Writing a Cover Letter for Journal Submission [Free Template]

  • Research Process
  • Peer Review

Journal cover letters are your chance to lobby on behalf of your manuscript. This AJE Journal Cover Letter Guide offers some useful tips for getting them right. It also includes a free journal cover letter template.

Updated on September 20, 2018

two researchers writing a cover letter for journal submissions

The cover letter accompanying your journal submission is your chance to lobby on behalf of your manuscript. The letter is far from just a formality and should be written with the same care as your manuscript's text (if not more). Ultimately, your cover letter is designed to influence the decision of the editor to send your manuscript out for peer review. The letter will argue that your manuscript is a good fit for the journal you are submitting it to and highlight your most important findings. Let us help you produce the most effective cover letter possible.

Getting ready to submit your manuscript? Download our comprehensive Free Journal Cover Letter Writing Guide with Template .

A cover letter should be written like a standard business letter :

Address the editor formally by name, if known. Include your contact information, as well. This information is probably available through the journal's online submission system, but it is proper to provide it in the cover letter, too.

Begin your cover letter with a paragraph that states the name of the manuscript and the names of the authors. You can also describe what type of manuscript your submission is (research article, review, case report, etc.). In this first paragraph and the next, describe the rationale behind your study and the major findings from your research. You can refer to prior work that you have published if it is directly related.

Next, write a short paragraph that explains why your manuscript would be a good fit for the journal. Do not simply state that your manuscript is “of interest to the field” or “novel.” Address specific aspects of the journal's Aims & Scope statement. If the journal expresses interest in research with a clinical application, be sure to highlight the importance of your work in terms of clinical implications. If the journal mentions that it focuses on nanostructured materials, explain how your work involved such materials. Even if your work is not a perfect fit for the journal, be sure to address some of the Aims & Scope statement, and explain why your manuscript would be of interest to the journal's readers.

Finally, close with a brief paragraph indicating the following:

  • The manuscript is original (i.e., you wrote it, not copied it)
  • No part of the manuscript has been published before, nor is any part of it under consideration for publication at another journal
  • There are no conflicts of interest to disclose
  • A list of potential reviewers (only if requested by the journal)
  • Any researchers who should NOT review your manuscript

Together, this information provides assurance to the editor that your manuscript merits consideration for publication in their journal and that you are interested specifically in their journal. Sometimes great science will be reviewed regardless of the cover letter, but a well written cover letter is useful for the vast majority of scientists who want to make their research stand out.

Best of luck with your research! If you have any questions about your cover letter, write us anytime.

Ben Mudrak, Senior Product Manager at American Chemical Society/ChemRxiv, PhD, Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University

Ben Mudrak, PhD

See our "Privacy Policy"

Cover Letter for Journal Submission Templates

Download a Microsoft Word template for a standard journal cover letter (also available with instructions in Chinese , Japanese , Korean , Portuguese , and Spanish ).

  • SpringerLink shop

Cover letters

A good cover letter can help to “sell” your manuscript to the journal editor. As well as introducing your work to the editor you can also take this opportunity to explain why the manuscript will be of interest to a journal's readers, something which is always as the forefront editors’ mind. As such it is worth spending time writing a coherent and persuasive cover letter.

The following is an example of a poor cover letter:

Dear Editor-in-Chief, I am sending you our manuscript entitled “Large Scale Analysis of Cell Cycle Regulators in bladder cancer” by Researcher et al. We would like to have the manuscript considered for publication in Pathobiology. Please let me know of your decision at your earliest convenience. With my best regards, Sincerely yours, A Researcher, PhD

Instead, check to see whether the journal’s Instructions for Authors have any cover letter requirements (e.g. disclosures, statements, potential reviewers). Then, write a letter that explains why the editor would want to publish your manuscript. The following structure covers all the necessary points that need to be included.

  • If known, address the editor who will be assessing your manuscript by their name. Include the date of submission and the journal you are submitting to.
  • First paragraph: include the title of your manuscript and the type of manuscript it is (e.g. review, research, case study). Then briefly explain the background to your study, the question you sought out to answer and why.
  • Second paragraph: you should concisely explain what was done, the main findings and why they are significant.
  • Third paragraph: here you should indicate why the readers of the journal would be interested in the work. Take your cues from the journal’s aims and scope. For example if the journal requires that all work published has broad implications explain how your study fulfils this. It is also a good idea to include a sentence on the importance of the results to the field.
  • To conclude state the corresponding author and any journal specific requirements that need to be complied with (e.g. ethical standards).

TIP: All cover letters should contain these sentences:

  • We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal.
  • All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to [insert the name of the target journal].

Submission checklist

Before submitting your manuscript, thoroughly check its quality one more time. Evaluate it critically—could anything be done better?

Be sure that:

  • The manuscript follows the Instructions for Authors
  • All files are in the correct file format and of the appropriate resolution or size
  • The spelling and grammar are correct
  • You have contact information for all authors
  • You have written a persuasive cover letter

Back │ Next

English Editing Research Services

cover letter for case study report

Writing a Successful Journal Cover Letter (Free Templates)

cover letter for case study report

Even great manuscripts often stand out based on the title or its contents alone. They need great cover letters.

Cover letters for journal submission are an underrated part of the submission process. Don’t overlook them. They’re a valuable step to getting your research noticed, published, and all the good things that come after that.

The truth is, most journal editors just don’t have the time to thoroughly read every submitted article in full to decide if it’s suitable for their journal. They use cover letters to help them filter out the most interesting and appropriate submissions first.

Cover letters also help identify articles completely out of the journal’s scope and that would be better off getting a quick letter of rejection.

If your manuscript doesn’t have a cover letter and the 12 other articles on the editor’s desk do, it’s likely that your paper will be looked at last. Putting in that extra effort, just like on a job application, lets you sell your research, avoid quick rejections, and more likely make it to peer review.

We also have some journal cover letter templates and examples for you, so you don’t have to start from zero. Read on.

What do you put in a journal cover letter?

Your cover letter needs certain basic elements. Generally they are:

  • Editor and target journal
  • Salutation (Dear Dr. …)
  • Indication you’re submitting your manuscript, along with its title, and the category of manuscript you’re submitting (Original Report, Review , Case Study, etc.) based on what the journal accepts
  • Background information regarding your work – what is already known about the subject matter?
  • What your study was
  • Why you performed the study (rationale)
  • Briefly, what methods you used and what your key findings were
  • Why your manuscript is a great fit for this journal
  • (optional, depending on the journal and on if you want to do this) Recommended reviewers
  • (optional, depending on the journal) Funding information
  • Closing line (Sincerely, etc.) and the name and contact details for the manuscript’s corresponding author

Those are the key elements. It’s how you express them and the quality of your message that mean the different between a dry overview and an attractive promotion of your work.

Many journals don’t have a prescribed format for the cover letter. On the other end of the spectrum are PLOS ONE’s guidelines , which give specifics on what to include, including selecting Academic Editors from its directory.

Always check the guidelines first to be sure you give the journal what it wants. Those are basics. With a grasp of those, there are many ways to polish your cover letter into a valuable sales tool for your work.

What to do and what to avoid in your journal cover letter

Most “problems with journal cover letters relate to simply not spending enough time and care on it. Or even not doing it at all. These are easily fixed if you’re a skilled English writer. If not, they’re still easily fixed with a little help.

All of the following are critical. Make sure you DO:

  • Check the name of your target journal.
  • Address the cover letter to the relevant person. It is not enough to simply say “Dear Editor” or “To whom it may concern.” Include the name, title and position of the editor you are addressing.
  • Avoid superlatives – about the journal, yourself and your own work. It’s pretty unlikely your work is “groundbreaking” or “trailblazing,” though it may by the “first time ever” that a certain approach was taken with a certain population.
  • Check the formatting. This varies by journal. It includes US vs. UK vs. Oxford English spelling, correct page numbering, use of templates, and much more.
  • Get a colleague to read your cover letter before you send it.

cover letter for case study report

“ A typical cover letter just repeats the abstract. That’s a huge missed opportunity. You need to think of what the journal wants. Try to tailor your manuscript’s novel and interesting points specifically to the your target journal’s aims and scope. It may mean an extra half-hour of work for you, but if it helps get you published, isn’t it worth that small investment of time? “ — Geraldine Echue , PhD, CMPP Edanz Managing Editor

But don’t do this…

The following may not be critical, but they’re common areas that authors mess up. Sometimes they don’t know they’re doing it or they’re just trying their best. So be aware

Make sure you DON’T :

  • Take shortcuts. Your cover letter is very important for getting your manuscript to peer review; give it time and attention.
  • Cut and paste your abstract, or sections of it, into the cover letter. That’s low-effort and low-readability. Reword it to make it pop.
  • Over-praise the editor or target journal – it’s not necessary to use such phrases as “your esteemed journal.” A manuscript will be sent for peer review based on the quality of the cover letter and study, not because you say nice things about the journal.
  • Forget to use the Word (or other software’s) spellcheck and, ideally, use a tool like Grammarly and/or Hemingway to help grammar and readability. These are no substitute for a professional edit, though.
  • Be overly proud about your English skills. Just like you go to the dentist to get your teeth fixed, you can hire a professional editor and subject matter expert to get your English fixed.

Not that a lot of these also reply to resubmission letters and responses to peer review . The underlying themes are care, courtesy, and excellent English suitable for your audience.

And two more big DOs

  • DO get a professional edit or proofread if you’re not a native speaker of English or just not that great at writing.

DO have a professional write your cover letter for you if you want to save some time and make sure you got everything just as the journal wants it. The Edanz Cover Letter Development service can handle this for you.

cover letter for case study report

Set phrases and common expressions

The journal letter maintains a formal tone, so there are certain stock phrases you can use and in some cases must use. As a result, there are a number of phrases which are common to cover letters.

These include:

  • To our knowledge, this is the first report showing…
  • We believe our findings will appeal to the readership of [target journal name].
  • Please address all correspondence to:
  • We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

cover letter for case study report

“I’ve found about 60% of authors don’t submit a cover letter at all. It seems they just expect something magical to happen with their manuscript. Journal editors struggle with this: they’re not necessarily subject-area specialists. They wonder, ‘Why is the paper important?'” — Gareth Dyke , PhD Edanz Author Education Manager

Commonly required statements

Many journals and publishers require that all cover letters should contain the following sentences:

  • We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal.
  • All authors have read and approved the final manuscript and agree with its submission to [target journal name].

Competing interests

If all authors have no competing interests, you should include a statement indicating as such:

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

If an author does have competing interests, it’s a good idea to include details of these in your cover letter. You might also include funding information:

This study was supported by a grant from the [funding body].

Other required statements

Some other potentially required information:

  • Clinical trial registration database and number
  • Has this manuscript been published in another language? If so, has that journal editor given permission for this submission?
  • What other publications related to the same study have been published? (especially for clinical trial related manuscripts)
  • Has the data in your study been presented or been published in any other format? For studies involving human subjects, was informed consent obtained? Was permission obtained from an ethics committee? Was the study carried in accordance with Declaration of Helsinki guidelines?
  • Was permission obtained for the reproduction or modification of previously published figures and tables (especially for review articles).

The journal’s guidelines will typically give specific directions on which of these to include, if any. And if you have any questions, get in touch with them directly.

Journal submission tips and hacks from the experts

Most of these are plain common sense, but if you’re in a hurry, you might overlook them. Some are less commonly known.

Be personal, use the editor’s name

Do your homework. Look up the name of the Editor-in-Chief or the specific Section Editor for the journal you’re submitting to and address the letter to them directly.

Use Dear Dr. (or Professor) + their Last name . If you’re not sure of their title, Google them to see if they have a LinkedIn page, ResearchGate page, or works published in the last couple of years. If you still can’t confirm their title, use Dear Full name as shown on the journal’s webpage .

It’s like a cover letter for a job; you need to personalize your cover letter to demonstrate your interest in that particular journal, and not make it look like you’d just be happy to get your paper accepted anywhere.

You should also explain why your study will be of specific interest to the readers of the journal.

Check the Aims & Scope on the journal website to see who their target audience is and tailor your reasoning to them.

Edanz Learning Lab – cover letters

Tell them what you want to publish

This may seem obvious, but sometimes authors submit cover letters without including the title of their manuscript and what type of article it is.

This should appear in the very first paragraph of your letter and will help the editor see immediately if the topic is of interest and judge whether they have space for the article type you’re submitting for the current issue.

Even more, it will show that you thoroughly read the guidelines. If you say you’re submitting “Original Research” when the journal calls it “Research Articles”, you’re not making a very good first impression.

Summarize the highlights of your work

It’s not enough to simply include the title of your manuscript in the cover letter and hope that alone will attract the editor.

Try to keep the cover letter to one page, but always include a brief summary of your study outlining the reasons why you conducted the work, your aims, and the major results you observed. If that makes you go a bit longer, it’s not a big deal.

Don’t include statistics or a lot of data; a compelling summary of the study is sufficient. If the editor is interested, they’ll look into your manuscript more deeply for further details.

Sell yourself

Cover letters are your chance to talk directly with the journal editor and convince them that your paper is more interesting than the next one sitting on their desk. Talk about any real-world implications of your findings or the significance of your results for the field. Don’t be too speculative or over-exaggerate your findings, but do take this important opportunity to feature the importance of your work.

Don’t forget your “must have” statements

Editors want to know that your manuscript has not been submitted elsewhere or is under consideration at another journal.

They want to know any relevant conflict of interest information and any roles the funding body played in the study.

The author instructions may or may not have explicit information on what they want you to write, but it’s good practice to state this information upfront. This way, the editor doesn’t have to dig through the manuscript to know if you’ve met the basic ethical requirements for publication.

See it in action: Edanz video on writing cover letters

We laid out the basics of a cover letter in this video.

And if you don’t want to start with a blank document…

Get a cover letter template

It’s all easier said than done, right?

Download a template to plug-and-play your text.

cover letter for case study report

Download the above short-form or long-form cover letter from the Edanz Learning Lab template collection .

“When I became a journal editor, I really learned how important cover letters are. We need them to learn more about submissions and to make more informed decisions on whether to send manuscripts out for peer review. As a journal editor, I greatly appreciate a carefully written cover letter; it saves me time and it shows me the authors really care. It also helps with reviewer selections … something I rarely have time to do.” — Gareth Dyke , PhD Editor-in-Chief of Taylor & Francis journal ‘Historical Biology’

By the way, not all cover letters are the same, though most are. PLOS ONE cover letters are a notable exception and have certain requirements for what you need to tell them, such as which of their Academic Editors you want to review your submission. See their guidelines here .

So, all set to do your cover letter? Now go find a forever home for your manuscript and tell them why they’re the perfect fit for you.

Want to dig deeper into the publication process, soup to nuts, ideas to publication? Take simple, expert-designed courses to walk you through it all, at the Edanz My Learning Lab .

U.S. flag

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
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • v.11(2); Apr-Jun 2019

Guideline on writing a case report

Basim saleh alsaywid.

1 Department of Surgery, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of National Guard, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

2 Department of Research Unit, College of Medicine, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Nada Mansour Abdulhaq

3 Department of Pediatric, Rabigh Branch, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

4 Department of Medicine, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Research is an important competency that should be mastered by medical professionals. It provides an opportunity for physicians to develop numerous skills including communication, collaboration, time management, and teamwork. Case report, as a research design, describes important scientific observations that are encountered in a clinical setting to expand our knowledge base. Preparing a case report is far easier than conducting any other elaborative research design. Case report, with its main components, should be focused and delivers a clear message. In this article, the key components of a case report were described with the aim of providing guidance to novice authors to improve the quality of their reporting.

