of the paper (see section 5.5). If authors regard it as essential to indicate that two or more co-authors are equal in status, they may be identified by an asterisk symbol with the caption ‘These authors contributed equally to this work’ immediately under the address list. If more than three co-authors are equal in status, this should be indicated in the author contributions statement. Present addresses appear immediately below the author list (below the footnote rule at the bottom of the first page) and may be identified by a dagger symbol; all other essential author-related explanation is placed in the acknowledgements.

Our preferred format for text is Microsoft Word, with the style tags removed.

TeX/LaTeX: If you have prepared your paper using TeX/LaTeX, we will need to convert this to Word after acceptance, before your paper can be typeset. All textual material of the paper (including references, tables, figure captions, online methods, etc.) should be included as a single .tex file.

We prefer the use of a ‘standard’ font, preferably 12-point Times New Roman. For mathematical symbols, Greek letters and other special characters, use normal text or Symbol font. Word Equation Editor/MathType should be used only for formulae that cannot be produced using normal text or Symbol font.

The ‘Methods’ section is in the main text file, following the figure legends. This Methods section will appear in the PDF and in the full-text (HTML) version of the paper online, but will not appear in the printed issue. The Methods section should be written as concisely as possible but should contain all elements necessary to allow interpretation and replication of the results. As a guideline, the Methods section does not typically exceed 3,000 words. To increase reproducibility, authors are encouraged to deposit a detailed description of protocols used in their study in a protocol sharing platform of their choice. Springer Nature’s protocols.io is a free and open service designed to help researchers share experimental know-how. Protocols deposited by the authors in www.protocols.io will be linked to the online Methods section upon publication

Detailed descriptions of methods already published should be avoided; a reference number can be provided to save space, with any new addition or variation stated.

The Methods section should be subdivided by short bold headings referring to methods used and we encourage the inclusion of specific subsections for statistics, reagents and animal models. If further references are included in this section their numbering should continue from the end of the last reference number in the rest of the paper and they are listed after the Methods section.

Please provide separate Data Availability and Code Availability statements after the main text statements and before the Extended Data legends; detailed guidance can be found in our data availability and data citations policy . Certain data types must be deposited in an appropriate public structured data depository (details are available here ), and the accession number(s) provided in the manuscript. Full access is required at the time of publication. Should full access to data be required for peer review, authors must provide it.

The Methods section cannot contain figures or tables (essential display items should be included in the Extended Data or exceptionally in the Supplementary Information).

References are each numbered, ordered sequentially as they appear in the text, tables, boxes, figure legends, Methods, Extended Data tables and Extended Data figure legends.

When cited in the text, reference numbers are superscript, not in brackets unless they are likely to be confused with a superscript number.

Do not use linked fields (produced by EndNote and similar programs). Please use the one-click button provided by EndNote to remove EndNote codes before saving your file.

As a guideline, Articles allow up to 50 references in the main text if needed and within the average page budget. Only one publication can be listed for each number. Additional references for Methods or Supplementary Information are not included in this count.

Only articles that have been published or accepted by a named publication, or that have been uploaded to a recognized preprint server (for example, arXiv, bioRxiv), should be in the reference list; papers in preparation should be mentioned in the text with a list of authors (or initials if any of the authors are co-authors of the present contribution).

Published conference abstracts, numbered patents, preprints on recognized servers, papers in press, and research datasets that have been assigned a digital object identifier may be included in reference lists, but text, grant details and acknowledgements may not. (An exception is the highlighted references which we ask authors of Reviews, Perspectives and Insights articles to provide.)

All authors should be included in reference lists unless there are more than five, in which case only the first author should be given, followed by ‘et al.’.

Please follow the style below in the published edition of Nature in preparing reference lists.

Authors should be listed surname first, followed by a comma and initials of given names.

Titles of all cited articles are required. Titles of articles cited in reference lists should be in upright, not italic text; the first word of the title is capitalized, the title written exactly as it appears in the work cited, ending with a full stop. Book titles are italic with all main words capitalized. Journal titles are italic and abbreviated according to common usage. Volume numbers are bold. The publisher and city of publication are required for books cited. (Refer to published papers in Nature for details.)

Research datasets may be cited in the reference list if they have been assigned digital object identifiers (DOIs) and include authors, title, publisher (repository name), identifier (DOI expressed as a URL). Example: Hao, Z., AghaKouchak, A., Nakhjiri, N. & Farahmand, A. Global Integrated Drought Monitoring and Prediction System (GIDMaPS) data sets. figshare http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.853801 (2014).

Recognized preprints may be cited in the reference list. Example: Babichev, S. A., Ries, J. & Lvovsky, A. I. Quantum scissors: teleportation of single-mode optical states by means of a nonlocal single photon. Preprint at http://arXiv.org/quant-ph/0208066 (2002).

References to web-only journals should give authors, article title and journal name as above, followed by URL in full - or DOI if known - and the year of publication in parentheses.

References to websites should give authors if known, title of cited page, URL in full, and year of posting in parentheses.

End notes are brief and follow the Methods (or Methods References, if any).

Acknowledgements should be brief, and should not include thanks to anonymous referees and editors, inessential words, or effusive comments. A person can be thanked for assistance, not “excellent” assistance, or for comments, not “insightful” comments, for example. Acknowledgements can contain grant and contribution numbers.

Author Contributions: Authors are required to include a statement to specify the contributions of each co-author. The statement can be up to several sentences long, describing the tasks of individual authors referred to by their initials. See the authorship policy page for further explanation and examples.

Competing interests  statement.

Additional Information: Authors should include a set of statements at the end of the paper, in the following order:

Papers containing Supplementary Information contain the statement: “Supplementary Information is available for this paper.”

A sentence reading "Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to XX.” Nature expects this identified author to respond to readers’ enquiries and requests for materials, and to coordinate the handling of any other matters arising from the published contribution, including corrections complaints. The author named as corresponding author is not necessarily the senior author, and publication of this author’s name does not imply seniority. Authors may include more than one e-mail address if essential, in which event Nature will communicate with the first-listed address for any post-publication matters, and expect that author to coordinate with the other co-authors.

Peer review information includes the names of reviewers who agree to be cited and is completed by Nature staff during proofing.

A sentence reading “Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.”

Life sciences and behavioural & social sciences reporting guidelines

To improve the transparency of reporting and the reproducibility of published results, authors of life sciences and behavioural & social sciences Articles must provide a completed Reporting Summary that will be made available to editors and reviewers during manuscript assessment. The Reporting Summary will be published with all accepted manuscripts.

Please note: because of the advanced features used in these forms, you must use Adobe Reader to open the documents and fill them out.

Guidance and resources related to the use and reporting of statistics are available here .

Tables should each be presented on a separate page, portrait (not landscape) orientation, and upright on the page, not sideways.

Tables have a short, one-line title in bold text. Tables should be as small as possible. Bear in mind the size of a Nature page as a limiting factor when compiling a table.

Symbols and abbreviations are defined immediately below the table, followed by essential descriptive material as briefly as possible, all in double-spaced text.

Standard table formats are available for submissions of cryo-EM , NMR and X-ray crystallography data . Authors providing these data must use these standard tables and include them as Extended Data.

Figure legends

For initial submissions, we encourage authors to present the manuscript text and figures together in a single Word doc or PDF file, and for each figure legend to be presented together with its figure. However, when preparing the final paper to be accepted, we require figure legends to be listed one after the other, as part of the text document, separate from the figure files, and after the main reference list.

Each figure legend should begin with a brief title for the whole figure and continue with a short description of each panel and the symbols used. If the paper contains a Methods section, legends should not contain any details of methods. Legends should be fewer than 300 words each.

All error bars and statistics must be defined in the figure legend, as discussed above.

Nature requires figures in electronic format. Please ensure that all digital images comply with the Nature journals’ policy on image integrity .