INTRODUCTION

“The best teaching of medicine is that taught by the patient himself” is a famous statement by William Osler which describes the opportunities we have as physicians to learn from our encounters with patients.[ 1 ] This learning experience, based on the observation of clinical cases, can be transferred to others, locally, nationally, and internationally, through communication and reporting. A case report is the first effort for many doctors, and other health professionals to convey a message to the entire medical profession by the means of specialized journal and remain essential to the art of medicine.[ 2 ] The purpose of the case report is to expand our knowledge on clinical manifestation, diagnostic approach, or therapeutic alternative of a disease, ultimately, to improve the quality of care provided to our patients. A case report that is worth reading should, therefore, contain both practical and educational messages.[ 3 , 4 ]

The clinical case report has been an integral part of medical literature throughout history. The oldest example of a preserved clinical case in medical literature is a text from an ancient Egyptian papyrus dating from the 16 th to the 17 th dynasty, 1600 BC, addressing the management of dislocated jawbone.[ 5 ] From Hippocratic case histories, “Epidemics” 400 BC, through Galenic case reports, in the second century AD, case reports were usually used to tell other doctors or colleagues about interesting cases they have encountered. Muslim scholars have reported case histories as well, particularly, Abu Bakr Mohamed Ibn Zakariya Al-Razi (865–929 AD), where he left a large collection of case reports in his 25-volume medical encyclopedia “Kitab Al-Hawi.”[ 5 ]

Those case histories were not a publication but rather a documentation or a message between the medical professionals, and it is usually kept in their records. Case reports have now been developed and accepted as a scholarly publication to disseminate knowledge to a wide medical audience.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CASES REPORT

The case report is a research design where an unexpected or novel occurrence is described in a detailed report of findings, clinical course, and prognosis of an individual patient, which might be, but not mandatory, accompanied by a review of the literature of other reported cases. Although case reports are considered the lowest in the hierarchy of evidence-based practice in the medical literature [ Figure 1 ], it provides essential information for unfamiliar events and shared individual experiences, for better understanding and optimizing patient care. This approach might generate an idea or hypothesis, but it will not be confirmed unless we conduct further confirmatory quantitative experimental or observational study designs such as clinical trials or cohort studies. Despite that, case report provides the medical community with information which cannot be picked up by any other designs. Just to name a few, in 1819, James Parkinson published a case report entitled “An essay on the shaking palsy”[ 6 ] and lead to the discovery of Parkinson's disease. And in 1981, a case report was published in the literature as “Preliminary communication on extensively disseminated Kaposi sarcoma in a young homosexual man”[ 7 ] few years later, HIV from this case report was discovered. Furthermore, in 2012, Ali Zaki reported an article in New England Journal of Medicine titled “Isolation of a novel coronavirus from a man with pneumonia in Saudi Arabia” which ultimately, lead to the discovery of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus.[ 8 ] All those previous examples show how important is case report in the advancement of medical practice. The case report might be in the tail of the hierarchy of evidence-based medicine but if properly selected and appropriately reported it might stand a better chance of publication in high impact journals than even a clinical trial.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is UA-11-126-g001.jpg

Hierarchy of evidence base medicine

Some scientist classifies case reports as a qualitative study design, others might consider it a quantitative approach or even a mixed method design.[ 9 ] This polarization of the case report is unfair. However, if we have to categorize it; when we consider all research approaches in medicine, it can be classified into exploratory or confirmatory; then, case reports definitely will be considered an exploratory research approach. Case report can be classified as a single case report, two case reports or case series, which aggregate more than two cases in a report. Case reports are usually retrospective by nature, however, it can be prospectively designed, for example, applying a new diagnostic or management approach or guideline of a particular health condition to discover new cases.[ 10 ]

Cases deemed appropriate for a publication are listed in Table 1 .[ 3 ] Despite these restrictive criteria, any case report could have a reasonable chance of publication even if it was not novel, as long as it was authentic, lead to an incremental advance in medicine or carries an educational value.

Criteria for published case report

STAGES IN PREPARING A CASE REPORT

The source of case reports is clinical setting, every single patient is a potential case report therefore, always keep an eye on unusual cases in your practice either in the ward or in the clinic. Once a potential case is identified, and the patient is in hospital, follow him through hospitalization until discharge. Give the case an appropriate time frame in the course of the disease to observe the development over time. Wait for 6 months during multiple visits, before you start writing a case report to allow adequate time to complete the clinical course.

Once you have a potential case, how would you know if this is an appropriate for reporting or not? Especially if you are a novice physician, once you encounter a possible case and you are suspecting if this patient fulfills one of those criteria which are described in Table 1 . The first step is a high index of suspicion; keep your eyes open for every case, once you suspect a case then ask your colleagues either directly or in a group related to the same discipline, locally, to confirm that this could be a case report. The next step would be asking an expert from the national or international medical community about this case scenario, get their opinion and feedback, including the appropriateness of reporting this case. Once the feedback is positive, perform extensive literature search, through PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and databases for case reports to ensure that you retrieve all available information on this topic. Do not forget to look at popular case reports which are not indexed in PubMed and read through previously published case reports that will enhance your understanding of the subject and gives you a general scaffold to prepare your own report.

Once the decision was made to report this case, obtain an informed consent from the patient; otherwise, it will not be accepted for publication. Moreover, take a permission from consultant in-charge of the case before writing your report.

Once you have reviewed the literature and improved your knowledge on the topic, use the patient's note to record the key points in history, examination findings, relevant data results and interpretation, treatment (including operational findings), and outcomes. Delete all patients’ personal information, identifiers or contact detailed from the prepared report, including the radiological or histopathological images before you copy them into your article. Save the prepared report on a password protected hospital computer.

The last step would be checking the journal which is most appropriate for your case report. Those journals provide you with the required criteria and appropriate format to prepare your report, to enhance their acceptability for publication. Many journals are interested in published case reports, but not all. In 2007, the first case report journal was created “Journal of Medical Case Reports” since then, the interest raised and many other journals dedicated for case reports were created including a specific database for all case reports are aggregated and continuously updated from several publishers.[ 3 ]

FORMAT FOR WRITING A CASE REPORTS

The word count for case report may vary from one journal to another, but generally should not exceed 1500 words, therefore, your final version of the report should be clear, concise, and focused, including only relevant information with enough details.[ 3 ] If a shorter version is required by the journal, then you can always edit or trim off the discussion section of your article. The general format adopted for most case reports is detailed in the following subsection and summarized as a checklist in Table 2 .

Checklist for writing a case report

This is the most commonly read part of your article; therefore, it should be relevant, concise, informative, descriptive, and appealing enough to attract readers to your report. It is placed in the first page of the manuscript, but some journal might request you to specify a separate file from the manuscript, labeled as a “title page” file. In preparing the title, avoid unnecessary words, wordplay, double meaning, cute wording, and never uses abbreviations in the title. It is always advisable to add “case report” in your title. Beneath the title, list all authors and their affiliations on the same page including their E-mails account. Most of the case reports are not prepared by a single author, but it should not exceed more than six authors; otherwise, the journal might not accept your case report for publication. Finally, under the subsection of corresponding author, assign one author to communicate with the journal and include all details of communication, such as institutional address, E-mail, and phone numbers.

Who should be the corresponding author? Any person who will submit the article to the journal to get the feedback from the editor of the journal and should be one of the article's authors.

It is the most important part of your article as it will be freely accessible for others to read when retrieved from any medical databases during the relevant search. However, it is the last part written in your article. It should include a brief summary that gives a general idea of the content of the case report. It should not include any references or abbreviations and should not exceed 350 words, preferably <250 words. Check your journal instructions for a detailed guideline on word counts. The abstract is usually arranged into three subsections: background, case presentation, and conclusion. The background should clarify the importance of reporting such a unique case. Afterward, a brief description of the clinical scenario of the patient listing only the important details. Finally, the conclusion should be brief with lesson learned and impact on the interested group.

This is quite important for indexing your article, and it should be from three to ten words, and you should be very careful in your selection, as it would help in retrieving your paper during the search.

Introduction

In this section, the definition and brief description of the pathology, including common presentations and disease progression is discussed, explaining the background of the selected topic. Followed by a brief description of what is about to be reported and the importance of reporting such case. The content should be clear, focused, concise, and attract the reader's attention and interest.

Case presentation

Provide a clear picture of the patient's condition and presentation, and it is best presented in chronological order with sufficient detail and explanation. Describe the relevant demographic information of the patient censoring any details that could lead to the patient being identified. Start with the current medical condition and primary complaint with detailed history including relevant family history, occupational and social history, medication, and allergy. Findings of physical examination should be briefly reported with all relevant investigation, laboratory results and images, and its analysis. Describe the differential diagnosis and the rational of the management approach, including follow-up results and final diagnosis. Avoid any extensive interpretation or defense for the approach you took. This section can be broken up into small subsections if needed, and it should be supplemented with necessary images and tables to facilitate reader's understanding of the case.

Probably, this is an optional section, but it is preferable if reported, as it would explain more of your rational and approach with added additional relevant information about the uniqueness of this case. Compare your findings with what is known in the literature and why you think this case is different. Only discuss what is relevant to your case and do not provide any unproven and unsupported speculation. Acknowledge and explain any ambiguity or unexpected features occurred even if it is contradicting your concept. Explain how this case would contribute to the literature and suggest justifiable recommendations.

The section should include a concise and brief statement, explaining the importance and relevance of your case and it should relate to the purpose of the paper.

Patient's perspective

This new section is an optional, but it adds a new dimension to your paper, as it gives the chance to patients with their own perspective to write and describe their experiences throughout the disease process. Make sure that any patient's identifiers are removed, and his identity is managed appropriately with confidentiality, removing all irrelevant information to the case report.

Before submission, make sure that the patient gave his informed consent for publication, and statement indicating that should be clearly narrated in the report. You do not need to send the consent form on submission, but it should be available if requested. In case of the child, the parent or legal guardian should be consented instead, and if the child is a teenager then both patient and his parent should be consented. Many journals will not proceed with the peer review process unless a statement like “written informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication” is clearly stated. This statement could be in a separate section, as indicated here, or within the content of the report. If the patient is incapacitated or deceased, obtain the consent from the next-of-kin, and this should be stated clearly in the report. If the patient is deceased and next-of-kin is unreachable, you should exhaust all reasonable attempts to obtain the consent. If you fail, then you should state that in your report. If the patient is still alive but unreachable and you did not obtain the consent, do not bother publishing the case.[ 3 ]

Competing of interest

In this mandatory part, all authors should disclose any financial competing interest. If none, then, a statement like “the authors declare that they have no competing interests” should be clearly stated.

Author contribution

In this section, you need to credit all individuals who made a substantial contribution to the production of this study. Criteria of qualification to be an author should be strictly followed and explicitly stated for each author, separately. The first criterion is being a part of the conceptual development, data acquisition or analysis, then involvement in drafting part of the manuscript, and finally approving the final version of the manuscript. If those criteria are not fulfilled, then those individuals should be acknowledged in the next section. Be cautious from excessive authorship as this might lead to rejecting your article.

You need to mention around 15 references if possible, and few of them should be within the past 5 years, but do not exceed more than 25 references.

Cover letter

This is an optional supplementary document, addressed to the editor-in-chief, in a formal letter. Explain why this report is important and why it should be published in this journal.

JOURNAL EVALUATION FOR A CASE REPORT

Writing a case report varies from one physician to another, depending on the expertise of the author who prepared the report. This variation is influenced by many factors ranging from the author's knowledge base to his writing skills. The Peer review process will detect this variation to assure the quality of reporting through critical appraisal. It will assess the report, provide a valuable, supposedly constructive, feedback and helps the editor in a decision regarding the publication. This assessment should be as objective as possible to reach an unbiased decision. Therefore, several schemes were formulated to evaluate the quality of the case report. One of which is the Piersons 5-component scheme which relays on five major components, each component is scored from 0 to two, with a possible total score of 10 and lowest score of zero. The five major components are uniqueness, documentation, interpretation, objectivity, and educational value.[ 11 ] If the calculated score is more than 8, then this report is worth publishing. A score from 6 to 8, indicate possible publication with caution about validity. Any score <6, indicate the insufficient quality of the case report. Further details about this evaluation scheme are explained in Table 3 .

Matrix of case report evaluation

The calculated total score: Score of 9-10: Excellent report and most likely will add new information to the medical literature, Score of 6-8: Can be published but reader should be caution of validity and clinical value, Score of 5 or Less: Report is considered inadequate and inappropriate for publication

Case report remains an important source of information and common method in knowledge dissemination among physicians due to its simplicity in design. It will continue providing new research ideas through hypotheses generation. Finally, as I commenced my article with William Osler, I will end by quoting his other famous statement…. “Always note and record the unusual…. Publish it, place it on permanent record as a short, concise note. Such communication is always of value.”

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgment

You need to mention and acknowledge the source of the research fund if any. Moreover, acknowledging all people who helped you, supervised you, or assisted you in finalizing this report, if they are not fulfilling the criteria to be an author.

BMJ Author Hub

Writing and formatting

In this section:

  • NEW! Featured Author Support
  • Language editing services
  • Reproducing third party illustrative materials
  • Suggesting reviewers
  • Writing a cover letter
  • Video abstracts
  • Video: How to submit your article

The cover letter gives you the opportunity to present an overview of your manuscript to the editor.

Your cover letter should include

  • The objective and approach of your research
  • Any novel contributions reported
  • Why your manuscript should be published in this journal
  • Any special considerations about your submission
  • Related papers by you and/or your fellow authors (published or under consideration)
  • Previous reviews of your submission
  • Previous submissions of your manuscript to that journal
  • Previous communication you’ve had with journal staff

You’re encouraged to submit previous communications as they can help expedite the review process. If you have any of the following, you can submit them as ‘Supplementary file for editors only’:

  • Copies of related papers
  • Previous editors’ comments and your responses
  • Previous reviewers’ comments and your responses

NIH Employees

If you or any of your co-authors are NIH employees, you will have to submit a completed and signed NIH Publishing Agreement and Manuscript Cover Sheet according to NIH’s Employee Procedures .

  • Affiliate Program

Wordvice

  • UNITED STATES
  • 台灣 (TAIWAN)
  • TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
  • Academic Editing Services
  • - Research Paper
  • - Journal Manuscript
  • - Dissertation
  • - College & University Assignments
  • Admissions Editing Services
  • - Application Essay
  • - Personal Statement
  • - Recommendation Letter
  • - Cover Letter
  • - CV/Resume
  • Business Editing Services
  • - Business Documents
  • - Report & Brochure
  • - Website & Blog
  • Writer Editing Services
  • - Script & Screenplay
  • Our Editors
  • Client Reviews
  • Editing & Proofreading Prices
  • Wordvice Points
  • Partner Discount
  • Plagiarism Checker
  • APA Citation Generator
  • MLA Citation Generator
  • Chicago Citation Generator
  • Vancouver Citation Generator
  • - APA Style
  • - MLA Style
  • - Chicago Style
  • - Vancouver Style
  • Writing & Editing Guide
  • Academic Resources
  • Admissions Resources

How to Write a Case Study | Examples & Methods

cover letter for case study report

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that provides an in-depth examination of a particular phenomenon, event, organization, or individual. It involves analyzing and interpreting data to provide a comprehensive understanding of the subject under investigation. 

Case studies can be used in various disciplines, including business, social sciences, medicine ( clinical case report ), engineering, and education. The aim of a case study is to provide an in-depth exploration of a specific subject, often with the goal of generating new insights into the phenomena being studied.

When to write a case study

Case studies are often written to present the findings of an empirical investigation or to illustrate a particular point or theory. They are useful when researchers want to gain an in-depth understanding of a specific phenomenon or when they are interested in exploring new areas of inquiry. 

Case studies are also useful when the subject of the research is rare or when the research question is complex and requires an in-depth examination. A case study can be a good fit for a thesis or dissertation as well.

Case study examples

Below are some examples of case studies with their research questions:

These examples demonstrate the diversity of research questions and case studies that can be explored. From studying small businesses in Ghana to the ethical issues in supply chains, case studies can be used to explore a wide range of phenomena.

Outlying cases vs. representative cases

An outlying case stud y refers to a case that is unusual or deviates significantly from the norm. An example of an outlying case study could be a small, family-run bed and breakfast that was able to survive and even thrive during the COVID-19 pandemic, while other larger hotels struggled to stay afloat.

On the other hand, a representative case study refers to a case that is typical of the phenomenon being studied. An example of a representative case study could be a hotel chain that operates in multiple locations that faced significant challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as reduced demand for hotel rooms, increased safety and health protocols, and supply chain disruptions. The hotel chain case could be representative of the broader hospitality industry during the pandemic, and thus provides an insight into the typical challenges that businesses in the industry faced.

Steps for Writing a Case Study

As with any academic paper, writing a case study requires careful preparation and research before a single word of the document is ever written. Follow these basic steps to ensure that you don’t miss any crucial details when composing your case study.

Step 1: Select a case to analyze

After you have developed your statement of the problem and research question , the first step in writing a case study is to select a case that is representative of the phenomenon being investigated or that provides an outlier. For example, if a researcher wants to explore the impact of COVID-19 on the hospitality industry, they could select a representative case, such as a hotel chain that operates in multiple locations, or an outlying case, such as a small bed and breakfast that was able to pivot their business model to survive during the pandemic. Selecting the appropriate case is critical in ensuring the research question is adequately explored.

Step 2: Create a theoretical framework

Theoretical frameworks are used to guide the analysis and interpretation of data in a case study. The framework should provide a clear explanation of the key concepts, variables, and relationships that are relevant to the research question. The theoretical framework can be drawn from existing literature, or the researcher can develop their own framework based on the data collected. The theoretical framework should be developed early in the research process to guide the data collection and analysis.