Figures should be as small and simple as is compatible with clarity. The goal is for figures to be comprehensible to readers in other or related disciplines, and to assist their understanding of the paper. Unnecessary figures and parts (panels) of figures should be avoided: data presented in small tables or histograms, for instance, can generally be stated briefly in the text instead. Avoid unnecessary complexity, colouring and excessive detail.

Figures should not contain more than one panel unless the parts are logically connected; each panel of a multipart figure should be sized so that the whole figure can be reduced by the same amount and reproduced on the printed page at the smallest size at which essential details are visible. For guidance, Nature ’s standard figure sizes are 90 mm (single column) and 180 mm (double column) and the full depth of the page is 170 mm.

Amino-acid sequences should be printed in Courier (or other monospaced) font using the one-letter code in lines of 50 or 100 characters.

Authors describing chemical structures should use the Nature Research Chemical Structures style guide .

Some brief guidance for figure preparation:

Lettering in figures (labelling of axes and so on) should be in lower-case type, with the first letter capitalized and no full stop.

Units should have a single space between the number and the unit, and follow SI nomenclature or the nomenclature common to a particular field. Thousands should be separated by commas (1,000). Unusual units or abbreviations are defined in the legend.

Scale bars should be used rather than magnification factors.

Layering type directly over shaded or textured areas and using reversed type (white lettering on a coloured background) should be avoided where possible.

Where possible, text, including keys to symbols, should be provided in the legend rather than on the figure itself.

Figure quality

At initial submission, figures should be at good enough quality to be assessed by referees, preferably incorporated into the manuscript text in a single Word doc or PDF, although figures can be supplied separately as JPEGs if authors are unable to include them with the text. Authors are advised to follow the initial and revised submissions guidelines with respect to sizing, resolution and labelling.

Please note that print-publication quality figures are large and it is not helpful to upload them at the submission stage. Authors will be asked for high-quality figures when they are asked to submit the final version of their article for publication.At that stage, please prepare figures according to these guidelines .

Third party rights

Nature discourages the use or adaptation of previously published display items (for example, figures, tables, images, videos or text boxes). However, we recognize that to illustrate some concepts the use of published data is required and the reuse of previously published display items may be necessary. Please note that in these instances we might not be able to obtain the necessary rights for some images to be reused (as is, or adapted versions) in our articles. In such cases, we will contact you to discuss the sourcing of alternative material.

Figure costs

In order to help cover some of the additional cost of four-colour reproduction, Nature Portfolio charges our authors a fee for the printing of their colour figures. Please contact our offices for exact pricing and details. Inability to pay this charge will not prevent publication of colour figures judged essential by the editors, but this must be agreed with the editor prior to acceptance.

Production-quality figures

When a manuscript is accepted in principle for publication, the editor will ask for high-resolution figures. Do not submit publication-quality figures until asked to do so by an editor. At that stage, please prepare figures according to these guidelines .

Extended Data

Extended Data figures and tables are online-only (appearing in the online PDF and full-text HTML version of the paper), peer-reviewed display items that provide essential background to the Article but are not included in the printed version of the paper due to space constraints or being of interest only to a few specialists. A maximum of ten Extended Data display items (figures and tables) is typically permitted. See Composition of a Nature research paper .

Extended Data tables should be formatted along similar lines to tables appearing in print (see section 5.7) but the main body (excluding title and legend, which should be included at the end of the Word file) should be submitted separately as an image rather than as an editable format in Word, as Extended Data tables are not edited by Nature’s subediting department. Small tables may also be included as sub-panels within Extended Data figures. See Extended Data Formatting Guide .

Extended Data figures should be prepared along slightly different guidelines compared to figures appearing in print, and may be multi-panelled as long as they fit to size rules (see Extended Data Formatting Guide ). Extended Data figures are not edited or styled by Nature’s art department; for this reason, authors are requested to follow Nature style as closely as possible when preparing these figures. The legends for Extended Data figures should be prepared as for print figures and should be listed one after the other at the end of the Word file.

If space allows, Nature encourages authors to include a simple schematic, as a panel in an Extended Data figure, that summarizes the main finding of the paper, where appropriate (for example, to assist understanding of complex detail in cell, structural and molecular biology disciplines).

If a manuscript has Extended Data figures or tables, authors are asked to refer to discrete items at an appropriate place in the main text (for example, Extended Data Fig. 1 and Extended Data Table 1).

If further references are included in the Extended Data tables and Extended Data figure legends, the numbering should continue from the end of the last reference number in the main paper (or from the last reference number in the additional Methods section if present) and the list should be added to the end of the list accompanying the additional Methods section, if present, or added below the Extended Data legends if no additional Methods section is present.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (SI) is online-only, peer-reviewed material that is essential background to the Article (for example, large data sets, methods, calculations), but which is too large or impractical, or of interest only to a few specialists, to justify inclusion in the printed version of the paper. See the Supplementary Information page for further details.

Supplementary Information should not contain figures (any figures additional to those appearing in print should be formatted as Extended Data figures). Tables may be included in Supplementary Information, but only if they are unsuitable for formatting as Extended Data tables (for example, tables containing large data sets or raw data that are best suited to Excel files).

If a manuscript has accompanying SI, either at submission or in response to an editor’s letter that requests it, authors are asked to refer to discrete items of the SI (for example, videos, tables) at an appropriate point in the main manuscript.

Chemical structures and characterization of chemical materials

For guidelines describing Nature ’s standards for experimental methods and the characterization of new compounds, please see the information sheet on the characterization of chemical materials .

We aim to produce chemical structures in a consistent format throughout our articles. Please use the Nature Portfolio Chemical Structures Guide and ChemDraw template to ensure that you prepare your figures in a format that will require minimal changes by our art and production teams. Submit final files at 100% as .cdx files.

Registered Reports

Registered Reports are empirical articles testing confirmatory hypotheses in which the methods and proposed analyses are pre-registered and peer reviewed prior to research being conducted. For further details about Registered Reports and instructions for how to submit such articles to Nature please consult our Registered Reports page.

All contributions should be submitted online , unless otherwise instructed by the editors. Please be sure to read the information on what to include in your cover letter as well as several important content-related issues when putting a submission together.

Before submitting, all contributors must agree to all of Nature's publication policies .

Nature authors must make data and materials publicly available upon publication. This includes deposition of data into the relevant databases and arranging for them to be publicly released by the online publication date (not after). A description of our initiative to improve the transparency and the reproducibility of published results is available here . A full description of Nature’s publication policies is at the Nature Portfolio Authors and Referees website .

Other Nature Research journals

An account of the relationship between all the Nature journals is provided at the Nature family page . 

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…

Manuscript Structure, Style, and Content Guidelines

Updated 03/12/2024

Manuscripts must be submitted in the style of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association , 7th edition, with the exception that figures and tables should be embedded within the main text near to where they are discussed rather than at the end of the manuscript. Other considerations regarding elements of Psychological Science submissions can be found below. 

The structure described here applies to all articles with the relevant sections.

Manuscript Main Text

The abstract should be on a separate page and be no longer than 150 words. Five to seven relevant keywords should be listed directly under the abstract on the same page.

Research Transparency Statement

The Research Transparency Statement should be a separate section of the manuscript, inserted between the Abstract and the Introduction section. It does not count towards word limits. See the submission guidelines for more information.

Introduction

The introduction should explain the rationale behind the current study, placing the research topic and study within the context of the current research landscape. Authors should critically review previous research relevant to the current study and highlight the gap in knowledge being filled by the present research. The introduction should clearly pose the research question, and describe how it will be tested.

This section (or sections: e.g., Participants, Materials, Procedure) should contain a clear and concise description and, when needed, justification of the methods and procedures used in the study, as well as the analytical tools or methodology used. All excluded observations, all independent variables/manipulations and their levels or conditions, and all dependent variables/measures must be reported. Authors should give a justification of the sample size with attention to statistical power or precision for all key tests. If the study was preregistered, all major deviations from the preregistered plan, or decisions that were not specified in the preregistration, should be reported (these can be summarized in a table, see the “Preregistration” section of the submission guidelines ). If the study was not preregistered, this should be reported.