To give your case analysis a strong theoretical grounding, be sure to include a literature review of references and sources relating to your topic and develop a clear theoretical framework. Your case study does not simply stand on its own but interacts with other studies related to your topic. Your case study can do one of the following: 

  • Demonstrate a theory by showing how it explains the case being investigated
  • Broaden a theory by identifying additional concepts and ideas that can be incorporated to strengthen it
  • Confront a theory via an outlier case that does not conform to established conclusions or assumptions

Step 3: Collect data for your case study

Data collection can involve a variety of research methods , including interviews, surveys, observations, and document analyses, and it can include both primary and secondary sources . It is essential to ensure that the data collected is relevant to the research question and that it is collected in a systematic and ethical manner. Data collection methods should be chosen based on the research question and the availability of data. It is essential to plan data collection carefully to ensure that the data collected is of high quality

Step 4: Describe the case and analyze the details

The final step is to describe the case in detail and analyze the data collected. This involves identifying patterns and themes that emerge from the data and drawing conclusions that are relevant to the research question. It is essential to ensure that the analysis is supported by the data and that any limitations or alternative explanations are acknowledged.

The manner in which you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard academic paper, with separate sections or chapters for the methods section , results section , and discussion section , while others are structured more like a standalone literature review.

Regardless of the topic you choose to pursue, writing a case study requires a systematic and rigorous approach to data collection and analysis. By following the steps outlined above and using examples from existing literature, researchers can create a comprehensive and insightful case study that contributes to the understanding of a particular phenomenon.

Preparing Your Case Study for Publication

After completing the draft of your case study, be sure to revise and edit your work for any mistakes, including grammatical errors , punctuation errors , spelling mistakes, and awkward sentence structure . Ensure that your case study is well-structured and that your arguments are well-supported with language that follows the conventions of academic writing .  To ensure your work is polished for style and free of errors, get English editing services from Wordvice, including our paper editing services and manuscript editing services . Let our academic subject experts enhance the style and flow of your academic work so you can submit your case study with confidence.

Disclaimer » Advertising

  • HealthyChildren.org

Pediatrics is the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics . Pediatrics publishes original research, clinical observations, and special feature articles in the field of pediatrics, as broadly defined. Contributions pertinent to pediatrics also include related fields such as nutrition, surgery, dentistry, public health, child health services, human genetics, basic sciences, psychology, psychiatry, education, sociology, and nursing.

Pediatrics considers unsolicited manuscripts in the following categories: reports of original research, particularly clinical research; review articles; special articles; and case reports. When preparing a manuscript for Pediatrics , authors must first determine the manuscript type and then prepare the manuscript according to the specific instructions below.

The digital edition of Pediatrics is the journal of record. Some accepted article types may also be presented in full in print, in addition to the digital edition of Pediatrics .

Acceptance Criteria

Relevance to readers is of primary importance in manuscript selection. The readership includes general and specialist pediatricians, pediatric researchers and educators, and child health policy-makers.  Pediatrics  receives many more high-quality manuscripts than can be accommodated in our available space. The acceptance rate is approximately 10%. An article that is thought by the editors to not be relevant to readers, outside of scope, or very unlikely to be accepted may be rejected without review. All manuscripts considered for publication are peer reviewed, including those written by members of the Editorial Board. Peer reviewers are selected by the editors. Selection is based on their expertise in the topic of the manuscript. Generally, at least 2 reviews are required before a decision is rendered. Authors can suggest reviewers who they believe should not review the manuscript but should provide a clear rationale for this request.

Authors should carefully follow instructions for manuscript preparation and ensure that the manuscript is proofread before submission. Manuscripts that do not follow the author instructions will not be considered for review. Careless preparation of a manuscript raises concerns about the quality of the work and makes acceptance less likely. Manuscripts are electronically scanned for plagiarism. Authors will be contacted if there is concern about potential plagiarism. Pediatrics follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics for concerns about plagiarism or any other manuscript-related ethical issue.

Manuscripts are judged on the importance, originality, scientific strength, clinical relevance, and clarity of content.  Pediatrics  does not publish manuscripts that focus only on animal research. Refer to the sections below on the particular considerations for each of the manuscript types that appear in the journal. Authors should also consider the comprehensive reporting guidelines for a wide variety of study designs that are available at  http://www.equator-network.org/home/ . These can be helpful in improving manuscript clarity and completeness. Note that authors submitting manuscripts describing adverse drug or medical device events or product problems should also report these to the appropriate governmental agency. Responses to a published article should be submitted as online comments. The editors will determine which comments will be published in the journal as Letters to the Editor.

After the reviews are received, the editors may take one of the following actions:  Accept ;  Accept with Revisions ;  Reject with option to Resubmit ; Reject, or Reject and Transfer (if authors opted to have their manuscript transferred to Hospital Pediatrics in not accepted by Pediatrics ) . A rejected manuscript may not be resubmitted. A manuscript may be rejected with an option to resubmit with extensive revision. The resubmitted manuscript receives an additional round of peer review (which may include new reviewers), and the manuscript may or may not be accepted. A decision of  Accept with Revision  indicates that the editors intend to accept the manuscript contingent on adequate response to reviewers. A decision of  Accept , which is exceedingly rare on first submission, indicates that the manuscript is ready to place into production without further modification. Appeals on decisions will be considered by the editorial board on a case-by-case basis.

↑ Back to Top ↑

Publication Ethics

Authorship. An “author” is someone who has made substantive intellectual contributions to a published study. Each author is required to meet ALL FOUR of the following criteria:

  • Substantial contribution(s) to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; and
  • Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and
  • Final approval of the version to be published, and
  • Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

NOTE: Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute a sufficient basis for authorship .

All persons listed as authors must meet these criteria, and all persons who meet these criteria must be listed as authors. Articles submitted with an unexpectedly large number of authors invite scrutiny by editors and reviewers for clear justification for the presence of each person on the authorship list. Pediatrics permits a statement of equal contribution for two first authors and two senior authors. On the title page, include asterisks by each name and a statement that reads: * Contributed equally as co-first authors or *Contributed equally as co-senior authors.

Decide authorship issues, including the order, before submission. Pediatrics  does not allow addition or removal of authors or changes to the author order after a manuscript is submitted without explicit approval from the editors.

If published, author names and affiliations will appear as seen in the submitted manuscript Word document and the final typeset proofs. All authors must ensure that their information is correct. 

Conflict of Interest and Disclosure. After a paper is accepted by Pediatrics for publication, all authors must submit conflict of interest and disclosure forms. Pediatrics adheres to the policy and uses the standardized disclosure form of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The collection of the forms is automated within the online system.

IRB Approval. All studies that involve human subjects must be approved or deemed exempt by an official institutional review board; this should be noted in the Methods section of the manuscript.

Industry Sponsorship . All industry sponsorship must be declared in the manuscript. Manuscripts in which all authors are employed by a commercial entity can raise additional scrutiny from the editorial board. 

Registration of Clinical Trials. All clinical trials must be registered in a World Health Organization-approved Clinical Trial registry prior to enrollment of the first subject. The registry name and registration number should be included on the title page. Reports of unregistered trials will be returned to authors without review. Publication of the results of a trial that was initiated prior to the ICMJE requirement for trial registration will be considered by the editors on a case-by-case basis.

Suspected Errors and Allegations of Misconduct.  Pediatrics follows the processes outlined in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) flowcharts when investigating suspected errors and allegations of misconduct. Please be aware that all investigations are confidential. If an error has been found or misconduct has been identified, the journal will publicly acknowledge the outcome through an erratum or retraction, depending on the severity of the issue. Investigations that result in no error or misconduct being found will not be publicized.

Editorial Board Members as Authors. The journal allows editorial board members to submit articles for consideration. These articles undergo the same rigorous peer review as all other submissions. The manuscript management system automatically blinds a user with administrative access from viewing a manuscript for which they are an author, so author editorial board members cannot view the manuscript from the administrative side once it has been submitted.

Editor Conflict of Interest:  Journal editors recuse themselves from manuscripts for which they have a conflict of interest.

Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools do not qualify for authorship. To qualify, authors must meet all four of the following criteria 1 :

AI tools cannot take responsibility for the accuracy or integrity of a manuscript and, therefore, do not qualify for authorship. 2  

While the use of AI tools is discouraged, if generative AI tools are used in any part of manuscript preparation, from writing to data analysis to image creation, the authors must report it in the Methods and Acknowledgments sections 3 and note use of an AI tool in the cover letter. Identification of AI must include the name and manufacturer of the AI tool and how it was used in relation to the work being submitted. 2 Authors are accountable for the integrity and accuracy of all material in their manuscript, including any content generated by AI. 3

  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors. Available at: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html. Accessed April 7, 2023
  • World Association of Medical Editors. Chatbots, ChatGPT, and Scholarly Manuscripts. Available at: https://wame.org/page3.php?id=106. Accessed April 7, 2023
  • Committee on Publication Ethics. Authorship and AI Tools. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author. Accessed April 7, 2023

Use of Inclusive Language

Articles published in Pediatrics should use the most inclusive language possible. These recommendations are intended to guide authors but are not comprehensive. As the preferred terminology related to inclusive language evolves over time, these recommendations will be updated continuously. Please reach out to the editorial office for clarifications or suggestions.    Appropriate Use of Race and/or Ethnicity

The rationale for including race and/or ethnicity in a manuscript should always be provided. Race and ethnicity should be acknowledged as social constructs rather than as genetic or biological categories. In research articles, justification for including race and/or ethnicity should be described in the Methods section. Please also note if reporting race and/or ethnicity is required by the funder. The Methods section should also include a clear explanation of how race and/or ethnicity were assigned (eg, self-report, observation by an investigator or other third-party, electronic health record with uncertain method). Use of “other” as a category for race and/or ethnicity should be clearly defined. It is inappropriate to assign missing race and/or ethnicity to an “other” category. The use of racial and/or ethnic categories in statistical analyses should be justified in the Methods section, and the rationale for the comparator group should also be justified. Results related to race and/or ethnicity should be interpreted in the context of racism (eg, interpersonal, institutional, or internalized) and histories of exclusion, mistreatment, and exploitation, rather than as behaviors or presumed deficits. Please see the AMA Manual of Style Section 11.12.3: Race and Ethnicity for additional considerations.  Inclusive Language

  • Person-first language, which emphasizes the individual or group rather than the condition, disease, or situation, should generally be used, eg, “child(ren) with diabetes” and “child(ren) with obesity” rather than “diabetic child(ren)” and “obese child(ren).” Exceptions to first-person language include certain identity-first language for individuals and groups who prefer it, eg, “Deaf child(ren)” or “autistic child(ren).”
  • Race and ethnicity categories should be capitalized, including the White race. Race and ethnicity should be used as adjectives rather than nouns, eg, “Hispanic individuals” rather than “Hispanics.”  Race and ethnicity should be treated as separate categories rather than merging them, eg, “race and ethnicity” rather than “race/ethnicity.” 
  • Articles that report race and/or ethnicity should use the specific terms used in data collection or in the original study referenced. The terms should be accurate, understandable to study participants, and consistent with participants’ self-understanding. 
  • Refer to gender identity using terms such as “cisgender or transgender,” “man or woman,” “gender-nonbinary,” “genderqueer,” or “agender person,” etc., rather than “transgendered,” “transsexual,” or “transvestite.” Refer to the community as “transgender and non-binary” or “gender diverse,” rather than “gender non-conforming.”
  • Refer to sexual orientation using specific terms such as “heterosexual,” “lesbian,” “gay,” “bisexual,” “queer,” rather than terms such as “homosexual” or “non-heterosexual.” Refer to the “LGBTQ+ community” rather than the “gay community” unless referencing specific subgroups.  Restrict the use of “men who have sex with men” to refer to behaviors rather than to sexual orientation. 
  • Both pregnant women” and “pregnant people” are acceptable terms. Avoid substituting “pregnant women” with phrases such as “birthing people” or “people with uteruses.” Neutral terms, such as “pregnant patients” and “pregnant people” are inclusive alternatives. Authors of research studies should use the specific terms used in data collection or in the original study referenced. 
  • If using a medical eponym rather than the scientific terminology, consider historical associations that may make the term problematic. For example, Asperger, Reiter, Wegener, Wiskott-Aldrich, and Rett are Nazi-associated eponyms. If available, consider using a replacement term (eg, reactive arthritis vs. Reiter’s syndrome).

The following table provides suggestions for preferred terms, those to avoid, and rationale for why some terms should be avoided.

Images published in Pediatrics should be as inclusive as possible. Authors should strive to include images that reflect all children, including the full spectrum of skin color.  Historically, the lack of variation in images has contributed to limited understanding of how disease can manifest.

Journal Style

All aspects of the manuscript, including the formatting of tables, illustrations, and references and grammar, punctuation, usage, and scientific writing style, should be prepared according to the most current AMA Manual of Style ( http://www.amamanualofstyle.com ). 1

Author Listing. All authors’ names should be listed in their entirety, and should include institutional/professional affiliations and degrees held. If published, author names and affiliations will appear as seen in the submitted manuscript Word document and the final typeset proofs. All authors must ensure that their information is correct. 

Authoring Groups. To include an authoring group, note the following to ensure all individuals are correctly acknowledged:

  • On the title page, list any study group at the end of the author listing, preceded either by "for" or "on behalf of" and followed by an asterisk, such as: "on behalf of the XXXXX Study Group*."
  • Add the following line: “*A complete list of study group members appears in the Acknowledgments.” (Alternatively, list these non-author contributors in an Appendix and change the statement accordingly.)
  • Ensure that your Acknowledgments section, placed at the end of the main text and before the References, clearly delineates group members and non-group members. For example: "Members of Study Group ABC include: Person 1, Person 2, Person 3, Person 4. We also wish to acknowledge Person 5 and Person 6 for technical editing."
  • Do not list the group name as an author in the online metadata section. Only authors who fulfill all four authorship criteria should be included in the online metadata, the title page, and the contributors statement page. These authors should not be included in the acknowledgments, which are reserved for thanking non-author contributors.

Titles.    Pediatrics generally follows the guidelines of the AMA Manual of Style for titles. Titles should be concise and informative, containing the key topics of the work. Declarative sentences are discouraged as they tend to overemphasize a conclusion, as are questions, which are more appropriate for editorials and commentaries. Subtitles, if used, should expand on the title; however, the title should be able to stand on its own. It is appropriate to include the study design (“Randomized Controlled Trial”; “Prospective Cohort Study”, etc.) in subtitles. The location of a study should be included only when the results are unique to that location and not generalizable. Abbreviations and acronyms should be avoided. The full title will appear on the article, the inside table of contents, and in MEDLINE. Full titles are limited to 97 characters, including spaces. Short titles must be provided as well and are limited to 55 characters, including spaces. Short titles may appear on the cover of the journal as space permits in any given issue.

Abbreviations. List and define abbreviations on the Title Page. Unusual abbreviations should be avoided. All terms to be abbreviated in the text should also be spelled out at first mention, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses. The abbreviation may appear in the text thereafter. Abbreviations may be used in the abstract if they occur 3 or more times in the abstract. Abbreviations should be avoided in tables and figures; if used they should be redefined in footnotes.

Units of Measure. Like many US-based journals, Pediatrics uses a combination of Système International (SI) 2,3 and conventional units. Please see the AMA Manual of Style for details.

Proprietary Products. Authors should use nonproprietary names of drugs or devices unless mention of a trade name is pertinent to the discussion. If a proprietary product is cited, the name and location of the manufacturer must also be included.

Page/Line Numbers. Include page numbers and line numbers in your manuscript so that editors and peer reviewers may more easily point out items/revisions. Line numbers may be continuous or restart on each page.

References. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of references. Citations should be numbered in the order in which they appear in the text. Reference style should follow that of the AMA Manual of Style , current edition. Abbreviated journal names should reflect the style of Index Medicus. Visit: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog/journals . If you used reference management software (eg, EndNote) to prepare your manuscript, you must convert the file to plain text prior to submission. Please note: The generated HTML page with the References is for staff/editorial use only; please do not use Word line numbering on your references.

  • Iverson C, Christiansen S, Flanagin A, et al. AMA Manual of Style . 10th ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2007.
  • Lundberg GD. SI unit implementation: the next step. JAMA . 1988;260:73-76.
  • Système International conversion factors for frequently used laboratory components. JAMA . 1991;266:45-47.

Clinical Trials

A study is considered a clinical trial if it prospectively assigns human subjects (whether randomized or not) to intervention or concurrent comparison or control groups to study the cause-and-effect relationship between a medical intervention and a health outcome. Medical interventions include drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioral treatments, process-of-care changes, and the like.