Results for all measures and all research questions should be reported in a concise, straightforward manner, using tables or figures when appropriate. Duplication of information that is presented in tables or figures should be minimal in the text, and results should be reported in the text or tables, rather than figure captions. Authors should include effect sizes accompanied by 95% confidence intervals or other measures of uncertainty. Authors should be particularly attentive to APA style when reporting statistical details (e.g., N s for chi-square tests, formatting of df s).

This section should discuss the findings in the context of the research question initially posed and the current research landscape. The Discussion should also thoroughly consider the limitations of the research and how these limitations affect the conclusions that can be drawn, including, but not limited to, constraints on the generality of the findings. The Discussion should also explore the broader implications and significance of the findings, while keeping in mind the limitations..

A Note on Manuscripts Presenting Multiple Studies: For some Research Articles that include multiple studies, an alternate structure might be appropriate, e.g., general introduction – Study 1 introduction – Method – Results – Discussion – Study 2 introduction – Method – Results – Discussion – etc. – General Discussion. Authors who choose to structure their manuscript in this manner should note that Results and Discussion sections for each study should not be combined; a combined Results and Discussion section will be treated simply as a Discussion section and will be counted toward the word limit .

Every citation in the text should be listed in the reference list, and vice versa.  Note that online sources should be cited in the same manner as print sources (i.e., author and date in parentheses).  Be sure to cite sources for all software and include full reference information. References should be formatted in accordance with APA style. Relevant examples:

Journal article:

Russano, M. B., Meissner, C. A., Narchet, F. M., & Kassin, S. M. (2005). Investigating true and false confessions within a novel experimental paradigm. Psychological Science , 16 (6), 481–486. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01560.x

Authored book:

Krumhansl, C. L. (1990). Cognitive foundations of musical pitch . Oxford University Press.

Chapter in edited book:

Mazziotta, J. C., Toga, A. W., & Friston, K. J. (2000). Experimental design and statistical issues. In J. C. Mazziotta & A. W. Toga (Eds.), Brain mapping: The disorders (pp. 33–58). Academic Press.

Source with 21 or more authors:

Kalnay, E., Kanamitsu, M., Kistler, R., Collins, W, Deaven, D., Gandin, L., Iredell, M., Saha, S., White, G., Woollen, J., Zhu, Y., Chelliah, M., Ebisuzaki, W, Higgins, W, Janowiak, J., Mo, K. c., Ropelewski, c., Wang, J., Leetmaa, A., . . . Joseph, D. (1996). The NCEP/NCAR 40-year reanalysis project. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society , 77 (3), 437–471. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1996)077<0437:TNYRP>2.0.CO;2

Online source:

Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (1998). The University of South Florida word association, rhyme, and word fragment norms . http://w3.usf.edu/FreeAssociation/

R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 4.1.0) [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org

Tables should be editable. If tables are created in Word, authors should use the tables function rather than using tabs to separate columns. There should be no empty rows or columns. Column heads cannot change partway down a table; in such cases, the new heads and the data under them must be placed in a separate table, with its own title. Tables should be embedded near to where they are discussed in the text. Example:

Table 1. Title of Table 1

Other considerations:

• Tables must be numbered in the order in which they are referred to in the text.
• All tables must be referred to in the text, and the text needs to give a full indication of the information that is included in every table. For example, if a table presents results of multiple statistical tests, the text must refer to them all, whether in a general way or individually. The full scope of a table can be indicated all at once or cumulatively by multiple references to the table.

For original submissions, figures should be embedded near to where they are discussed in the text. For revisions, authors should also submit separate production-quality figures. For a graph or other line art, we ask that authors submit a computer file in the native file format, which is the format of the program in which the figure was originally created. For example, if you created a graph in Excel, supply the original Excel file rather than an Excel file embedded in a Word document. Photographic images such as brain scans or photos of the experimental setup should be submitted in standard image formats, like JPEG. To avoid images appearing blurry or pixelated in print, use a minimum resolution of 300 pixels per inch (PPI; more information about pixel density can be found here ). Do not submit images in TIFF format.

Please adhere to the following format when naming figure files: AuthorLastNameFigX.fileformat (e.g., SmithFig1.xls, SmithFig2.jpg, etc.). More details can be found in the APS Figure Format and Style Guidelines .

Figure Captions

Figure captions should be provided in the main text document; they should not be included in the figure files.  Each caption should begin with “ Fig. ” and then the appropriate number, followed by a period (e.g., “ Fig. 1. ”). The text of the caption begins on a separate line.

A caption should be concise and describe only what is shown in the figure itself. Results should not be summarized. Each caption should begin with a sentence fragment that serves as a title and covers the entire content of the figure (not just selected panels), at least in a general way. All the text following this fragment should be in complete sentences.

• A caption should be clear by itself. That is, a reader should be able to understand the figure without referring elsewhere. However, if providing a complete explanation would be too cumbersome, the caption can instead refer readers to the text or another figure or table.
• References to panel letters in a caption should be in parentheses and, if possible, precede the relevant text: for example, “Reaction times in (a) Experiment 1 and (b) Experiment 2 as a function of experimental condition.” Do not begin a caption or a sentence in a caption with a panel letter. 
• If a figure includes error bars, the caption must explain what they represent (e.g., 95% confidence intervals).
• Treat each caption as a separate entity: Spell out all abbreviations on first use and cite all references as initial citations (in regard to using “et al.”). An abbreviation used in a figure must be explained in the caption.
• The caption should not repeat information that is included in a key within the figure (e.g., that dashed lines are used for a particular experimental condition).
• There is no requirement for a figure that contains multiple panels to have panel letters. If panel letters are used, they are always lowercase letters, and they must be referred to in the caption.
• Figures must be numbered in the order in which they are referred to in the text.
• All figures must be referred to in the text, and the text needs to give a full indication of the information that is included in every figure. For example, if a figure has two panels, the text cannot refer to only one of them (but the text does not have to call out each panel separately—e.g., if Fig. 1. has panels (a) and (b), the text can refer to Fig. 1 as a whole). The full scope of a figure can be indicated all at once or cumulatively by multiple references to the figure.
• If a figure has asterisks to indicate significance, the caption should explain them (i.e., what was tested and what p value is indicated by a single asterisk, two asterisks, etc.). Unlike in a table, this explanation should be incorporated into a complete sentence.

Checklist for Submission Components

In Manuscript/Main Text File

__Abstract (150 words or less)

__Research Transparency Statement (following the template)

__Text organized according to above guidelines

__Tables formatted according to guidelines (using the tables function in Word)

__Tables and figures embedded near to where they are discussed in main text

__Captions in main document rather than in figure files

__References formatted in APA style

Other Submission Files

__Separate figure files (revisions)

__Supplemental Files

Privacy Overview

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

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Manuscript Formatting

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

Include a separate title page with the full title of the manuscript, authors' names and institutions (listed vertically if there are more than one), a running head of the shortened title (60 characters or less), and a complete word count of the document (which includes footnotes and references).

A title footnote should include the address of the corresponding author (that is – the author who receives correspondence regarding the article), grants/funding, and additional credits and acknowledgements (for papers for sociology classes, this is often not needed). An asterisk (*) by the title refers to the title footnote at the bottom of the page.

If an abstract is needed, it should be on a separate page, immediately after the title page, with the title of the document as the heading.

Do not include author.

The abstract should be one paragraph, 150-200 words in length, using accessible language. Think of it this way: the abstract should also serve as a good press release about the research.

On the same page as the abstract, include a list of three to five words that help to identify main themes in the manuscript.

Text Formatting

All text within the document should be in a 12-point Arial font and double spaced (including footnotes), or as specified by journal or course instructor. 