If authors report the results of a clinical trial, they must affirm that the study has been registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov or another WHO-approved national or international registry prior to the enrollment of the first subject. Information on requirements and appropriate registries is available at www.icmje.org . The trial registry name, registration number, and date of registration must be listed on the title page. To facilitate the review, please also provide the web link to the registration on the title page. Please also provide this registration information in the main methods section of the report.

All articles reporting results of clinical trials must include the Data Sharing Statement on their Title Page .

Authors are also required to complete both pages of a CONSORT Form (flowchart and checklist) and submit these with their manuscript. In our submission system, these files appear under “Instructions and Forms.” For observational epidemiological studies, follow the appropriate STROBE checklist .

Download a CONSORT form checklist (PDF) here .

Download a CONSORT form flowchart (PDF) here .

Reuse of Data Sets

If a manuscript uses the same or similar data contained in previously published articles, the authors must state this in the cover letter (and provide citations to the related or possibly duplicative materials).

If a separate manuscript by the same authors using the same data set is under review or accepted but not yet published in another journal, the authors must state this in the cover letter and provide enough information to assure that the manuscript submitted to Pediatrics is not duplicative.

Data Sharing

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) requires ICMJE journals to include data sharing statements in articles that report results of clinical trials.

Data sharing statements must include:

  • Whether deidentified participant data (including data dictionaries) will be shared
  • The data that will be shared
  • Whether additional documents will be made available
  • The start and end dates of data availability
  • Access criteria
  • How the data will be made available

The data sharing statement must be included on the title page of your manuscript and entered into the section provided in the manuscript management system.

If you will not be sharing your data, insert the following statement on your title page and in the manuscript submission system.

Data Sharing Statement: Deidentified individual participant data will not be made available.

If you will be sharing your data, refer to the table in the data sharing section of the ICMJE clinical trials page for examples of how to incorporate the required information into your statement, and refer to the example below.

Data Sharing Statement: Deidentified individual participant data (including data dictionaries) will be made available, in addition to study protocols, the statistical analysis plan, and the informed consent form. The data will be made available upon publication to researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal for use in achieving the goals of the approved proposal. Proposals should be submitted to ____________[INSERT EMAIL ADDRESS OR OTHER CONTACT INFORMATION].

Open Access

Pediatrics primarily publishes under the traditional subscription model (Hybrid OA), with a 12-month embargo, but also offers Green OA and Gold OA options. You will be able to state your requirements during the manuscript submission process. Ensure that your OA funds are available before submission. If you have any questions, please reach out to the journal’s editorial staff before final submission.

Formatting Requirements

All submissions must adhere to the following format:

  • Typeset in portrait orientation.
  • Times New Roman font, size 12, black.
  • Title Page, Contributors Statement Page, Abstract, Acknowledgments, and References should be single-spaced.
  • Only the Main Body Text should be double-spaced.
  • Main Submission Document as a Microsoft Word file (no PDFs).
  • Include line and page numbering in your Word document (excluding the References).
  • Do not include page headers or footers in new submissions.
  • Do not include footnotes within the manuscript body. Footnotes are allowed only in tables/figures.

Refer to the “Article Types” section for specific guidelines on preparing a manuscript in each category. Note in particular the requirements regarding abstracts for different categories of article.

Double-Blind Peer Review Manuscript Formatting

The journal offers the option of selecting single-blind or double-blind peer review. If selecting double-blind peer review, you must prepare your manuscript according to the following guidelines.

  • Upload a SEPARATE document (Word format only) containing your complete Title Page and Contributors Statement Page. Include ALL required Title Page and Contributors Statement Page information or your submission will be returned to you for correction.
  • When uploading your manuscript, upload the Title Page/Contributors Statement Page first by clicking the “Upload your title page” link.
  • Please make sure none of your other files have any identifying information on them, including the name of your institution. If you wish to include acknowledgments, include an Acknowledgments section on the title page (see Title Page).
  • In your manuscript file, remove references to the specific institution at which the study was performed and replace those mentions with generic descriptors of the setting as appropriate (eg, our 400-bed freestanding children’s hospital in the southeastern US).

The Title Page should appear first in your manuscript document if selecting single-blind peer review, or as a separate file if selecting double-blind peer review. If you select double-blind peer review and are including acknowledgments, those should appear at the end of the Title Page file. Depending on the individual needs of a paper, the Title Page may encompass more than one page.

Title pages for all submissions must include the following items (as shown in the sample Title Page ):

  • Title (97 characters [including spaces] or fewer)
  • Author listing. Full names for all authors, including degrees, and institutional/professional affiliations. These affiliations should list the institution where the research presented in the article took place; if the affiliation has changed, add a note indicating the additional affiliation. If published, author names and affiliations will appear as seen in the submitted manuscript Word document and the final typeset proofs; all authors must ensure that their information is correct. Pediatrics permits a statement of equal contribution for two first authors and two senior authors; on the title page, include asterisks by each name and a statement that reads: * Contributed equally as co-first authors or * Contributed equally as co-senior authors.
  • Corresponding Author. Contact information for the Corresponding Author (including: name, address, telephone, and e-mail). Note that the affiliation should list the institution where the research presented in the article took place; if the affiliation has changed, add a note indicating the additional affiliation. Pediatrics allows one Corresponding Author only; the position of Corresponding Author does not imply seniority or any other status.
  • Short title (55 characters [including spaces] or fewer). Please note: The short title may be used on the cover of the print edition.
  • Conflict of Interest Disclosures for all authors. This includes any potential conflicts of interest, any relevant financial relationships, and any other relationships or activities that could be perceived to have influenced the work. If none, say "The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article to disclose.”
  • Funding/Support . Research or project support, including internal funding, should be listed here; if the project was done with no specific support, please note that here. Technical and other assistance should be identified in Acknowledgments. If your funding body has open access requirements, please contact the Editorial Office prior to submission. Pediatrics offers Green OA and Gold OA options.
  • If applicable, Clinical Trial registry name, registration number, and data sharing statement . We adhere to ICMJE guidelines, which require that all trials must be registered with ClinicalTrials.gov or any other WHO Primary registry. All articles reporting results of clinical trials must also include the Data Sharing Statement .
  • Abbreviations . List and define abbreviations used in the text. If none, say "Abbreviations: none".
  • Article Summary.  All articles with abstracts require this summary. This brief summary is limited to 25 words. For accepted manuscripts, this will appear under the author names in the table of contents to give the reader a brief insight into what the article is about. It should entice the reader to read the full article. For example: "Through linkage of state Medicaid and Child Protective Services databases, this study captures similarities and differences in health care expenditures based on a history of child maltreatment."
  • For Regular Article submissions, include both the “What’s Known on This Subject" and the "What This Study Adds”  summaries (see below under Regular Article type for description). These are not needed for any other article type.

If a title page does not include all of the above items, the submission may be returned to the authors for completion.

  • Download and view a sample Title Page here .

Contributors Statement Page

All submissions must contain a Contributors Statement Page, directly following the Title Page(s) and in the specific format described below. Manuscripts lacking a properly formatted Contributors Statement Page will be returned to the authors for correction. If you select double-blind peer review, the Contributors Statement Page should be part of your separate Title Page file.

All persons designated as authors must qualify for authorship ( see "Publication Ethics" above ), and all those who qualify should be listed. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. The Contributors Statement Page lists the authors and specifies the contribution(s) made by each individual. If multiple individuals have identical contributions they may be listed together; do not list an author more than once.

You must follow the required format when creating your Contributors Statement Page or your manuscript will be returned for correction.

  • Each author should only appear once.
  • Use full names, not initials.
  • If multiple authors have identical contributions, you can list them in the same sentence; otherwise, list each author separately.
  • Conclude your statement by confirming that: All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Sample Contributors Statement:

Dr Katie Smith and Prof Clarence Jones conceptualized and designed the study, drafted the initial manuscript, and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript. Drs Sarah Brown, Jim Grey, and Susan Black designed the data collection instruments, collected data, carried out the initial analyses, and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript. Sam Johnson critically reviewed and revised the manuscript. Dr Allen Green conceptualized and designed the study, coordinated and supervised data collection, and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of a research group alone does not constitute a sufficient basis for authorship. Contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship (such as persons who helped recruit patients for the study, or professional editors) should be listed in an Acknowledgments section placed after the manuscript’s conclusion and before the References section. Because readers may infer their endorsement of the data and conclusions, these persons must give written permission to be acknowledged. These permissions do not need to be submitted with the manuscript unless requested by the editors.

To determine article length, count the body of the manuscript (from the start of the Introduction to the end of the Conclusion). The title page, contributors statement page, abstract, acknowledgments, references, figures, tables, and multimedia are not included.

Figures, Tables, and Supplementary Material

For any figure, table, or supplementary material reproduced or adapted from another source, authors are required to obtain permission from the copyright holder, and proof of permission must be uploaded at the time of submission. The legend must include a statement that the material was used or adapted with permission.

Authors should number figures in the order in which they appear in the text. Figures include graphs, charts, photographs, and illustrations. Each figure must include a legend (placed in a list appearing after the References) that does not exceed 50 words. Abbreviations previously expanded in the text are acceptable. Upload figures as separate files; list figure legends as the last item in your main Word/text file.  Do not paste figures into your manuscript text/Word file. There is no charge or maximum number for figures.

Figure arrays should be clearly labeled, preassembled, and submitted to scale. Figure parts of an array (A, B, C, etc.) should be clearly marked in capital letters in the upper left-hand corner of each figure part.

Style for figures:   Readers should be able to understand figures without referring to the text. Avoid pie charts, 3-dimensional graphs, and excess ink in general. Make sure that the axes on graphs are labeled, including units of measurement, and that the font is large enough to read. Generally delete legends or other material from the graph if it makes the picture smaller. Color graphs should be interpretable if photocopied in black and white.

Technical requirements for figures: The following file types are acceptable: TIFF, PDF, EPS. Color files must be submitted in their original RGB color. Pediatrics cannot accept Excel or PowerPoint files for any part of your submission.

The height of all figures should be less than or equal to 9.25” / 23.5 cm / 55.5 picas. The width of figures should be no smaller than 3.33" / 8.5 cm / 20 picas and no larger than 7" / 17.5 cm / 41.5 picas. Figure resolution should be 300 dpi for halftones (images with no text or line art), 600 dpi for combination halftones (images with text or line art), or 1000 dpi for monochrome line art.

For text within the figures, please use the same font for all figures in your manuscript, and use a standard font such as Arial, Helvetica, Times, Symbol, Mathematical Pi, and European Pi. Do not use varying letter type sizes within a single figure; use the same size or similar sizes throughout. The preferred font size is 8 points; the minimum font size is 6 points.

Remember to upload figures as separate files; list figure legends as the last item in your main Word/text file. Do not paste figures into your manuscript text/Word file.

Tables should be numbered in the order in which they are cited in the text and include appropriate headers. Tables should not reiterate information presented in the Results section, but rather should provide clear and concise data that further illustrate the main point. Tabular data should directly relate to the hypothesis. Table formatting should follow the current edition of the AMA Manual of Style . There is no maximum number of tables.

Technical requirements for tables: Tables should be constructed using a Microsoft Word program and inserted either in numerical order at the end of the main Word document (following the references) or as separate files. Tables may use any legible font size and may appear in portrait or landscape orientation; however, the main manuscript text pages must remain in portrait orientation. Do not provide tables in scan/image format. Pediatrics cannot accept Excel or PowerPoint files for any part of your submission. 

  • Do NOT include linked or cross-referencing cell functions and formulas in your Word document tables, as these can cause a file conversion error in the manuscript submission system.

Style for tables:   Tables should be self-explanatory. Avoid abbreviations; define any abbreviations in footnotes to the table. Avoid excess digits and excess ink in general. Where possible, rows should be in a meaningful order (eg, descending order of frequency). Provide units of measurement for all numbers. In general, only one type of data should be in each column of the table.

Presentation of Numbers and Statistics

  • Results in the abstract and the paper generally should include estimates of effect size and 95% confidence intervals, not just P values or statements that a difference is statistically significant. Where possible, focus on absolute and not relative differences. Measures of clinical impact like the number needed to treat can be especially helpful for our readers.
  • All statistical methods should be clearly described.
  • Units of independent variables must be provided in tables and results sections if regression coefficients are provided.
  • Equations should be typed exactly as they are to appear in the final manuscript. The following table, adapted from the guidelines for authors for the  Annals of Internal Medicine  by editors of  Medical Decision Making , shows how to present certain percentages and some statistical measures:

Supplemental Information

Authors may wish to include additional information in an appendix as part of their article. References to any online supplemental information must appear in the main article. Such supplemental information can include but are not limited to additional tables, figures, videos, audio files, slide shows, data sets (including qualitative data), and online appendices. If your study is based on a survey, consider submitting your survey instrument or the key questions as a data supplement. Authors are responsible for clearly labeling supplemental information and are accountable for its accuracy. Supplemental information will be peer reviewed, but not professionally copyedited.

Supplemental figures and tables should follow the same formatting requirements as main figures and tables.

Pediatrics encourages the submission of videos to accompany articles where relevant. Links can be placed in the article for use when it is accessed electronically. All videos must adhere to the same general permission rules that apply to figures (ie, parental consent when a patient is identifiable).

All videos should be submitted at the desired reproduction size and length. To avoid excessive delays in downloading the files, videos should be no more than 6MB in size and run between 30 and 60 seconds in length. In addition, cropping frames and image sizes can significantly reduce file sizes. Files submitted can be looped to play more than once, provided the file size does not become excessive. Video format must be either .mov or .mp4.

Authors will be notified if problems exist with videos as submitted and will be asked to modify them if needed. No editing will be done to the videos at the editorial office—all changes are the responsibility of the author.

Video files should be named clearly to correspond with the figure they represent (ie, figure1.mov, figure2.mp4, etc.). Be sure all video files have filenames that are no more than 8 characters long and include the suffix “.mov” or ".mp4." A caption for each video should be provided (preferably in a similarly named Word file submitted with the videos) stating clearly the content of the video presentation and its relevance to the materials submitted.

IMPORTANT: One to four traditional still images from the video must be provided. These still images may be published with the article and will act as thumbnail images that will link to the full video file. Please indicate clearly in your text whether a figure has a video associated with it, and be sure to indicate the name of the corresponding video file. A brief figure legend should also be provided.

Regular Article

Abstract length: 250 words or fewer (structured, as noted below) Article length: 3,000 words or fewer

Regular Articles are original research contributions that aim to inform clinical practice or the understanding of a disease process. Regular Articles include but are not limited to clinical trials, interventional studies, cohort studies, case-control studies, epidemiologic assessments, and surveys. Components of a Regular Article include:

  • What’s Known on This Subject
  • What This Study Adds

These two brief summaries are each limited to 40 words. Please use precise and accurate language in paragraph form (ie, not bullet points). For manuscripts accepted as Regular Articles, these summaries will become a highly visible part of your published paper, with prominence on the first page. Moreover, these summaries may be highlighted and presented in other areas of the journal. It is therefore paramount that you use language of the same caliber as the rest of your paper.

  • Structured Abstract (four paragraphs with headings in boldface type; single-spaced)

The abstract should consist of: Objectives or Background and Objectives, Methods, Results, and Conclusions. The Objective should clearly state the hypothesis; Methods, inclusion criteria and study design; Results, the outcome of the study; and Conclusions, the outcome in relation to the hypothesis and possible directions of future study.

  • Body of Article

For the body of your article, follow this general outline:

  • Introduction

A 1- to 2-paragraph introduction outlining the wider context that generated the study and the hypothesis.

This section should detail inclusion criteria and study design to ensure reproducibility of the research. All studies that involve human subjects must be approved or deemed exempt by an official institutional review board; this should be noted here.

This section should give specific answers to the aims or questions stated in the introduction.  The order of presentation of results should parallel the order of the methods section.

The section should highlight antecedent literature on the topic and how the current study changes the understanding of a disease process or clinical situation. It should include a section on the limitations of the present study.

A brief concluding paragraph presenting the implications of the study results and possible new research directions on the subject.

General submission instructions (including cover letter, title page requirements, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) apply to Regular Articles.

  • Download and view a sample Regular Article manuscript here .

Research Briefs

Abstract length: no abstract Article length: 700 words or fewer References:   Up to 10 references can be cited.

Research Briefs summarize original research describing preliminary findings or descriptive studies that although meaningful are better suited to a shorter, focused report than other article types that appear in the journal. Although there is no restriction on the type of study design for Research Briefs, clinical trials are in most cases better suited for submission as a Regular Article. 

Authors should follow the following format.

Introduction A brief paragraph summarizing the context of the report and any hypotheses.

Methods A concise description of the study design and approach.  All studies that involve human subjects must be approved or deemed exempt by an official institutional review board; this should be noted here.

Results A concise description of the findings.  A combined total of two tables or figures can be used.

Discussion A concise summary of how the findings influence the understanding of the topic.  The limitations should be clearly described.  Special attention should be on the implications and next steps that are needed beyond a statement that more research is needed.

  • Download and view a sample Research Brief manuscript here .

Advocacy Case Studies

Abstract length: 250 words or fewer (unstructured: no heading, single paragraph) Article length: 3,000 words or fewer Author limit: Four (4). All authors must have been engaged in the advocacy work described in the case study. Additional authors can be added with permission of the editors.

Advocacy Case Studies describe a specific, organized effort in child advocacy that results in changes to systems that affect child health and well-being.

These reports should focus on the advocacy process and outcomes of the intervention, not the evidence that underlies the advocacy work. We encourage reports that provide lessons that others could adopt.

Introduction What was the problem? Describe the local environment, situation, and motivation for the advocacy work. What was the overall goal of the advocacy work? Be specific and include objectives.

Methods and Process Who was involved in the advocacy work? Describe the stakeholders involved and how they were brought together. What was the approach of the advocacy work? Describe the challenges faced and how they were addressed. How was success defined and measured? What sources of assistance or support was central to the advocacy work?

Outcomes What were the results of your advocacy? Link these to the goals and objectives. Describe any communication of these results if integral to sustaining the project.

Lessons Learned What are the lessons learned from the advocacy work that are relevant for pediatricians and other child health care providers?

Conclusions How will your advocacy work be sustained? Describe any future plans.

The general submission instructions (including cover letter, title page, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to Advocacy Case Studies.

  • Download and view a sample Advocacy Case Studies manuscript here .

Case Report

Abstract length: 250 words or fewer (unstructured: no headings, run in a single paragraph) Article length: 1,600 words or fewer Author limit: Seven (7) authors or fewer (with rare exception)

Case Reports highlight unique presentations or aspects of disease processes that may expand the differential diagnosis and improve patient care. In general, case reports will include 10 cases or fewer. For a manuscript to be considered a Case Report, it must meet at least one of the following three criteria:

  • Challenge an existing clinical or pathophysiologic paradigm.
  • Provide a starting point for novel hypothesis-testing pre-clinical or clinical research.
  • Focus on topics pertinent to the pediatric generalist, allowing pediatrics colleagues to provide improved care. (Manuscripts meeting this criterion will be prioritized over other submissions.)

Case Reports should consist of an unstructured abstract that summarizes the case(s), a brief introduction (recommended length, 1-2 paragraphs), a section that details patient presentation, initial diagnosis and outcome, as well as a discussion that includes a brief review of the relevant literature and describes how this case brings new understanding about the presentation, diagnostic approach, and/or novel treatment of a disease. Case Reports that merely present, for example, the third published case of a clinical condition, that describe a patient who has 2 rare conditions, or that detail the youngest patient with a well-described disease do not on those merits alone meet the bar for publication in Pediatrics.

Authors may find the criteria for case reports as contained in the CARE guidelines useful in preparing their manuscript.

Written consent must be obtained from the parent or guardian. You do not need to include a copy with your submission unless the patient may be identifiable; however, a copy must be provided to Pediatrics upon request. Pediatrics does not supply a consent form.

The general submission instructions (including cover letter, title page, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to Case Reports. Do not include "a case report" or similiar language in your title as this is redundant; published manuscripts will appear in the Case Reports section.

  • Download and view a sample Case Report manuscript here .

Abstract length: no abstract Article length: 400 to 800 words

Commentaries are solicited by the editors. These contributions usually pertain to and are published concurrently with a specific article; the commentary serves to launch a broader discussion of a topic. The general submission instructions (including cover letter, title page, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to commentaries). Further instructions will be sent to authors after they are invited to write a commentary. Unsolicited opinion pieces are published as Pediatrics Perspectives. Responses to published articles should be submitted as online Comments.

  • Download and view a sample Commentary manuscript here .

Diagnostic Dilemmas and Clinical Reasoning

Abstract length: 250 words or fewer (unstructured: no headings, run in a single paragraph) NOTE: Abstracts must not reveal the final diagnosis

Article length: 3,500 words or fewer

Author limit: Seven (7) authors or fewer

Diagnostic Dilemmas and Clinical Reasoning articles are interactive case studies with comments inserted by generalists and specialists asked to comment on the case, simulating what might occur in an oral case presentation.

The goal of this feature is to present clinical cases that are diagnostic dilemmas and that involve the input of both generalists and subspecialists who comment as segments of the case are presented, similar to Ethics Rounds feature articles. Each case presented should generate a dialogue about unusual or complicated disease processes and stimulate discussion about clinical reasoning. The initial case description should include the chief complaint and enough information to generate an initial differential diagnosis. Clinical details should alternate with input from generalists and from subspecialists as the case evolves and as the ultimate diagnosis is made. The case should culminate with a brief summary (750–1,000 words) of the key points of the case and of the ultimate diagnosis. Use of media, such as radiology studies, pathology specimens, or video clips, is encouraged to complement the discussion.

  • Authors may come from any institution. The case may be one that was discussed in the hospital’s teaching rounds (many hospitals have sessions entitled Case Conference, CPC, Professorial Rounds, or something similar).
  • Manuscripts will be submitted for peer review, with acceptance contingent on positive peer reviews and input from the editorial board.
  • All cases should be real cases.
  • Written consent must be obtained from the parent or guardian, and authors should use their cover letter to attest that they have this consent. You do not need to include a copy with your initial submission unless the patient may be identifiable; however, a copy must be provided to PEDIATRICS upon request. If you upload consent, do so as a Supplemental File and be sure to click the 'internal use only' box for that file.
  • Instances where there are extenuating circumstances in which family consent may be problematic will be handled on a case-by-case basis. If a case is published without family consent, enough elements should be changed so that the patient and family are not recognizable. If the case is too unique to be disguised, then those involved in the care of the patient cannot be authors, and the published paper must have no link to the institution where the case took place.
  • The requirements of local institutional review boards should be followed.
  • Authorship: As with all article types, authors must fulfill the ICJME criteria for authorship.

Questions can be addressed to Andrea Cruz, MD, MPH, section editor for Diagnostic Dilemmas and Clinical Reasoning, here .

Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Justice

Abstract length: no abstract Article length: 1,200 words or fewer

The general instructions regarding submission (including cover letter, title page requirements, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to this section.

  • Download and view a sample manuscript here .

The goal of the Equity, Diversity, Inclusion and Justice section is to highlight areas in which bias, discrimination, racism, and inequity have impacted the health of children and their families. Topics discussed should question assumptions of traditionally held beliefs of race and other social constructs and encourage the promotion of health equity. Suggested topics include, but are not limited to: the impact of social or structural factors on health, with respect to housing and geography, health care access, transportation, education, wealth, law, policy, and justice system involvement. A short synopsis, case report, opinion piece, or personal narrative is not appropriate.

Primary research, regardless of scope, should not be submitted to this section; please see additional Pediatrics Author Guidelines for research submissions.

For some examples of previously published articles, see these articles about: Reflections of Growing Up in a World That Favors Whiteness ; Adolescent and Young Adult Menstrual Poverty ; and Using Words and Action in the Fight Against Racism.

Specific questions may be directed to Associate Editor Kimberly Montez, MD, MPH ( contact ). 

Ethics Rounds

Abstract length: 250 words or fewer (unstructured: no headings, run in a single paragraph) Article length: 3,500 words or fewer

Ethics Rounds present discussions of cases that illustrate ethical dilemmas in patient care, research, or administration.

Ethics Rounds usually consist of an abstract, a brief introduction, a case followed by several commentaries, the outcome of the case, and Section Editor comments. The abstract should briefly describe the case and summarize the commentators’ substantiative conclusions. The case may involve clinical, research, or organizational ethics. It should conclude with an ethical dilemma or conflict, and the need for an individual or group to make a decision.

Cases are typically 250 to 300 words in length. If the case is based on the care of an actual patient, informed consent should be obtained from the adult patient or the parents or guardian of a minor patient, or the case should be sufficiently anonymized that the participants cannot recognize it. Cases may also be a composite of the care of several actual patients.

The case is usually followed by 2-3 commentaries. Each commentary usually has 1-2 authors. The author(s) of the case are typically among the commentators. If there are 2 commentaries, they should each be 1,200 or fewer words; if there are 3 commentaries, each should be 800 or fewer words. It is preferable that the commentaries’ authors represent different institutions, disciplines, and/or perspectives. Commentaries should not introduce new information about the case and should not be repetitive. Ethics Rounds generally conclude with a description of the outcome of the case and a brief comment by the Section Editor.

Unsolicited manuscripts are welcome. The Section Editor Armand Antommaria ( e mail ) is also happy to work with authors who have a case that raises ethical issues and who require additional assistance. In such cases, the Section Editor may fulfill the criteria for authorship. This will be discussed with the corresponding author during the submission process. Potential authors are strongly encouraged to review recently published Ethics Rounds to familiarize themselves with the format and topics that have already been covered. The Section Editor may also originate manuscripts.

The general submission instructions (including cover letter, title page, contributors statement page, abstract, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to Ethics Rounds.

For more information on this section's format and submission process, see the blog Publishing Ethics in Pediatrics .

Family Partnerships

Abstract length: No abstract Article length: 2,000 words or fewer Author limit: None Reference limit: 10 references or fewer

Family Partnership articles provide the opportunity to highlight the relationships that form between patients, families, and their pediatric care teams. These articles can describe partnerships that occur in caring for an individual patient with shared decision making to achieve comprehensive, coordinated, family-centered care or can illustrate opportunities where a family and pediatric health care professional work together to collaborate on  policy development, health systems transformation, quality improvement, a clinical research study, or a medical education project. Articles should be written collaboratively, reflect shared experiences, and include generalizable suggestions for improving health care. Submissions for this article type do not present a singular opinion or perspective, but should aim to describe experiences that achieve a meaningful and equitable partnership between patients, families and pediatricians. Potential authors are strongly encouraged to review recently published Family Partnerships articles to familiarize themselves with the format and topics already covered. Authors with questions about a potential Family Partnerships article can email Associate Editor Cara Coleman at [email protected]

Specific points to consider:

  • Articles should include at least one author who is a family member related to the topic or the article and one author who is a healthcare professional.
  • The patient and/or family member should be actively involved in designing and carrying out the project being described and in drafting the article being submitted.
  • The role of the family member as author should be clear to the reader. For example, simply quoting a family member is not equivalent to shared authorship.
  • The introduction and conclusion should be written jointly by all authors reflecting a shared point of view. Additionally, the body of the article should provide active descriptions of and experiences reflective of the partnership.
  • Articles should include generalizable lessons about how to achieve or improve family partnerships in health care even if an individual’s story is the focus of the narrative.

The Features section offers an opportunity to gain insight into aspects of our field: past, present, and future. 

While Features articles may be invited, submissions are welcome and any queries or proposals should be directed to the editors of their respective columns: Jay Berkelhamer, MD ( [email protected] ) for Global Health; Robert Dudas, MD ( [email protected] ) for COMSEP; Eli Cahan, MD ( [email protected] ) for SOPT; and Jeffrey Baker, MD ( [email protected] ) for the AAP Gartner Pediatric History Center.

The general instructions regarding submission (including cover letter, title page requirements, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to Features.

  • Download and view a sample Features manuscript here .

SOPT Feature

This section publishes insightful updates and opinion articles on all aspects of pediatrics, written from the unique perspective of the trainee.

The goal of the editorial board of the AAP Section on Pediatric Trainees (SOPT) Feature is to work with trainee authors to develop thoughtful and timely articles related to pediatrics that appeal to everyone from medical students to well-seasoned practitioners. Topic content that focuses on training in pediatric medicine is preferred, but a range of other content areas will be considered. Topics should be relevant to students, residents, and fellows, but also of general interest to the readership of Pediatrics . The issue being discussed must be uniquely viewed from the trainee’s perspective , not from that of the supervisor, educator, or attending.

A few questions to consider when writing include: Why is the issue important? What is causing the problem to persist? How might it be corrected? How is this issue important to pediatricians in training? How might it affect pediatric medicine in the future? We are looking for authors who take a stand and support it with evidence from the literature, and for articles with an “edge.” A narrative thread that engages the reader and includes observations drawn from the author’s clinical and professional experiences is recommended.

Points to Consider:

  • The first author must be a resident, fellow, or medical student, but does not need to be a SOPT member. Collaborating authors at any career level are welcome. (Note: In order to promote a diversity of trainee voices, SOPT has a guideline of waiting at least 2 years to publish work from an author already published in SOPT Features.)
  • One article will be published at least every 4 months as the Feature in  Pediatrics .
  • Word Limit: 1,200 words.
  • Reference Limit: 15 references.
  • Author limit: 4 authors.
  • Identical or similar manuscripts that have been accepted or published elsewhere, including online, cannot be considered. Please refer to the Pediatrics main author guidelines for further explanation about Pediatrics ’ approach regarding plagiarism.

Specific questions may be directed to Section Editor Eli Cahan, MD, here .

Historical Perspectives Feature

The historical perspectives Feature is intended to attract concise and engaging historical articles of interest to clinicians. These articles are more akin to a commentary than an original article and cannot be expected to provide the kind of in-depth analysis expected in professional historical journals. The content may draw from original research or develop a particular insight from existing scholarship. These articles are typically qualitative and not divided into the conventional sections appropriate for original scientific contributions. Articles are peer reviewed by professionals with both medical and historical expertise.

Consider the following points as you develop your article:

  • Frame a clear question or central argument. Historical articles do not just recite chronologies or lists of persons and dates, they investigate a particular question and develop an argument backed up by sources.
  • Set your article in historical context—in its own time and place. Don’t judge the past by the standards of the present. Secondary sources can be very helpful. Search for articles or books that can provide historical background. If you are not familiar with historical scholarship, see “resources” on the Pediatric History Center page of the American Academy of Pediatrics Web site.
  • Will your article be of interest to pediatricians (the main audience for Pediatrics )? Is the writing clear, organized, and easy to follow?
  • Is it original? Authors who have completed longer historical projects may wish to submit a short article related to a bigger project that may attract new readers to their other scholarship.
  • Are assertions in the paper accurate and supported with appropriate references? Most articles will have about 10 to 20 references. Follow the AMA Manual of Style. Specific references in longer sources may require page numbers to be noted in parentheses.

Primary sources (produced by participants or contemporaries) are preferred when possible. The goal is to provide enough information that a reader could independently confirm the assertions in the text. Secondary sources (books and reviews written by historians or physician-historians) should be cited to provide context (to frame the story in space and time) and scholarly background.

Specific questions may be directed to Section Editor Jeffrey P. Baker, MD, PhD ( contact ).

Global Health Feature

The global health Feature is intended to educate and engage clinicians who might not otherwise be immersed in the global health field. Submissions should provide information or perspective on issues and initiatives of international interest, including health, nutrition, and medical care in low- and middle-income countries. Articles may be broad or specific in focus and should include appropriate references. Please direct questions to Jay Berkelhamer, MD ( contact ), section editor.

COMSEP Feature

COMSEP (Council on Medical Student Education in Pediatrics) publishes articles on topics of relevance to pediatric medical student education. Articles are solicited internally via a quarterly call through the COMSEP listserv. The number of authors is limited to 3 with at least one author holding an active COMSEP membership. If you have a question, please contact the current section editor Robert Dudas, MD  ( contact ).

Pediatrics Perspectives

Abstract length: no abstract Article length: 1,200 words max Author limit: Three (3) authors or fewer Figure/table: No more than one (1) figure or table allowed

Please Note:  Pediatrics receives many more Pediatrics Perspectives than the journal can publish. Authors are encouraged to review the Pediatrics Perspectives that have published to ensure that new submissions are unique.

Pediatrics Perspectives are unsolicited opinion pieces that address current topics in issues such as advocacy, public policy, and population health, or clinical topics related to infant, child, and/or adolescent health. Perspectives pieces should include a clear explanation of the issue and potential measures to address it. A short synopsis of current or past personal research on the topic is not appropriate. Perspectives pieces cannot exceed 1,200 words, be written by more than 3 authors, or and have more than 7 references. Pediatrics Perspectives may include 1 figure or 1 table.

The general instructions regarding submission (including cover letter, title page requirements, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to Pediatrics Perspectives.