Margins should be at least 1 1/4 inches on all sides, or as specified by journal or course instructor.

The first page of the text should start with the title and be on a new page of text (after the title page and abstract).

Subheadings

Use subheadings to organize the body of the manuscript. Usually, three different levels of headings should be sufficient.

THIS IS A FIRST-LEVEL HEAD

• Place first-level heads in all caps and left-justify.
• Don't use a bold font.
• Don't begin the manuscript with a heading, such as  Introduction .

This is a Second-Level Head

• Italicize and left-justify second-level heads.
• Use title case.

This is a third-level head.

• Italicize and left-justify third-level heads.
• These should be indented at the beginning of the paragraph…
• …followed by a period
• Capitalize only the first word of the head.

Footnotes and Endnotes

Footnotes and endnotes are used to cite materials of limited availability, expand upon the text, or to add information presented in a table.

Endnotes are used more frequently than footnotes, but both should be used sparingly. As a general rule, use one or the other throughout the manuscript but do not mix them. (The exception to this rule is to use a footnote on the Title page and for tables, but use endnotes throughout the rest of the document for manuscripts being submitted to a sociology journal.) They should be limited to fewer than 100 words.

In the text, footnotes or endnotes, whichever are used, should be numbered consecutively throughout the essay with superscript Arabic numerals. If referring to a footnote again later, use parentheses.

Footnotes are placed at the bottom of the page on which the material being referenced appears. If using endnotes, at the end of the paper in a separate section following the references, type the endnotes in numerical order, double-spaced, as a separate section with the title  Notes  or  Endnotes .

Begin each note with the same superscripted number used in the text.

Page Numbering

Pages should be numbered consecutively (1, 2, 3...) starting with the title page and including the references page(s), or as specified by journal or course instructor.

Tables and Figures

Number tables consecutively (Table 1, Table 2, Table 3).

Number figures consecutively (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3).

Each table or figure should be placed on a separate page at the end of the manuscript, and should have a descriptive title that explains enough that the reader can understand it without having to refer to the text of the article.

In tables, give full headings for every column and row, avoiding the use of abbreviations whenever possible. Spell out the word  percent  in headings.

For more information, please consult the  ASA Style Guide , Fifth Edition.

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
• Indian J Orthop
• v.52(4); Jul-Aug 2018

Standard Format for Writing a Manuscript: A Guide to Authors

Ish kumar dhammi.

Department of Orthopaedics, UCMS and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, New Delhi, India

Rehan Ul Haq

The editorial team at the Indian Journal of Orthopaedics is committed to improving the quality of the journal and also to make it more useful for our readers. We are also making efforts to help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts. Some of the previous editorials on this theme have been very well received by the readers. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 The current editorial is intended to help authors understand how they must structure a manuscript according to standard guidelines.

Depending on the type of manuscript, a number of standard guidelines such as CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT); Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA); STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE); CAse REport guidelines (CARE), and STAndards for Reporting Diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD) have been recommended for conducting and reporting them. 6 Each journal also has its own unique set of guidelines mentioned in the “Instructions to authors”. Besides these study design or journal-specific guidelines, there is another standard format; Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (IMRaD) which can be followed while writing an original research article for a scientific journal. In this editorial, we would like to discuss the composition and content of the different sections of the IMRaD format in detail. The intent is to help authors prepare better quality manuscripts.

Introduction: Any researcher who wants his or her work to pass the preliminary scrutiny by the editorial team must write an effective introduction. As the introduction appears immediately after the abstract section, a poorly written introduction may turn off the editors or reviewers and may result in rejection of the manuscript inspite of it having good scientific content. It must usually consists of 3–4 well-structured paragraphs. A funnel approach where one moves from generalities to specifics is a good way to write an introduction. 7 The first paragraph should provide a general statement about the area of research followed by a summary of literature about what is already known about the topic. The next paragraph must elaborate on the lacunae in current knowledge or understanding of the subject. The importance of the knowledge gap and how your research would help to fill it up should also be elaborated. In the last paragraph of the introduction, the author must explicitly state his “aim and objectives.” One must understand that the “aim” is the broad statement about what one intends to do, while “objectives” are the set of specific steps by which one intends to achieve the aim. The objectives must be Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Result-oriented and Time bound (SMART).

Materials and methods: This section of the manuscript is very important and needs to be written with great care. Any fault in the methodology or the way it is written may be a reason for rejection of the manuscript. In the term “Materials and Methods” materials refers to all the items such as human/animal subjects, equipment's, reagents, proforma, questionnaire, etc., that are going to be used during the study, while methods refer to how, when and where they would be used. 8 This section needs to be written in great detail so that if other researcher wants to do a similar study, he can replicate the steps.

When writing this section of an observational or interventional study, the following things need to be elaborated; study design, study setting, participants information including inclusion and exclusion criteria, intervention, primary and secondary outcome measures/criteria, sample size estimation, and statistics. Similarly based upon the study design other important information as elaborated in the different guidelines must be provided. In case, the intervention is a new or modified surgery, then its steps need to be elaborated, else reference to a standard text is sufficient. Similarly, if the outcome is a known score such as Harris hip score, Tegner activity scale, etc., then reference to the original text needs to be provided. A line about ethical clearance must also be provided.

Results: In the result section of the manuscript one presents his observations, made by synthesizing the data obtained during the research. The following data must be provided in the result section. 9

• Participant data, which includes participant flow and baseline data.
• Outcome data, which includes data about the primary and secondary outcome measures.
• Ancillary data, which include significant finding other than the primary and secondary outcome measures.
• Any other findings including complications.

One must understand that of all the data sets the outcome data is the most important and must usually constitute the major portion of the result section. Summary data about all the primary and secondary outcomes outlined in the methods sections must be provided. If there are more than one group, besides the summary data the contrast between the two groups known as the effect size must be provided. When test of significance are used the results must be represented as the exact “ P ” value.

This section should usually be a mix of narration, tables, graphs, and figures. However, the tendency of the same data being presented in more than one form should be avoided. Another common mistake that should be avoided is that one must not start interpreting or discussing the results in the result section. Finally over, under, or misreported of results must not be done.

Discussion: This section provides a space for the author for dialog with the reader and a platform for logical argumentation and critical analysis of one's work. 10 The discussion section of the manuscript usually has four important sections; summary of the study and results, strengths and limitations of the study, comparison of results with existing literature and importance of findings for practice, policy, and future research. In the summary of the study and results, authors must initially give a brief statement about the study followed by the study's key findings concisely without quoting data. One must discuss if the results support the research hypothesis and provide an answer to the research questions raised in the introduction section. After this, the technical and factual strengths and limitations of the study should be highlighted. While discussing the strengths, one must not go overboard. One must not state or assume that ones method are best and flawless and should also not attack methods adopted by other researchers. Similarly while discussing the limitations, one must not be very apologetic. The limitations and the reason for it must be enumerated and the steps taken to mitigate their effect must be discussed. One must not give unwarranted justifications for the limitations. Following this, the results must be compared with the existing literature. While doing it, one must ensure that one discusses studies on both sides of the issue, i.e., one must not only discuss studies that support ones results but also the ones which have different results. While discussing the differences or common point, the reasons for the same must also be discussed. Finally, authors must provide directions for future research and implications for clinical practice and policy. While doing this authors must ensure that the importance of the findings are not inflated or exaggerated. Finally, a brief conclusion based on the study results must be provided.

Besides these four sections, the abstract of the manuscript needs to be written with great care. 11 Most editors and reviewers make a preliminary decision about accepting or rejecting a manuscript based on the abstract. Moreover, if a manuscript does get accepted, the abstract is its most read part because of it being readily accessible while doing an electronic search. There are two types of abstract formats; the traditional or unstructured abstract and the structured abstract. The traditional unstructured abstract is written in the form of a paragraph without any subheadings. Although very readable sometimes vital information is missed inadvertently in an unstructured abstract. Therefore, nowadays most journals including the Indian Journal of Orthopaedics want authors to submit a structured abstract for their original articles. A structured abstract has relevant subsections such as the background, material and methods, results and conclusion. Evaluation studies have shown that structured abstracts contain more information, are of higher quality and facilitate better peer review. Each section of the abstract must be written clearly and comprehensively so that the gist of the paper is understood by the readers by reading it alone.