  • Download and view a sample Pediatrics Perspectives manuscript here .

Quality Report

Abstract: 250 words or fewer (structured: see Regular Articles) Article: 3,000 words or fewer Supplemental content: appropriate for figures, tables, multimedia, measurement tools  

Quality Reports are intended to add to our understanding of how to design and implement highly reliable systems of care that optimize the quality, safety, and value of health care delivered to children. 

What is suitable to submit as a Quality Report?

  • The primary goal of Quality Reports is to share important and meaningful quality improvement projects.  Submissions should describe sustainable and replicable initiatives that have been evaluated using quality improvement methods.  Submissions that include assessment of impact on costs will be given high priority.  Pilot projects of interventions to improve quality of care may be acceptable if there are important lessons that can inform further quality-improvement efforts.
  • Reports of clinical trials to assess whether interventions are effective are better suited as Regular Articles. 
  • If you are uncertain whether your manuscript is appropriate as a Quality Report, e-mail Munish Gupta, MD, MMSc ( contact ).  

What format should authors use when submitting a Quality Report?

  • The general instructions to authors regarding submission (including cover letter, title page requirements, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict-of-interest statements) also apply to Quality Reports.
  • Authors should follow the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence (SQUIRE 2.0) Guidelines. The SQUIRE guidelines are described in detail on the SQUIRE website ( www.squire-statement.org ).  Of note, the SQUIRE guidelines acknowledge that different reports will have different areas of emphasis, and not every SQUIRE element may be necessary for every quality improvement manuscript. 
  • All submissions should follow the IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion) format consistent with the rest of the journal.  The SQUIRE guidelines suggest specific elements that should be addressed in each text section; authors should complete the table below indicating the location of each SQUIRE element in their manuscript.  This table should be uploaded as a supplemental file. 

Table of SQUIRE elements

  • Download and view a sample Quality Reports manuscript here .
  • Download the blank SQUIRE requirements table here .

Review Article

Abstract length: 250 words or fewer (structured or unstructured, depending on review type) Article length: 4,000 words or fewer

Review Articles combine and/or summarize data from the knowledge base of a topic. Preference is given to systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clearly stated questions over traditional narrative reviews of a topic.  Both types of review require an abstract; the abstract of a narrative review may be unstructured (no headings, run in a single paragraph). See below for abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Review Articles combine and/or summarize data from the knowledge base of a topic. Preference is given to systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clearly stated questions. Non-systematic reviews usually receive a low priority score. The general instructions regarding submission (including cover letter, title page requirements, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to Review Articles.

Reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses should use the PRISMA statement ( http://www.prisma-statement.org/ ) as a guide, and include a completed PRISMA checklist and flow diagram to accompany the main text. Blank templates of the checklist and flow diagram can be downloaded from the PRISMA Web site ( http://www.prisma-statement.org ).

Systematic reviews should use structured abstracts. Headings should include: Context, Objective, Data Sources, Study Selection, Data Extraction, Results, Limitations, and Conclusions (see Iverson et al 1[pp22-23] ). Journal requirements for the abstract supersede the PRISMA checklist.

  • Download and view a sample Systematic Review/Meta-analysis manuscript here .

Special Article

Abstract length: 250 words or fewer (unstructured: no headings, run in a single paragraph) Article length: 4,000 words or fewer

Special Articles reflect topics or issues of relevance to pediatric health care that do not conform to a traditional study format. Special Articles may address broad social and ethical issues, scientific methodology, or other scholarly topics, and may include reports from consensus committees and working groups. These articles should not include specific guidelines or recommendations for practice. Guidelines and recommendations from groups outside of the AAP must be approved through the AAP and may be published at the discretion of the AAP in the dedicated AAP section of the journal (see below).

The general instructions regarding submission (including cover letter, title page requirements, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) apply to Special Articles.

  • Download and view a sample Special Article manuscript here .

State-of-the-Art Review Article

State-of-the-Art Review Articles provide a comprehensive and scholarly overview of an important clinical subject with a principle focus on developments in the past 5 years. State-of-the-Art Review Articles are usually invited.  If you are interested in submitting a State-of-the-Art Review, please email Associate Editor Dr. Karen Puopolo ( contact ) and copy Publications Editor Mark Plemmons ( c ontact ).

The general instructions regarding submission (including cover letter, title page requirements, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to State-of-the-Art Reviews.

  • Download and view a sample State-of-the-Art Review manuscript here .

State-of-the-Art Translational Science Brief

Abstract length: 250 words or fewer (unstructured: no headings, run in a single paragraph) Article length: 1,500 words or fewer Reference limit: 25 State-of-the-Art Translational Science Briefs examine cutting-edge translational science advances with implications for practicing pediatricians. These manuscripts should describe a recent finding or a group of closely related findings that have current implications for diagnosis or management, or that could lead the way to novel approaches to care in the near future. These articles should clearly describe the underlying scientific principles and the ways in which clinical care could be transformed.    If you are interested in submitting a State-of-the-Art Translational Science Brief, please email Associate Editor Dr. Karen Puopolo ( contact ) and copy Publications Editor Mark Plemmons ( contact ). The general instructions regarding submission (including cover letter, title page requirements, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to State-of-the-Art Translational Science Briefs.

  • Download and view a sample State-of-the-Art Translational Science Brief manuscript here .

Video Abstracts

The journal publishes video abstracts with articles by invitation only. Guidelines will be provided upon invitation.

"From the American Academy of Pediatrics"- For AAP Use Only

The editorial process and manuscript selection for publication in Pediatrics are separate from the processes and materials that are produced or endorsed by the AAP. These materials are published in print and online in a visually distinct section of the journal. AAP Clinical Practice Guidelines, Policy Statements, Clinical Reports and other AAP-produced or endorsed materials that are intended to help guide practice are highly valued by membership and are published in this section of the journal at the sole discretion of the AAP. Content produced or endorsed by the AAP is reviewed and approved outside of the Pediatrics editorial process.

Do not select an AAP Clinical Report, AAP Policy Statement, or other AAP article type for your submission. These are reserved for internal AAP use only.

Cover Letter

The cover letter serves to assure the editors that the article and the authors meet the conditions of publication.  A brief paragraph that provides any additional information that may be useful to the editors is welcome, but keep in mind that the need for a long cover letter may indicate that the article does not speak for itself.  Reviewers will not see the cover letter; cover letters are not a Title Page.

All authors must affirm the following in their cover letter before their manuscript is considered:

  • That the manuscript is being submitted only to Pediatrics , that it will not be submitted elsewhere, while under consideration, that it has not been published elsewhere, and, should it be published in Pediatrics , that it will not be published elsewhere—either in similar form or verbatim—without permission of the editors. These restrictions do not apply to abstracts or to press reports of presentations at scientific meetings.
  • That all authors are responsible for reported research.
  • That all authors have participated in the concept and design, analysis and interpretation of data, and drafting or revising of the manuscript, and that they have approved the manuscript as submitted.

If the manuscript has been posted on a preprint server, the authors must state this in the cover letter (and include a link to the preprint server posting). Manuscripts should not be submitted to preprint servers while under consideration for publication.

Getting Started

  • Go to https://submit-pediatrics.aappublications.org/ and sign in, or click the “create a new account” link if you are a first-time user.
  • You should be automatically be taken to your Author Area at sign-in.
  • Click “Submit a new manuscript."

Submitting Your Manuscript

To start a new submission, click “Submit a new manuscript” in your Author Area.

You must complete each step to submit your manuscript.  Use proper capitalization - Do not use all CAPS, or all lowercase, or HTML. Click on the “Save/Continue” button on each screen to save your work and advance to the next screen.

Submission Guide. The first screen you’ll see is the “Submission Guide.” This page provides a description of each article type and guidance on what is required for each section of the submission system. Once you’ve reviewed this page, click “Begin Submission” at the bottom of the page.

Manuscript Basics. Select your article type and enter the title, short title, and abstract. Review your article type earlier in the Submission Guide for further details on abstracts. The Article Summary and the What’s Known/What’s Added summaries are required for Regular Articles only (if this does not apply, input “NA” to skip).

For published articles, the Article Summary will appear under the author names in the table of contents to give the reader a brief insight into what the article is about. It should entice the reader to read the full article. Summarize your article in 25 words or less. For example: "Through linkage of state Medicaid and Child Protective Services databases, this study captures similarities and differences in health care expenditures based on a history of child maltreatment."

Manuscript Files. In this step, you will be prompted to upload your files.

The first screen you’ll see includes information on the file types supported for each upload type (manuscript file, image files (which include tables and figures), and supplemental data or additional files). Click Save/Continue to submit your files.

If you chose double-blind peer review, you will see the link “Upload your title page” in the middle of the screen. Click here to upload your Title Page (which should include your Contributors Statement Page and Acknowledgments). Once you’ve uploaded your Title Page separately, you can then upload your manuscript and table/figure files.

Your main manuscript file should be submitted by dragging the file into the green box labeled “Drop manuscript files here” or by clicking the “Select Files” link in this box. Labels are preferred, but not required. Please note that these labels are not a substitute for the required table/figure legends  in your manuscript files.

Your table and figure files should be submitted by dragging them into the gray box labeled “Drop image and table/figure files here” or by clicking the “Select Files” link in this box.

Supplemental data files should be submitted by dragging them into the blue box labeled “Drop supplemental files here” or by clicking the “Select Files” link in this box. Once you drag a file into this box, you will have the option of checking an “Internal Use” box if the file provided is for editor use only and not to be shared with the peer reviewers.  

Once you’ve dragged over or selected your files, click “Upload Files” to complete the upload. Once you are taken to the next screen, use the navigation links on the left-hand side to move to the next step.

Abstract, Cover Letter and Questions. Enter your abstract and cover letter in the text boxes provided. If your article type does not require an abstract, type “NA” in the text box. If your manuscript reports the results of a clinical trial, you must enter a Data Sharing Statement and the clinical trial number in the text boxes provided. See Data Sharing for more information. Reponses to the funding questions are required.

Keywords. Enter the appropriate keywords/categories for your submission.

Reviewer Suggestions/Exclusions. To indicate any preferred and non-preferred reviewers, enter the reviewer's information in the appropriate sections.

Author List. To add yourself as an author, click the “Add Author” button, then the “I Am This Author” button in the top right corner of the popup screen. If you are also the corresponding author, click the “Mark as Corresponding Author” box, then click “Save.” You can add additional authors by entering their email address to search for them in the system. You can change the author order in your list by dragging author entries to the desired position.

Submission Proofing. Here you will review the data entered for each step. You can revise any section by clicking the “Edit” button next to the section you’d like to revise.

Copyright Forms

At the time of provisional acceptance, all authors will receive instructions for submitting an online copyright form. No paper will be scheduled for an issue and move onto production until all authors have completed their copyright forms.

We do not accept copyright forms via fax, email, or regular mail unless a technical problem with the online author account cannot be resolved. Every effort should be made for authors to use the online copyright system. Corresponding authors can log in to the submission system at any time to check on the status of any co-author’s copyright form.

All accepted manuscripts become the permanent property of the American Academy of Pediatrics and may not be published elsewhere, in whole or in part, without written permission from the AAP (with certain exceptions: authors retain certain rights including the right to republish their work in books and other scholarly collections). Authors who were employees of the United States Government at the time the work was done should so state on the copyright form. Articles authored by federal employees remain in the public domain.

Note: Pediatrics cannot accept any copyright that has been altered, revised, amended, or otherwise changed. Our original electronic copyright form must be used as is.

Disclosure Forms

At the time of provisional acceptance, all authors are required to submit a disclosure form. Pediatrics adheres to ICMJE policy and uses an online disclosure e-form in order for authors to do so. The collection of forms is automated within the online submission system. Note: Pediatrics cannot accept any disclosure that has been altered, revised, amended, or otherwise changed. Our original electronic disclosure form must be used as is.

Ordering Reprints

Reprint order forms will be sent to the corresponding author. If you are not the corresponding author and wish to order reprints, you may either contact the corresponding author or use the contact info below. Reprints are available at any time after publication. However, reprints ordered after publication may cost more. Delivery of reprints is usually 4 to 6 weeks after publication.

To order author reprints, please contact:

Reader Comments

Pediatrics welcomes reader comments on published articles. To submit a comment, click on the "Comments" tab that appears with each article, then click on "Submit a Comment." (You must be logged in to submit a comment.) Comments submitted via email or regular mail will not be considered for posting or returned.

The editors review all comments submitted online; comments are not peer-reviewed. The decision regarding whether to post a comment is at the sole discretion of the editors, and all editorial decisions are final. The submitting author will receive an email if the comment is posted, which generally occurs within 3-5 days of submission. No email notification will be sent if the comment is not posted. Once a comment has been posted on the website, you will not have the right to have it removed or edited. Pediatrics shall, however, be able to remove any comment at its discretion.

Note: Comments are online responses only. They are neither published nor cited in Medline/PubMed. Comments that raise issues addressed in prior comments are unlikely to be posted.

Be sure to follow all of the consideration criteria below; you will not be able to modify your comment after submission.

Consideration Criteria for Posting of Reader Comments:

  • To ensure timely discussion, comments are limited to articles published within the previous 6 months.
  • The editors will consider posting comments that contribute substantially to the discussion of the original article to which the reader is responding. All editorial decisions are final.
  • We will consider posting comments from all readers regardless of professional background. Decisions about posting are made based on the content, not the professional background of the respondent.
  • Pediatrics does not allow multiple comment submissions from the same reader for a particular article.
  • Comments must be in English and not exceed 500 words, not including references.
  • Comments must have no more than 3 authors. Please insert commas between author names. If author affiliations include commas, insert semicolons between each affiliation.
  • Comments must have no more than 5 references.
  • Comments cannot include web links. We will remove any web links from responses chosen for posting. The only exceptions are links to AAP publications and to government documents/webpages; these must be correctly cited as references (do not paste them in the body of the comment) using AMA style. 
  • Tables, figures, and other attachments are not allowed.
  • Pediatrics will not post comments that are, or appear in the opinion of the editor to be, obscene, libelous, incomprehensible, defamatory, or rude; that include advertising, address personal health questions about the respondent or family members; or that give personal health information about identifiable individuals. The decision regarding whether to post any comment is at the sole discretion of the editors; all editorial decisions are final.
  • In general, we do not edit reader comments prior to or after posting. The editors may, at their discretion, modify submitted comments either before or after posting the comment.

How to Submit Reader Comments for Consideration

1. Please ensure that you are logged in; you must be logged in to submit a comment. User accounts are free if you do not already have one.

2. Locate the article online and scroll to the bottom of the page (or the sidebar on the left-side of the screen) to find the “Add comment” link.  Pediatrics  only allows one comment per author per article.

4. Click "Submit".

How to View Comments

To read comments on an article that have been posted, click on the "Comments"link in the sidebar on the left side of the screen.

How to Cite a Comment

Puttgen, Katherine. RE: Topical Timolol Maleate Treatment of Infantile Hemangiomas [comment], Pediatrics (November 2, 2016), https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/138/3/e20160355/52672/Topical-Timolol-Maleate-Treatment-of-Infantile

Letters to the Editor

All Letters to the Editor must first be submitted as online comments (and must conform to comment requirements ). Selected comments may then be chosen for publication in the indexed edition of Pediatrics as “Letters to the Editor.” The editors may choose to abridge and edit a comment prior to publication as a Letter to the Editor in Pediatrics without notifying or seeking approval from the author. Only these selected responses will be cited in MedLine. Any letters submitted through the official manuscript submission site will be withdrawn.

At the time of provisional acceptance, the comment author will receive instructions for submitting an online copyright form. No comment will be scheduled for an issue’s Letters to the Editor section and move onto production until the copyright form is completed.

The corresponding author of an article can request a correction to a published manuscript. The editors will decide if an erratum is in order. 

Supplements to Pediatrics

Supplements are sponsored sets of articles on a single topic or a theme pertinent to Pediatrics . Such sets of articles may come from the proceedings of sponsored meetings, reports from task forces or committees, organizations interested in a particular topic, or research groups. Please note: Pediatrics does not accept supplements financed by for-profit corporations if the topics in the supplement bear close relation to the products sold by the corporation. All supplements are peer-reviewed. The contents of all supplements are open to read from the date of publication.

Supplement Costs

  • The cost to sponsor a printed supplement to Pediatrics is $975 per page, with a minimum of 32 pages.  This estimate includes all costs for production, copyediting, press, distribution and postage, and online production and hosting of the supplement. A budget contract estimate will be issued for your approval prior to scheduling. The final price includes 100 complimentary copies of the supplement. Additional printed copies can be purchased by contacting Kate Larson, Senior Managing Editor, here .
  • We offer the option of publishing online-only supplements to Pediatrics . The submission and production processes are exactly the same as those supplements that are published both in print and online. The difference is that no copies of the supplement are printed, thereby eliminating costs associated with printing and postage. The cost to sponsor an online-only supplement is $485 per page.
  • A 50% deposit is required at budget contract and scheduling.