Keywords, MeSH terms, tables, figures, graphs, references, and acknowledgment are the other usual contents of a manuscript. Detailed instructions about these are provided in the “instruction to author” section of all journals and authors must familiarize themselves with them before preparing and submitting their manuscripts. If authors have some confusion, they must go through previously published articles in the same journal to understand the journal style and write accordingly.

Medical writing is an art which needs to be groomed. The more one writes the better one becomes at it. At Indian Journal of Orthopaedics we make all efforts not to reject a manuscript based only on its language or structure, especially if the topic is good. But definitely, well written and structured manuscripts have better chances of being accepted. We hope this editorial would help authors understand how they must write a manuscript so that not only has it a good chance of being accepted but also of being well received and appreciated by the readers if it is published.

• 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

Manuscript preparation

“From the proposal stage to the publication, every stage is process driven. Very systematic communication and the best e-proofing platform for online proof submission!” -  Book Author, 2020

You can keep track of where your book is in the publication process in real-time by signing up for notifications alerting you of all the critical stages, including when your book is published online and ready to share with the research community.

Revising your thesis into a book

Springer  will consider submissions containing material that has previously formed part of a PhD or other academic thesis including those that have been made publicly available according to the requirements of the institution awarding the qualification.

Important downloads

• Manuscript guidelines for English books ↗
• Manuscript guidelines for English textbooks ↗
• Key style points ↗
• LaTeX template for monographs ↗
• LaTeX template for contributed works ↗
• Word template for book chapters ↗
• How to create videos for books ↗
• Guide to open access books for Springer authors ↗

On this page

Layout & templates.

If you are comfortable using templates, we offer Word and LaTeX templates for monographs as well as for contributed books. If you prefer not to use a template, please follow the alternate instructions given under the appropriate template below.

When writing a book for Springer, please do not worry about the final layout. To ensure we always keep pace with all the requirements both online and in print, Springer

• structures the content in XML as the basis for presentation in print or in digital formats for such devices as Amazon Kindle™, Apple iPad™/iPhone™, and Google Android™
• utilizes standard layouts with style specifications suitable for multiple display formats.

What advantages do these provide for you in manuscript preparation? It means you can focus on the structured content and let Springer take care of the rest . We will professionally prepare your book with underlying XML structuring, in such a way that ensures your content becomes not only a professionally typeset printed work but is also available to readers in numerous formats for many years to come.

A key part of the publication process (and in response to the changing requirements of the book industry), are the standard corporate book covers that Springer introduced for each subject area in which it publishes. These covers provide a strong, corporate brand identity for Springer books, making them instantly recognizable amongst the scientific community. In addition the covers also assist speed of publication, as having standardized versions greatly reduces the time traditionally spent on creating individual book covers for each title.

Springer provides templates for Word users that help structure the manuscript, e.g., define the heading hierarchy. If you are using Microsoft Word to prepare your manuscript, you do not need to use any special tool for preparation. Please just ensure that the document is clearly structured visually, (e.g., using heading styles, lists, footnotes, etc.). We also provide a Manuscript preparation tool for Word.

• Word template

Note: These templates are not intended for the preparation of the final page layout. The final layout will be created by Springer according to our layout specifications.

The usage of these templates is not mandatory. Alternatively, you may either use a blank Word document or the standard LaTeX book class (for monographs) or article class (for individual contributions) and apply the default settings and styles (e.g., for heading styles, lists, footnotes, etc.).

Springer provides templates for LaTeX users that help structure the manuscript, e.g., define the heading hierarchy. Predefined style formats are available for all the necessary structures that are supposed to be part of the manuscript, and these formats can be quickly accessed via hotkeys or special toolbars.

Note: are not intended for the preparation of the final page layout. The final layout will be created by Springer according to our layout specifications.

LaTeX2e macro packages for 

• contributed books

Back to top of On this page

Book structure

L Key Style Points August 2023 To guarantee a smooth publication process and a seamless transformation of your manuscript into the final layout and various electronic platforms, the manuscript needs to be structured as follows:

• Front Matter: Title page, Dedication, Foreword, Preface, Acknowledgments, About the book/conference, Table of Contents, About the Author (for authored books), About the Editor/List of Contributors (for edited books), List of Abbreviations, List of Figures and/or Tables

The title page and table of contents must appear in the manuscript’s front matter. All other sections listed above are optional. The above order is not flexible. We have defined this order as our house style and optimized our publication process to follow it strictly.

• Text Body: It comprises the chapters containing the content of the book, i.e. text, figures, tables, and references. Chapters can be grouped together in parts.
• Back Matter: After the last chapter, the back matter can contain an appendix, a glossary, and/or an index, all of which are optional.

Front matter

Title page, preface, and table of contents precede the actual content of a book. The preface should be about the book: why it was written, who it is for, its organization, or the selection of contributors. An introduction in the subject of the book, however, should appear as the first chapter of the book.

Please include all author/editor names, their affiliations, the book title, and the subtitle. Ensure that the sequence of the author names is correct and the title of your book is final when you submit your manuscript. Once the manuscript has been delivered to Production, changes to title, subtitle, or authorship are no longer possible.

If you intend to include a foreword, please submit it with the manuscript.

• A foreword is usually written by an authority in the subject and serves as a recommendation for the book
• The name of the foreword’s contributor is always given at the end of the foreword; affiliations and titles are generally not included, but the date and place of writing may be.

The preface should be about the book: why its important, why it was written, who it is for. It should stimulate interest in the book.

• Front matter material is not listed in the table of contents.
• List all parts, chapters, and back matter material (e.g., an index) in their final sequence.
• If your chapters are numbered, use Arabic numerals and number the chapters consecutively throughout the book (Chapter 1, Chapter 2, etc.), i.e., do not start anew with each part. The introductory chapter must be listed as Chapter 1, if your chapters are numbered. Please do not use subchapters.
• In authored books we present two heading levels under the main chapter titles. In edited books, we present the chapter titles and the chapter author names.
• If there are parts, use Roman numerals for parts (Part I, Part II, etc.). Parts consist of a short title and can contain a short introductory text (optional). Please don’t use subparts.

Chapters contain the actual content of the book, i.e., text, figures, tables, and references. Chapters can be grouped together in parts; subparts are not possible. Only one chapter (e.g. an introduction) may precede the first part and would be the first chapter.

• Decide the numbering style for the chapters and apply this style consistently to all chapters: consecutively numbered (monographs or textbooks) or unnumbered (contributed volumes).
• If an introduction to the subject of the book (historical background, definitions, or methodology) is included, it should appear as the first chapter and thus be included in the chapter numbering. It can contain references, figures, and tables, just as any other chapter.

Either British or American English can be used, but be consistent within your chapter or book. In contributed books chapter-specific consistency is accepted Check for consistent spelling of names, terms and abbreviations, including in tables and figure legends.

For contributed volumes, please include each chapter authors’ names (spelled out as they would be cited), affiliations and e-mail addresses and telephone numbers after the chapter title. Ensure that the sequence of the author names is correct and the title of your book is final when you submit your manuscript. Please supply all emails, telephone numbers and address of each author and editor. Once the manuscript has been delivered to production, changes to title or authorship are no longer possible.

Chapter abstracts are strongly encouraged because they have been proven to significantly increase a book’s visibility. Good abstracts will mean that more people read your book. These will appear online at SpringerLink and other sites and will be available with unrestricted access to facilitate online searching (e.g., Google) and allow unregistered users to read the abstract as a teaser for the complete chapter.

If no abstract is submitted, we will use the first paragraph of the chapter instead.

Some books also publish keywords. Please check with the editor of your book or with the publishing editor to see if keywords are required.

• Heading levels should be clearly identified and each level should be uniquely and consistently formatted and/or numbered.
• Use the decimal system of numbering if your headings are numbered.
• Never skip a heading level. The only exception are run-in headings which can be used at any hierarchical level.
• Technical terms and abbreviations should be defined the first time they appear in the text.
• Please always use internationally accepted signs and symbols for units (also called SI units).
• Numerals should follow the British/American method of decimal points to indicate decimals and commas to separate thousands

Manuscripts will be checked by a copy editor for formal style. Springer Nature follows certain layouts and standards with regard to the presentation of the content, and the copy editors make sure that the manuscript conforms to these styles. When you receive the page proofs during the production of your book, please do not make changes that involve only matters of style.

• Italics should be used for emphasized words or phrases in running text, but do not format entire paragraphs in italics. 
• Use italics for species and genus names, mathematical/physical variables, and prefixes in chemical compounds. 
• Bold formatting should only be used for run-in headings and small capitals for indicating optical activity (D- and L-dopa). 
• Sans serif (e.g., Arial) and nonproportional font (e.g., Courier) can be used to distinguish the literal text of computer programs from running text.
• Do not set entire pages as boxes, because this diminishes online readability.
• Do not set entire pages as boxes, because this affects online readability. 
• For additional didactic elements such as examples, questions, exercises, summaries, or key messages in textbooks and in professional books, please use a consistent style for each of these elements and submit a list of the styles used together with your manuscript. For LaTeX users please use the Springer Nature macro package to highlight these elements.
• In Word, use the Math function, MathType, or Microsoft Equation editor to create your equations. Please don’t include the equations as images.
• In LaTeX, use the Math environment to create your equations.
• Give each table a heading (caption). Add a reference to the table source at the end of the caption if necessary.
• Number tables consecutively using the chapter number (e.g. Table 1.1 for the first table in Chapter 1) and ensure that all tables are cited in the text in sequential order. Do not write “the following table”.
• Use the table function to create and format tables. Do not use the space bar or multiple tabs to separate columns and please do not use Excel to create tables as this can cause problems when converting your tables into the typesetting program and other formats.

Figures and illustrations

Number the figures using the chapter number (e.g. Fig. 1.1 for the first figure in Chap. 1) and ensure that all figures are cited in the text in sequential order. Do not write “the following figure”.

• Give each figure a concise caption, describing accurately what the figure depicts. Include the captions at the end of the text file, not in the figure file.
• Identify all elements found in the figure in the figure caption; and use boxes, circles, etc., as coordinate points in graphs instead of color lines.
• If a figure is reproduced from a previous publication, include the source as the last item in the caption.
• A figure is an object that is drawn or photographed; it does not consist solely of characters and thus cannot be keyed.
• Do not submit tabular material as figures.
• Graphics and diagrams should be saved as EPS file with the fonts embedded. MS Office files (Excel or PowerPoint) can be submitted in the original format (xls, xlsx, ppt, pptx). Scanned graphics in TIFF format should have a minimum resolution of 1200 dpi.
• Photos or drawings with fine shading should be saved as TIFF with a minimum resolution of 300 dpi.
• A combination of halftone and line art (e.g., photos containing line drawing or extensive lettering, color diagrams, etc.) should be saved as TIFF with a minimum resolution of 600 dpi.

Cite references in the text with author name/s and year of publication in parentheses (“Harvard system”)

• One author: (Miller 1991) or Miller (1991)
• Two authors: (Miller and Smith 1994) or Miller and Smith (1994)
• Three authors or more: (Miller et al. 1995) or Miller et al. (1995)

If it is customary in your field, you can also cite with reference numbers in square brackets either sequential by citation or according to the sequence in an alphabetized list: [3, 7, 12].

Include a reference list at the end of each chapter so that readers of single chapters of the eBook can make full use of the citations. References at the end of the book cannot be linked to citations in the chapters. Please do not include reference lists at the end of a chapter section, at the end of a book part, in a preface or an appendix.

Include all works that are cited in the chapter and that have been published (including on the internet) or accepted for publication. Personal communications and unpublished works should only be mentioned in the text. Do not use footnotes as a substitute for a reference list.

Entries in the list must be listed alphabetically except in the numbered system of sequential citation. The rules for alphabetization are:

• First, all works by the author alone, ordered chronologically by year of publication
• Next, all works by the author with a coauthor, ordered alphabetically by coauthor
• Finally, all works by the author with several coauthors, ordered chronologically by year of publication

Springer Nature follows certain standards with regard to the presentation of the reference list. They are based on reference styles that were established for various disciplines in the past and have been adjusted to facilitate automated processing and citation linking. This allows us, for example, to easily cross link the cited references with the original publication. References will be revised in production in accordance with these house styles. 

Choose the appropriate style for your subject from the list below. Please note that the adapted and standardized forms are based on, but differ slightly from, certain recommended styles (e.g., APA, Chicago)

Back matter

After the last chapter, the back matter of the book can contain an appendix, a glossary or an index.

Do not include a reference list containing the cited literature in the back matter, as references are then not linked to citations in the chapters. Instead, please include reference lists at the end of each chapter. A list of further reading may be included in the back matter.

An appendix cannot include a reference list.

If an index is desired, please submit the entries with the manuscript.

Optimizing for Google – tips for book authors

Contribute to your book's success, long before it's published. By following a few tips when thinking about your book’s title, its back cover description and unique selling points, you can make sure that potential readers are able to find your finished book.

Click here to read our SEO tips for authors.

Search engine optimization (SEO) is about relevance! Help Google and other search engines present your book to the right audience and give these readers what they want.

Putting the Choice in Choice Tasks: Incorporating Preference Elicitation Tasks in Health Preference Research

• Practical Application
• Published: 14 May 2024

Cite this article

• Jennifer A. Whitty   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5886-1933 1 , 2 ,
• Emily Lancsar   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2404-6735 3 ,
• Richard De Abreu Lourenco   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5978-8774 4 ,
• Kirsten Howard   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0918-7540 5 &
• Elly A. Stolk   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5968-0416 6 , 7  

30 Accesses

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Choice-based preference elicitation methods such as the discrete choice experiment (DCE) present hypothetical choices to respondents, with an expectation that these hypothetical choices accurately reflect a ‘real world’ health-related decision context and that consequently the choice data can be held to be a true representation of the respondent’s health or treatment preferences. For this to be the case, careful consideration needs to be given to the format of the choice task in a choice experiment. The overarching aim of this paper is to highlight important aspects to consider when designing and ‘setting up’ the choice tasks to be presented to respondents in a DCE. This includes the importance of considering the potential impact of format (e.g. choice context, choice set presentation and size) as well as choice set content (e.g. labelled and unlabelled choice sets and inclusion of reference alternatives) and choice questions (stated choice versus additional questions designed to explore complete preference orders) on the preference estimates that are elicited from studies. We endeavoure to instil a holistic approach to choice task design that considers format alongside content, experimental design and analysis.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Choice experiments to quantify preferences for health and healthcare: state of the practice.

Eliciting Preferences from Choices: Discrete Choice Experiments

Data availability

Not applicable.

Whitty JA, de Bekker-Grob EW, Cook NS, et al. Patient preferences in the medical product lifecycle. Patient. 2020;13(1):7–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-019-00400-y .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

The PREFER Consortium. PREFER Recommendations - Why, when and how to assess and use patient preferences in medical product decision-making. 2022. Available at: https://zenodo.org/records/6592304 . Accessed 19 Jan 2024.

Bouvy JC, Cowie L, Lovett R, Morrison D, Livingstone H, Crabb N. Use of patient preference studies in HTA decision making: a NICE Perspective. Patient. 2020;13(2):145–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-019-00408-4 .