Conceptual Approval

Approval of the topic of a supplement must be obtained from Alex Kemper, MD, MPH, MS, Deputy Editor, prior to submission. To facilitate this process, we ask for a brief letter outlining the supplement, a proposed table of contents listing titles and authors of prospective papers, and a statement describing who will underwrite the cost of the supplement. This material should be sent to the deputy editor ( here ) during the planning stages of the supplement, ideally several months prior to submission.

Submission Requirements

To submit the supplement after conceptual approval, you must submit via the manuscript system .

  • Download and view a sample Supplement format here . Submit the supplement under a single manuscript number with multiple supplemental files as detailed in this guide . The formatting requirements for articles also apply to supplement articles.

Once the supplement is received by the deputy editor, it is sent out in its entirety to reviewers. If the supplement is provisionally accepted, revisions may be required. If revisions cannot be made to the satisfaction of the editors, the supplement may be rejected.

We estimate 120 days from final acceptance to publication. However, this timeline can vary depending on the number of other supplements already scheduled for publication.

Pediatrics Editorial Offices

Vermont (Office of the Editor-in-Chief) University of Vermont College of Medicine 89 Beaumont Ave Given Courtyard, S261 Burlington, VT 05405

Ohio (Office of the Deputy Editor) Natiowide Children's Hospital 700 Children's Drive Columbus, OH 43205

Publisher’s Office American Academy of Pediatrics 345 Park Blvd Itasca, IL 60143 Email

Senior Managing Editor Kate Larson, Itasca, IL Email

Publications Editor Mark Plemmons, Itasca, IL Email

Editorial Staff Nina B. Jaffe, Burlington, VT

Problems With Article Submission?

  • Email our editorial staff here .

Ver. 03.11.2022

Advertising Disclaimer »

cover letter for case study report

Affiliations

  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Policies
  • Journal Blogs
  • Pediatrics On Call
  • Online ISSN 1098-4275
  • Print ISSN 0031-4005
  • Pediatrics Open Science
  • Hospital Pediatrics
  • Pediatrics in Review
  • AAP Grand Rounds
  • Latest News
  • Pediatric Care Online
  • Red Book Online
  • Pediatric Patient Education
  • AAP Toolkits
  • AAP Pediatric Coding Newsletter

First 1,000 Days Knowledge Center

Institutions/librarians, group practices, licensing/permissions, integrations, advertising.

  • Privacy Statement | Accessibility Statement | Terms of Use | Support Center | Contact Us
  • © Copyright American Academy of Pediatrics

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Instructions for Authors

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

Original Investigation

Caring for the critically ill patient, brief report, research letter, systematic review (without meta-analysis), narrative review, special communication, clinical challenge, diagnostic test interpretation, a piece of my mind, letter to the editor, letter in reply.

  • Randomized Clinical Trial
  • Parallel-Design Double-blind Trial
  • Crossover Trial
  • Equivalence and Noninferiority Trial
  • Cluster Trial
  • Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

Meta-analysis

  • Cohort Study
  • Case-Control Study
  • Cross-sectional Study
  • Case Series
  • Economic Evaluation
  • Decision Analytical Model
  • Comparative Effectiveness Research
  • Genetic Association Study
  • Diagnostic/Prognostic Study
  • Quality Improvement Study
  • Survey Study
  • Qualitative Study

Manuscript Submission

Copies of previous editorial and reviewer comments, cover letter, manuscript style, manuscript components, recommended file sizes, manuscript file formats, abbreviations, units of measure, names of drugs, devices, and other products, gene names, symbols, and accession numbers, reproduced and re-created material, statistical methods and data presentation, online-only supplements and multimedia.

What to Expect

Editorial and Peer Review

The jama network advantage.

  • JAMA-Express

Authorship Form and Publishing Agreement

Publication.

  • Postpublication Online Commenting

Reprints/e-Prints

Corrections, previous publication, related manuscripts and reports, and preprints, previous or planned meeting presentation or release of information, embargo policy, research article public access, depositing in repositories, and discoverability.

Editorial Policies for Authors

Authorship and Disclosures

Authorship criteria and contributions, role of the corresponding author, changes in authorship, name change policy, group authorship, conflicts of interest and financial disclosures, funding/support and role of funder/sponsor, data access, responsibility, and analysis, acknowledgment section, equator reporting guidelines, use of causal language, timeliness of data, reporting demographic information for study participants, ethical approval of studies and informed consent, patient identification, personal communications and unpublished data, manuscripts that pose security risks.

Journal Policies, Forms, Resources

Decisions and Management of Editorial Conflicts of Interest

Publishing agreement, unauthorized use.

  • Patient Permission Form
  • AMA Manual of Style
  • EQUATOR Network
  • About This Journal

Contact Information

JAMA , Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, PhD, MD, MAS, Editor in Chief, 330 N Wabash Ave, Chicago, IL 60611-5885; telephone: (312) 464-4444; fax: (312) 464-5824; email: [email protected] . Manuscripts should be submitted online at http://manuscripts.jama.com .

Determine My Article Type

Categories of articles.

Original Investigation full info

Clinical trial Meta-analysis Intervention study Cohort study Case-control study Epidemiologic assessment Survey with high response rate Cost-effectiveness analysis Decision analysis Study of screening and diagnostic tests Other observational study

  • ≤5 tables and/or figures
  • Structured abstract

Data Sharing Statement

Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines

Caring for the Critically Ill Patient full info

Original research reports, preferably clinical trials or systematic reviews that address virtually any aspect of critical illness, from prevention and triage, through resuscitation and acute treatment, to rehabilitation and palliative care.

  • See also requirements for Clinical Trial , Meta-analysis , and Systematic Review

Brief Report full info

Short reports of original studies or evaluations or unique, first-time reports of clinical case series.

It is very rare for this journal to publish case reports.

  • 15 references
  • ≤3 tables and/or figures

Research Letter full info

Concise, focused reports of original research. Can include any of the study types listed under Original Investigation.

  • No more than 7 authors
  • ≤6 references
  • ≤2 small tables and/or figures
  • No Abstract or Key Points

Back to top

Clinical Review and Education

Systematic Review (without meta-analysis) full info

This article type requires a presubmission inquiry. See the "full info" below for requirements and contact information.

Critical assessments of the literature and data sources pertaining to clinical topics, emphasizing factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention.

Systematic Reviews without meta-analysis are published as Reviews; those with meta-analysis are published as Original Investigations (see Meta-analysis ).

  • 50-75 references
  • A PRISMA-style flow diagram should be included as an online supplement
  • Include a table with ratings of the quality of the studies/evidence
  • Subtitle should be "A Systematic Review"

Narrative Review full info

Up-to-date review for clinicians on a topic of general common interest from the perspective of internationally recognized experts in these disciplines.

The focus should be an update on current understanding of the physiology of the disease or condition, diagnostic consideration, and treatment.

These reviews should address a specific question or issue that is relevant for clinical practice.

  • 2000-3500 words
  • 3-part structured abstract
  • No Key Points
  • Subtitle should be "A Review"

Special Communication full info

This journal publishes very few of these types of articles.

These manuscripts describe an important issue in clinical medicine, public health, health policy, or medical research in a scholarly, thorough, well-referenced, systematic, and evidence-based manner.

  • 50 references
  • ≤4 tables and/or figures
  • Requires a presubmission inquiry

Clinical Challenge full info

Presents an actual patient case with a specific disease or condition with an accompanying clinical image.

  • "What Would You Do Next?" with 4 single-phrase plausible treatment options describing possible courses of action with 1 being preferred
  • Case presentation: 250 words
  • Discussion: 500-600 words
  • ≤10 references
  • 1-2 small figures
  • Patient permission required

Diagnostic Test Interpretation full info

This article requires a presubmission inquiry.

Presentation of the results of a diagnostic test from a single patient with exploration of the clinical application of the test result; intended to help clinicians understand the underlying rationale in ordering tests, interpreting test results, and acting on the diagnostic test findings.

  • How Do You Interpret These Test Results? (or What Would You Do Next?) with 4 plausible responses
  • Case presentation: 200 words
  • Discussion: 650 words

Viewpoint full info

May address virtually any important topic in medicine, public health, research, discovery, prevention, ethics, health policy, or health law and generally are not linked to a specific article.

  • 1200 words (or 1000 words with 1 small table or figure)
  • ≤7 references at submission
  • ≤3 authors, with no more than 2 affiliations per author

A Piece of My Mind full info

Personal vignettes (eg, exploring the dynamics of the patient-physician relationship) taken from wide-ranging experiences in medicine; occasional pieces express views and opinions on the myriad issues that affect the profession.

  • ≤1600 words
  • Patient permission may be needed

Poetry full info

Original poems related to the medical experience, whether from the point of view of a health care worker or patient, or simply an observer.

  • No longer than 44 lines

Correspondence

Letter to the Editor full info

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

  • ≤5 references (1 of which should be to the recent article)

Letter in Reply full info

Replies by authors of original articles to letters from readers.

Determine My Study Type

Randomized Clinical Trial full info

A trial that prospectively assigns participants to intervention or comparison groups to study the cause-and-effect relationship between an intervention and a health outcome. Interventions include but are not limited to drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioral treatments, educational programs, dietary interventions, quality improvement interventions, process-of-care changes, and the like.

  • ≤5 tables and/or figures, including CONSORT flow diagram
  • Subtitle should be "A Randomized Clinical Trial"
  • Trial registration and ID
  • Trial protocol
  • CONSORT checklist
  • Follow CONSORT Reporting Guidelines

Parallel-Design Double-blind Trial full info

A randomized trial that prospectively assigns participants to 2 or more groups to receive different interventions. Participants and those administering the interventions are unaware of which intervention individual participants are receiving.

Crossover Trial full info

A trial in which participants receive more than 1 of the treatments under investigation, usually in a randomly determined sequence, and with a prespecified amount of time (washout period) between sequential treatments.

Equivalence and Noninferiority Trial full info

A trial designed to assess whether the treatment or intervention under study (eg, a new intervention) is no worse than an existing alternative (eg, an active control). In these trials, authors must prespecify a margin of noninferiority that is consistent with all relevant studies and within which the new intervention can be assumed to be no worse than the active control.

Cluster Trial full info

A trial that includes random assignment of groups rather than individuals to intervention and control groups.

Nonrandomized Controlled Trial full info

A trial that prospectively assigns groups or populations to study the efficacy or effectiveness of an intervention but in which the assignment to the intervention occurs through self-selection or administrator selection rather than through randomization. Control groups can be historic, concurrent, or both. This design is sometimes called a quasi-experimental design.

  • ≤5 tables and/or figures, including a trial flow diagram
  • Subtitle should be "A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial"
  • TREND checklist

Meta-analysis full info

A systematic review that includes a statistical technique for quantitatively combining the results of multiple studies that measure the same outcome into a single pooled or summary estimate.

  • Subtitle should include "A Meta-analysis"
  • Follow PRISMA Reporting Guidelines or MOOSE Reporting Guidelines

Cohort Study full info

An observational study that follows a group (cohort) of individuals who are initially free of the outcome of interest. Individuals in the cohort may share some underlying characteristic, such as age, sex, diagnosis, exposure to a risk factor, or treatment.

  • Follow STROBE Reporting Guidelines

Case-Control Study full info

An observational study designed to determine the association between an exposure and outcome in which study participants are selected by outcome. Those with the outcome (cases) are compared with those without the outcome (controls) with respect to an exposure or event. Cases and controls may be matched according to specific characteristics (eg, age, sex, or duration of disease).

Cross-sectional Study full info

An observational study of a defined population at a single point in time or during a specific interval, in which exposure and outcome are ascertained simultaneously.

Case Series full info

An observational study that describes a selected group of participants with similar exposure or treatment and without a control group. A case series may also involve observation of larger units such as groups of hospitals or municipalities, as well as smaller units such as laboratory samples.

  • Follow Reporting Guidelines

Economic Evaluation full info

A study using formal, quantitative methods to compare 2 or more treatments, programs, or strategies with respect to their resource use and expected outcomes. This includes cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, and cost-minimization analyses.

  • Follow CHEERS Reporting Guidelines

Decision Analytical Model full info

A mathematical modeling study that compares consequences of decision options by synthesizing information from multiple sources and applying mathematical simulation techniques, usually with specific software. Reporting should address the relevant non-cost aspects of the CHEERS guideline.

Comparative Effectiveness Research full info

A study that compares different interventions or strategies to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor health conditions to determine which work best for which patients, under what circumstances, and are associated with the greatest benefits and harms.

  • Follow ISPOR Reporting Guidelines

Genetic Association Study full info

A study that attempts to identify and characterize genomic variants that may be associated with susceptibility to multifactorial disease.

  • Follow STREGA Reporting Guidelines

Diagnostic/Prognostic Study full info

A prospective study designed to develop, validate, or update the diagnostic or prognostic accuracy of a test or model.

  • Follow STARD Reporting Guidelines or TRIPOD Reporting Guidelines

Quality Improvement Study full info

A study that uses data to define, measure, and evaluate a health care practice or service to maintain or improve the appropriateness, quality, safety, or value of that practice or service.

  • Follow SQUIRE Reporting Guidelines

Survey Study full info

A survey study includes a representative sample of individuals who are asked to describe their opinions, attitudes, or behaviors. Survey studies should have sufficient response rates (generally ≥60%) and appropriate characterization of nonresponders to ensure that nonresponse bias does not threaten the validity of the findings.

  • Follow AAPOR Best Practices for Survey Research
  • Optional: Survey instrument as supplemental file

Qualitative Study full info

A study based on observation and interview with individuals that uses inductive reasoning and a theoretical sampling model and that focuses on social and interpreted, rather than quantifiable, phenomena and aims to discover, interpret, and describe rather than to test and evaluate. This includes mixed-methods studies that combine quantitative and qualitative designs in a sequential or concurrent manner.

  • Follow SRQR Reporting Guidelines or COREQ Reporting Guidelines

These reports typically include randomized trials (see Clinical Trial ), intervention studies, cohort studies, case-control studies, epidemiologic assessments, other observational studies, surveys with high response rates (see Reports of Survey Research ), cost-effectiveness analyses and decision analyses (see Reports of Cost-effectiveness Analyses and Decision Analyses ), and studies of screening and diagnostic tests (see also Reports of Diagnostic Tests ). Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study setting and dates, patients or participants with inclusion and exclusion criteria and/or participation or response rates, or data sources, and how these were selected for the study); the essential features of any interventions; the main outcome measures; the main results of the study; a discussion section placing the results in context with the published literature and addressing study limitations; and the conclusions and relevant implications for clinical practice or health policy. Data included in research reports must be original and should be as timely and current as possible (see Timeliness of Data ). Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines .

A structured abstract is required; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures.

These manuscripts are original research reports, preferably clinical trials, or systematic reviews (see above classifications for manuscript submission requirements by category of article) that address virtually any aspect of critical illness, from prevention and triage, through resuscitation and acute treatment, to rehabilitation and palliative care. Manuscripts that provide new insights into the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of critically ill patients, as well as those that explore pathophysiological, technological, ethical, or other related aspects of critical care medicine, are welcome. Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines . For reports of original data and systematic reviews, a structured abstract is required; see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data or Abstracts for Reviews . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures.

These manuscripts are short reports of original studies or evaluations or unique, first-time reports of clinical case series. Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines . A structured abstract is required; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Recommended length: 1200 words (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material) with no more than a total of 3 tables and/or figures and no more than 15 references. Note: It is very rare for this journal to publish case reports.

Research Letters are concise, focused reports of original research. These should not exceed 600 words of text and 6 references and may include up to 2 tables or figures. Online supplementary material is only allowed for brief additional and absolutely necessary methods but not for any additional results or discussion. Research Letters may have no more than 7 authors. The text should include the full name, academic degrees, and a single institutional affiliation for each author and the email address for the corresponding author. Other persons who have contributed to the study may be indicated in an Acknowledgment, with their permission, including their academic degrees, affiliation, contribution to the study, and an indication if compensation was received for their role. Letters must not duplicate other material published or submitted for publication. In general, Research Letters should be divided into the following sections: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. They should not include an abstract or key points, but otherwise should follow all of the guidelines in Manuscript Preparation and Submission Requirements . Letters not meeting these specifications are generally not considered.