US FDA. Benefit-Risk Assessment for New Drug and Biological Products. Guidance for Industry. Silver Spring, MD: US FDA; 2023.

Janssens R, Barbier L, Muller M, et al. How can patient preferences be used and communicated in the regulatory evaluation of medicinal products? Findings and recommendations from IMI PREFER and call to action. Front Pharmacol. 2023;14:1192770. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1192770 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Wang H, Rowen DL, Brazier JE, Jiang L. Discrete Choice experiments in health state valuation: a systematic review of progress and new trends. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2023;21(3):405–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-023-00794-9 .

Soekhai V, Whichello C, Levitan B, et al. Methods for exploring and eliciting patient preferences in the medical product lifecycle: a literature review. Drug Discov Today. 2019;24(7):1324–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2019.05.001 .

Whichello C, Levitan B, Juhaeri J, et al. Appraising patient preference methods for decision-making in the medical product lifecycle: an empirical comparison. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020;20(1):114. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-01142-w .

Lancsar E, Swait J. Reconceptualising the external validity of discrete choice experiments. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(10):951–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-014-0181-7 .

Haghani M, Bliemer MCJ, Rose JM, Oppewal H, Lancsar E. Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods. J Choice Modell. 2021;41:100322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2021.100322 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Haghani M, Bliemer MCJ, Rose JM, Oppewal H, Lancsar E. Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimaging. J Choice Model. 2021;41:100309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2021.100309 .

Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health–a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011;14(4):403–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013 .

Lancsar E, Louviere J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user’s guide. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(8):661–77. https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200826080-00004 .

Ramos-Goni JM, Oppe M, Slaap B, Busschbach JJ, Stolk E. Quality control process for EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. Value Health. 2017;20(3):466–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2016.10.012 .

Spinks J, Mortimer D. Lost in the crowd? Using eye-tracking to investigate the effect of complexity on attribute non-attendance in discrete choice experiments. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2016;16:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-016-0251-1 .

Karimi M, Brazier J, Paisley S. How do individuals value health states? A qualitative investigation. Soc Sci Med. 2017;172:80–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.11.027 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Campoamor NB, Guerrini CJ, Brooks WB, Bridges JFP, Crossnohere NL. Pretesting discrete-choice experiments: a guide for researchers. Patient. 2024;17(2):109–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-024-00672-z .

Bansal P, Kim E-J, Ozdemir S. Discrete choice experiments with eye-tracking: how far we have come and a way forward. J Choice Model. 2024;51: 100478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocm.2024.100478 .

Soekhai V, de Bekker-Grob EW, Ellis AR, Vass CM. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: past, present and future. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(2):201–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-018-0734-2 .

Jonker MF, Donkers B, de Bekker-Grob E, Stolk EA. Attribute level overlap (and color coding) can reduce task complexity, improve choice consistency, and decrease the dropout rate in discrete choice experiments. Health Econ. 2019;28(3):350–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3846 .

Regier DA, Watson V, Burnett H, Ungar WJ. Task complexity and response certainty in discrete choice experiments: An application to drug treatments for juvenile idiopathic arthritis. J Behav Exp Econ. 2014;50:40–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2014.02.009 .

Swait J, Adamowicz W. Choice environment, market complexity, and consumer behavior: a theoretical and empirical approach for incorporating decision complexity into models of consumer choice. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 2001;86(2):141–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2941 .

Kragt M, Bennett J. Designing choice experiments to test for anchoring and framing effects. Canberra: Australian National University; 2008.

Google Scholar  

Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 1981;211(4481):453–8. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683 .

Kahneman D, Tversky A. Choices, values, and frames. Am Psychol. 1984;39(4):341–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.341 .

Levin IP, Schneider SL, Gaeth GJ. All frames are not created equal: a typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1998;76(2):149–88. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2804 .

Hallahan K. Seven models of framing: implications for public relations. J Public Relations Res. 1999;11(3):205–42. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr1103_02 .

O’Connor AM, Boyd NF, Tritchler DL, Kriukov Y, Sutherland H, Till JE. Eliciting preferences for alternative cancer drug treatments. The influence of framing, medium, and rater variables. Med Decis Making. 1985;5(4):453–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X8500500408 .

Howard K, Salkeld G. Does attribute framing in discrete choice experiments influence willingness to pay? Results from a discrete choice experiment in screening for colorectal cancer. Value Health. 2009;12(2):354–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00417.x .

Kragt ME, Bennett JW. Attribute framing in choice experiments: how do attribute level descriptions affect value estimates? Environ Resource Econ. 2012;51(1):43–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-011-9487-5 .

Smith IP, Ancillotti M, de Bekker-Grob EW, Veldwijk J. Does It matter how you ask? Assessing the impact of failure or effectiveness framing on preferences for antibiotic treatments in a discrete choice experiment. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2022;16:2921–36. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S365624 .

Veldwijk J, Essers BA, Lambooij MS, Dirksen CD, Smit HA, de Wit GA. Survival or mortality: does risk attribute framing influence decision-making behavior in a discrete choice experiment? Value Health. 2016;19(2):202–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2015.11.004 .

Kenny P, Goodall S, Street DJ, Greene J. Choosing a doctor: does presentation format affect the way consumers use health care performance information? Patient. 2017;10(6):739–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-017-0245-9 .

Benning TM, Dellaert BG, Severens JL, Dirksen CD. The effect of presenting information about invasive follow-up testing on individuals’ noninvasive colorectal cancer screening participation decision: results from a discrete choice experiment. Value Health. 2014;17(5):578–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2014.04.007 .

Knox SA, Viney RC, Gu Y, et al. The effect of adverse information and positive promotion on women’s preferences for prescribed contraceptive products. Soc Sci Med. 2013;83:70–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.12.025 .

Ghijben P, Lancsar E, Zavarsek S. Preferences for oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation: a best-best discrete choice experiment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(11):1115–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-014-0188-0 .

Blake MR, Lancsar E, Peeters A, Backholer K. Sugar-sweetened beverage price elasticities in a hypothetical convenience store. Soc Sci Med. 2019;225:98–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.02.021 .

Campbell D, Erdem S. Including opt-out options in discrete choice experiments: issues to consider. Patient. 2019;12(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-018-0324-6 .

Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH. Applied choice analysis: a primer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.

Book   Google Scholar  

Viney R, Lancsar E, Louviere J. Discrete choice experiments to measure consumer preferences for health and healthcare. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2002;2(4):319–26. https://doi.org/10.1586/14737167.2.4.319 .

Ryan M, Skatun D. Modelling non-demanders in choice experiments. Health Econ. 2004;13(4):397–402. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.821 .

Veldwijk J, Lambooij MS, de Bekker-Grob EW, Smit HA, de Wit GA. The effect of including an opt-out option in discrete choice experiments. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(11): e111805. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111805 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Norman R, Mulhern B, Lancsar E, et al. The use of a discrete choice experiment including both duration and dead for the development of an EQ-5D-5L value set for Australia. Pharmacoeconomics. 2023;41(4):427–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-023-01243-0 .

Jonker MF, Donkers B, de Bekker-Grob EW, Stolk EA. Advocating a paradigm shift in health-state valuations: the estimation of time-preference corrected QALY tariffs. Value Health. 2018;21(8):993–1001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2018.01.016 .

Mulhern B, Norman R, Street DJ, Viney R. One method, many methodological choices: a structured review of discrete-choice experiments for health state valuation. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(1):29–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-018-0714-6 .

Salkeld G, Ryan M, Short L. The veil of experience: do consumers prefer what they know best? Health Econ. 2000;9(3):267–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1050(200004)9:3%3c267::aid-hec511%3e3.0.co;2-h .

Brazell JD, Diener CG, Karniouchina E, Moore WL, Severin V, Uldry P-F. The no-choice option and dual response choice designs. Market Lett. 2006;17:255–68.

Laba TL, Howard K, Rose J, et al. Patient preferences for a polypill for the prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Ann Pharmacother. 2015;49(5):528–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1060028015570468 .

Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Kulin NA, et al. How do physician assessments of patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests differ from actual preferences? A comparison in Canada and the United States using a stated-choice survey. Health Econ. 2009;18(12):1420–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1437 .

Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Phillips KA, Marshall JK, Thabane L, Kulin NA. Measuring patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a choice-format survey. Value Health. 2007;10(5):415–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00196.x .

Lancsar EJ, Hall JP, King M, et al. Using discrete choice experiments to investigate subject preferences for preventive asthma medication. Respirology. 2007;12(1):127–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1843.2006.01005.x .

Louviere JJ, Islam T, Wasi N, Street D, Burgess L. Designing discrete choice experiments: do optimal designs come at a price? J Consum Res. 2008;35(2):360–75. https://doi.org/10.1086/586913 .

Louviere JJ, Hensher DA, Swait JD. Stated choice methods: analysis and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.

de Bekker-Grob EW, Hol L, Donkers B, et al. Labeled versus unlabeled discrete choice experiments in health economics: an application to colorectal cancer screening. Value Health. 2010;13(2):315–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00670.x .

Jin W, Jiang H, Liu Y, Klampfl E. Do labeled versus unlabeled treatments of alternatives’ names influence stated choice outputs? Results from a mode choice study. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(8): e0178826. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178826 .

McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka P, editor. Frontiers in econometrics. Academic Press; 1973. p. 105–42.

Beggs S, Cardell S, Hausman J. Assessing the potential demand for electric cars. J Economet. 1981;17(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(81)90056-7 .

Chapman RG, Staelin R. Exploiting rank ordered choice set data within the stochastic utility model. J Market Res. 1982;19(3):288–301. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151563 .

de Bekker-Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ. 2012;21(2):145–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1697 .

Lancsar E, Fiebig DG, Hole AR. Discrete choice experiments: a guide to model specification, estimation and software. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(7):697–716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-017-0506-4 .

Lancsar E, Louviere J, Donaldson C, Currie G, Burgess L. Best worst discrete choice experiments in health: methods and an application. Soc Sci Med. 2013;76(1):74–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.10.007 .

Flynn TN, Louviere JJ, Peters TJ, Coast J. Best–worst scaling: What it can do for health care research and how to do it. J Health Econ. 2007;26(1):171–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2006.04.002 .

Whitty JA, Oliveira Goncalves AS. A systematic review comparing the acceptability, validity and concordance of discrete choice experiments and best-worst scaling for eliciting preferences in healthcare. Patient. 2018;11(3):301–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-017-0288-y .

Whitty JA, Walker R, Golenko X, Ratcliffe J. A think aloud study comparing the validity and acceptability of discrete choice and best worst scaling methods. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(4): e90635. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090635 .

Huls SPI, Lancsar E, Donkers B, Ride J. Two for the price of one: If moving beyond traditional single-best discrete choice experiments, should we use best-worst, best-best or ranking for preference elicitation? Health Econ. 2022;31(12):2630–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.4599 .

Download references

Acknowledgements/Funding

This research received no specific funding. Jennifer Whitty is an employee of Evidera, a clinical research organisation that receives funding from research contracts for undertaking patient preference research. Editorial services were provided by Fritz Hamme and Michael Grossi of Evidera.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Patient-Centred Research, Evidera, London, UK

Jennifer A. Whitty

Norwich Medical School, The University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

Department of Health Economics Wellbeing and Society, Australian National University, Acton, ACT, Australia

Emily Lancsar

Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Richard De Abreu Lourenco

Menzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia

Kirsten Howard

Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Elly A. Stolk

EuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer A. Whitty .

Ethics declarations

Author contributions.

All authors conceived of the concept for this manuscript, developed the draft of this manuscript, reviewed the manuscript for key academic content, and approved the final version for submission.

Competing Interests

None declared.

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

Whitty, J.A., Lancsar, E., De Abreu Lourenco, R. et al. Putting the Choice in Choice Tasks: Incorporating Preference Elicitation Tasks in Health Preference Research. Patient (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-024-00696-5

Download citation

Accepted : 08 April 2024

Published : 14 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-024-00696-5

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

Advertisement

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Assessing the Feasibility of Processing a Paper-based Multilingual Social Needs Screening Questionnaire Using Artificial Intelligence

• Find this author on Google Scholar
• Find this author on PubMed
• Search for this author on this site
• ORCID record for Obinna I Ekekezie
• For correspondence: [email protected]
• Info/History
• Supplementary material
• Preview PDF

The collection of Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) data is increasingly mandated by healthcare payers, yet traditional paper-based methods pose challenges in terms of cost effectiveness, accuracy, and completeness when manually entered into Electronic Health Records (EHRs). This study explores the application of artificial intelligence (AI), specifically using a document understanding model (Microsoft Azure Document Intelligence) and large language models (OpenAI's GPT-4 Turbo and GPT-3.5 Turbo), to automate the conversion of paper-based Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) questionnaires into structured, machine-readable formats that could theoretically be incorporated into EHRs. Using a dataset of synthetic and scanned examples, the study compares the performance of the GPT-3.5 and 4 Turbo base models and fine-tuned GPT-3.5 Turbo models on this task. Findings indicate that GPT-4 Turbo outperforms GPT-3.5 Turbo in accuracy and consistency, with fine-tuning enhancing GPT-3.5 Turbo's performance and consistency in several languages. These results suggest that AI could prove to be an accurate alternative to manual data entry, with important implications for improving how SDoH data is incorporated into EHRs. Future research should address data privacy, security concerns, cost considerations, and the technical aspects of incorporating AI-generated data into EHRs.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This study did not receive any funding

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

- Additional mention of related prior research in introduction - More robust dataset and methodology yielding new results - Revised manuscript and supplemental files accordingly

Data Availability

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the author. In addition, a GitHub repo containing the results from assessing GPT-3.5 Turbo on the training synthetic examples and from comparing models on the two testing datasets (synthetic and scanned) as well as the LLM calls and responses is available. The repo also contains the notebooks (HTML) referenced in the Supplementary Appendix.

https://github.com/oekekezie/poc-ai-sdoh-questionnaire-v2/

View the discussion thread.

Supplementary Material

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Citation Manager Formats

• EndNote (tagged)
• EndNote 8 (xml)
• RefWorks Tagged
• Ref Manager
• Tweet Widget
• Facebook Like
• Google Plus One
• Addiction Medicine (324)
• Allergy and Immunology (628)
• Anesthesia (165)
• Cardiovascular Medicine (2383)
• Dentistry and Oral Medicine (289)
• Dermatology (207)
• Emergency Medicine (380)
• Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (839)
• Epidemiology (11777)
• Forensic Medicine (10)
• Gastroenterology (703)
• Genetic and Genomic Medicine (3751)
• Geriatric Medicine (350)
• Health Economics (635)
• Health Informatics (2401)
• Health Policy (935)
• Health Systems and Quality Improvement (900)
• Hematology (341)
• HIV/AIDS (782)
• Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13323)
• Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (769)
• Medical Education (366)
• Medical Ethics (105)
• Nephrology (398)
• Neurology (3513)
• Nursing (198)
• Nutrition (528)
• Obstetrics and Gynecology (675)
• Occupational and Environmental Health (665)
• Oncology (1825)
• Ophthalmology (538)
• Orthopedics (219)
• Otolaryngology (287)
• Pain Medicine (233)
• Palliative Medicine (66)
• Pathology (446)
• Pediatrics (1035)
• Pharmacology and Therapeutics (426)
• Primary Care Research (422)
• Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3181)
• Public and Global Health (6150)
• Radiology and Imaging (1281)
• Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (749)
• Respiratory Medicine (828)
• Rheumatology (379)
• Sexual and Reproductive Health (372)
• Sports Medicine (323)
• Surgery (402)
• Toxicology (50)
• Transplantation (172)
• Urology (146)