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

The journal will consider 2 types of review articles:

Systematic Reviews

These types of Review articles differ by the scope and level of analysis of the literature searches and the titles used. Systematic Reviews require a complete systematic search of the literature using multiple databases, covering many years, and grading of the quality of the cited evidence. Narrative Reviews do not require a rigorous literature search but should rely on evidence and should be written by established experts in the field. See below for more detail on each type of Review.

Titles for these Reviews should include a concise description of the main topic. Use specific and not overly broad wording for the title; the type of review should be indicated in the subtitle. For example:

Behavioral Treatment of Obesity: A Systematic Review

Behavioral Treatment of Obesity: A Review (note: the word "narrative" is not included in the subtitle)

Systematic Reviews are critical assessments of the literature and data sources pertaining to clinical topics, emphasizing factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention. Systematic Reviews without meta-analysis are published as Reviews; those with meta-analysis are published as Original Investigations (see Meta-analysis ). Systematic Reviews should address a specific question or issue that is relevant for clinical practice and provide an evidence-based, balanced, patient-oriented review on a focused topic. Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines .

The basic structure of manuscripts reporting Systematic Reviews should include the following: Abstract (structured abstract of no more than 350 words); Introduction (150-250 words); Methods (150-250 words); Results (1000-1250 words, with the following subsections, if appropriate, depending on the specific question or issue addressed: Pathophysiology, Clinical Presentation, Assessment and Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis); Discussion (1000 words); and Conclusions (2-3 sentences).

Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material), with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references. For an example of a published Systematic Review, see JAMA . 2014;312(6):631-640 and below for the general structure of a Systematic Review article.

Prospective authors interested in submitting a review manuscript should prepare a detailed outline of the proposed article. There should also be a brief summary of the extent and quality of the literature supporting the proposed review. Alternatively, if a draft of the manuscript has been completed, this can be sent. Prospective authors should also summarize their publication record in the field. Send this information to the editorial office via email to Mary McDermott, MD, at [email protected] .

Specific Components of a Systematic Review

Key Points (75-100 words)

This feature provides a quick structured synopsis of the Review, following 3 key points: Question, Findings, and Meaning. Limit to no more than 100 words. This is different from the Abstract.

Question: What are the most effective medical treatments for adult chronic sinusitis? Findings: In this systematic review, symptoms of chronic sinusitis were improved with saline irrigation and topical corticosteroid therapy compared to no therapy. Compared with placebo, 3-week courses of systemic corticosteroids or oral doxycycline were associated with reduced polyp size, and a 3-month course of macrolide antibiotic was associated with improved symptoms in patients without polyps. Meaning: First-line therapy for chronic sinusitis should begin with daily topical intranasal corticosteroid in conjunction with saline irrigation; subsequent therapies should be based on the patient's polyp status and severity of symptoms.

Abstract (350 words)

A structured abstract is required; Systematic Review articles should include a structured abstract of no more than 350 words using the headings listed below.

Importance: Include 1 or 2 sentences describing the clinical question or issue and its importance in clinical practice or public health. Objective: State the precise primary objective of the review. Indicate whether the review emphasizes factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention and include information about the specific population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes that are being reviewed. Evidence Review: Describe the information sources used, including the search strategies, years searched, and other sources of material, such as subsequent reference searches of retrieved articles. Methods used for inclusion of identified articles and quality assessment should be explained. Findings: Include a brief summary of the number of articles included, numbers of various types of studies (eg, clinical trials, cohort studies), and numbers of patients/participants represented by these studies. Summarize the major findings of the review of the clinical issue or topic in an evidence-based, objective, and balanced fashion, with the highest-quality evidence available receiving the greatest emphasis. Provide quantitative data. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions should clearly answer the questions posed if applicable, be based on available evidence, and emphasize how clinicians should apply current knowledge. Conclusions should be based only on results described in the abstract Findings subsection.

Introduction (150-250 words)

The first 2 to 3 sentences of the Introduction should draw in readers such that they want to continue reading the article and should establish the importance of the Review. Reviews should include the clinical question or issue and its importance for general medical practice, specialty practice, or public health. The first paragraph should provide a general summary of the clinical problem (eg, obesity). The next paragraph should focus on the specific aspect of the clinical problem the article will explore (eg, treatments for obesity). The epidemiology of the disease or condition should be briefly summarized and generally should include disease prevalence and incidence. The third paragraph should discuss exactly what material will be covered in the Review (eg, obesity treatments reported in trials with a minimum follow-up of 2 years including 80% of the original cohort).

Methods/Literature Search (150-250 words)

The literature search should be as current as possible, ideally with end dates within a month or two before manuscript submission. A search of the primary literature should be conducted, including multiple bibliographic databases (eg, PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO). This can be facilitated by collaborating with a medical librarian to help with the search.

Briefly describe characteristics of the literature searched and included in the review, following the PRISMA reporting guidelines , including the bibliographic databases and other sources searched, search terms used, dates included in the search, date the literature search was conducted, screening process, language limitations, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. The rating system used to evaluate the quality of the evidence should be specified (see table below) and the methods used to evaluate quality should be described, including number of quality raters, how agreement on quality ratings was assessed, and how disagreements on quality ratings were resolved.

The highest-quality evidence (eg, randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and high-quality prospective cohort studies) should receive the greatest emphasis. Clinical practice guidelines ordinarily should not be used as a primary component of the evidence base for the systematic review, although relevant guidelines should be addressed in the Discussion section of the article.

The search methods should be described in sufficient detail so the search can be reproduced based on the information provided in the manuscript. A summary of the methods of the literature search including this information should be included in the main article; details can be included in an online-only supplement. A PRISMA-style flow diagram showing this information should also be included as an online-only supplement. In addition, a completed PRISMA checklist should be submitted for the items completed that apply to systematic reviews (the checklist items that apply to meta-analyses do not need to be completed for systematic reviews without meta-analysis). The checklist will be used during review but will not be published.

Results (1000-1250 words)

First, briefly report the results of the literature search, including the number of articles reviewed and included, numbers of various types of studies (eg, clinical trials, cohort studies) included, and the aggregate numbers of patients included in the reviewed studies. Also provide a brief summary of the quality of the evidence. Details of this information can be included in a PRISMA-style flow diagram and table(s).

Next, the subsections listed below should generally appear in the Results sections of most Reviews although all of these subsections may not be necessary for some topics, depending on the specific question or issue addressed. The word counts following each subsection are suggested to assist with keeping the overall Results section limited to 1000-1250 words.

Pathophysiology (150-250 words). Provide a brief overview of the pathophysiology of the disease. The intent is to provide readers with sufficient background information about the underpinnings of a disease to provide context for the rest of the article. Clinical Presentation (150-250 words). Briefly describe the clinical characteristics that result in a patient seeking medical care for the condition or what features of the disease should lead a clinician to evaluate or treat it. Assessment and Diagnosis (250-300 words). Describe the clinical examination for evaluation of the disease and explain the most salient physical examination findings. If laboratory or imaging studies are necessary, provide the sensitivity and specificity and diagnostic accuracy of these tests and consider providing positive and negative likelihood ratios. Sequences of diagnostic tests are best presented as algorithms or in tables. Treatment (250-500 words). Treatments should be based on the most recently available and highest level of evidence. Treatment options should be summarized in the text and presented in detail in tables along with an indication of the strength of evidence supporting the individual treatments. In general, treatment recommendations should be supported by a systematic review of the literature, either performed by the author of the Review or published in the form of a high-quality review or guideline. If possible, the costs for various treatments should be provided. Prognosis (100-150 words). A section outlining the overall prognosis for the condition, once treated, should be included. Discussion (Approximately 1000 words)

Key findings should be summarized in the first paragraph of the Discussion section. All statements made should be supported by evidence. It is very important to not simply list findings from the studies reviewed. This information is best presented in tables. The Discussion should provide a critical synthesis of data and information based on the results of the review, an assessment of the quality of studies summarized, and a description of how studies can be interpreted and used to guide clinical practice. The limitations of the evidence and of the review should be discussed, and gaps in evidence should be addressed. A discussion of controversial or unresolved issues and topics in need of future research also should be included.

Clinical Practice Guidelines: In the Discussion section, describe current clinical practice guidelines, relevant to the topic of the review, if available, and whether the conclusions of this review agree with, or disagree with, the current clinical practice guidelines. If this is done and there is more than 1 guideline, a table should be prepared comparing the major features that differ between the guidelines. Guideline quality should be discussed using the standards outlined for the JAMA Clinical Guidelines Synopsis .

Conclusions

Include a 2- to 3-sentence summary of the major conclusions of the review.

Construct tables that summarize the search results. Tables summarizing treatments should have information organized by category of treatment and then by individual treatments. Columns should include the name of the treatment, strength of evidence supporting the treatment, the treatment's effect (preferably shown as the treatment's effect as compared to control on the measured outcome together with 95% confidence intervals), adverse effects, and very brief comments, if necessary. Lengthy text-based tables should be avoided. Additional or lengthy tables may be published online only, if justified.

Ratings of the quality of the evidence. Tables summarizing evidence should include ratings of the quality of the evidence. Use the rating scheme listed below with ratings of 1-5 for Reviews that include individual studies (modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine for ratings of individual studies).

There are several other preferred systems for rating the quality of evidence in Review articles. For Reviews that synthesize findings from numerous studies into a single summary recommendation, use the rating scale shown above or the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine's Levels of Evidence and Grades of Recommendation or the recommendations in the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines . For reviews that include diagnostic studies, use The Rational Clinical Examination Levels of Evidence table .

Follow additional instructions for preparation and submission of Tables .

A PRISMA-style flow diagram should be included as an online supplement that summarizes the results of the literature search and the numbers of articles/records/studies and patients/participants represented in the studies identified, screened, eligible, and included in the final review.

Additional figures that illustrate pathophysiology or clinical presentation may be considered. Note: All figures will be re-created. For each proposed illustration, the authors should provide a list of the elements to be included in the illustration; 3-4 relevant recent references; example illustrations, if available; a working figure title and legend; and an explanation of how this new illustration would add to the published literature. We encourage videos, if appropriate, to illustrate a point made or process described in the Review.

Follow additional instructions for preparation and submission of Figures and Video .

Narrative Reviews on clinical topics provide an up-to-date review for clinicians on a topic of general common interest from the perspective of internationally recognized experts in these disciplines. The focus of Narrative Reviews will be an update on current understanding of the physiology of the disease or condition, diagnostic consideration, and treatment. These reviews should address a specific question or issue that is relevant for clinical practice. Narrative Reviews do not require (but may include) a systematic review of the literature search. Recommendations should be supported with evidence and should rely on recent systematic reviews and guidelines, if available, emphasizing factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention.

The basic structure of manuscripts reporting Narrative Reviews should include the following: Abstract (structured abstract of no more than 300 words); Introduction (150-250 words); Methods, if included (150-250 words); Discussion/Observations (1000-1250 words, with the following subsections, if appropriate: Pathophysiology, Clinical Presentation, Assessment and Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis); and Conclusions (2-3 sentences).

Typical length: 2000-3500 words (maximum), with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures, and no more than 50-75 references. For an example of this type of article, see JAMA . 2015;314(23):2544-2554 .

Specific Components of a Narrative Review

Abstract (300 words)

Narrative Review articles should include a 3-part structured abstract of no more than 300 words using the headings listed below:

Importance: An overview of the topic and discussion of the main objective or reason for this review. Observations: The principal observations and findings of the review. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions of the review that are supported by the information, along with clinical applications. How the findings are clinically relevant should be specifically stated.

The first 2 to 3 sentences of the Introduction should draw in readers in such that they want to continue reading the article and should establish the importance of the Review. Reviews should include the clinical question or issue and its importance for general medical practice, specialty practice, or public health. The first paragraph should provide a general summary of the clinical problem (eg, obesity). The next paragraph should focus on the specific aspect of the clinical problem the article will explore (eg, treatments for obesity). Briefly summarize the epidemiology of the disease. This information should include disease prevalence and incidence and perhaps discussion of the presence and frequency of any relevant subpopulations and any geographic or seasonal variations of the disease if these are relevant. The third paragraph should discuss exactly what material will be covered in the Review (eg, obesity treatments).

Methods (150-250 words)

A Methods section is not required for Narrative Reviews, but may be included to summarize a literature search that was conducted for this Review. If included, briefly describe the characteristics of the literature searched and included in the review, including the bibliographic databases and other sources searched, search terms used, dates included in the search, date the literature search was conducted, and any process used to evaluate the literature.

Discussion/Observations (1000-1250 words)

The principal observations of the Narrative Review generally should include the subsections listed below, although each section may not be necessary for some topics. The word counts following each subsection are suggested to assist with keeping the overall Observations section limited to 1000-1250 words.

Pathophysiology (150-250 words). Provide a brief overview of the pathophysiology of the disease. The intent is to provide readers with sufficient background information about the underpinnings of a disease to provide context for the rest of the article. Clinical Presentation (150-250 words). Briefly describe the clinical characteristics that result in a patient seeking medical care for the condition or what features of the disease should lead a physician to evaluate or treat it. Assessment and Diagnosis (250-300 words). Describe the clinical examination for evaluation of the disease and explain the most salient physical examination findings. If laboratory or imaging studies are necessary, provide the sensitivity and specificity and diagnostic accuracy of these tests and consider providing positive and negative likelihood ratios. Sequences of diagnostic tests are best presented as algorithms or in tables. Treatment (250-500 words). Treatments should be based on the most recently available and highest level of evidence. Treatment options should be summarized in the text and presented in detail in tables along with an indication of the strength of evidence supporting the individual treatments. In general, treatment recommendations should be supported by a systematic review or a high-quality guideline. If possible, the costs for various treatments should be provided. Prognosis (100-150 words). A section outlining the overall prognosis for the condition, once treated, should be included.

For most Narrative Reviews, tables should be included that summarize the epidemiology, diagnostic tools, and therapies available for the disease. In some cases, these 3 topics may not all be relevant to the review topic and tables may be appropriately modified to fit the review. Include a fourth table that compares the findings of the review and current clinical practice recommendations or diagnostic and therapeutic uncertainty or controversies.

Table 1: Major epidemiologic and burden of disease facts Table 2: Major diagnostic tools available Table 3: Major therapies available Table 4: Current clinical practice recommendations and/or diagnostic and therapeutic uncertainty, and controversies

Tables summarizing treatments should have information organized by category of treatment and then by individual treatments. Columns may include the treatment, strength of evidence supporting the treatment, the effect of the treatment (preferably shown as the treatment's effect as compared to control on the measured outcome together with 95% confidence intervals), adverse effects, and very brief explanatory comments, if necessary. Lengthy text-based tables should be avoided. Additional or lengthy tables may be published online only, if justified.

Figures that illustrate pathophysiology or clinical presentation may be included. Note: All figures will be re-created. For each proposed illustration, the authors should provide a list of the elements to be included in the illustration; 3-4 relevant recent references; example illustrations, if available; a working figure title and legend; and an explanation of how this new illustration would add to the published literature. We encourage videos, if appropriate, to illustrate a point made or process described in the Review.

Note: This journal publishes very few of these types of articles. These manuscripts describe an important issue in clinical medicine, public health, health policy, or medical research in a scholarly, thorough, well-referenced, systematic, and evidence-based manner.

A structured abstract is required. Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including tables, figures, or references) with no more than a total of 4 tables and/or figures and no more than 50 references. For a recently published example, see JAMA . 2019;322(20):1996-2016 .

Clinical Challenge presents an actual patient scenario about a specific disease or condition with an accompanying clinical image.

Authors should provide 4 single-phrase plausible treatment options describing possible courses of action with one of these being the most correct response for the question "What Would You Do Next?" Manuscripts should include a brief discussion of the relevant clinical issues and provide well-supported (evidence-based) explanations discussing the 4 potential courses of action. For a recently published example, see JAMA . 2022;327(24):2448-2449. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.8384 .

All diagnostic and treatment recommendations should be supported by referencing recent authoritative texts or journal articles. Preferably, these recommendations should be supported by governmental or multisociety guidelines, clinical trials, meta-analyses, or systematic reviews. The text should have a maximum length of 850 words, consisting of no more than 250 words for the case presentation, question, and 4 one-sentence answers, followed by no more than 600 words that include the diagnosis and a brief discussion. There should be no more than 3 authors. At least 1 of the authors, ideally the corresponding author, should have sufficient expertise and experience with the topic. There should be no more than 10 references, and no more than 2 small figures totaling 3 image components (Figure 1, with no more than 2 components, for the case presentation; and Figure 2, with no more than 1 component, for the diagnosis and discussion).

Provide a short title that briefly describes the disease entity or case presentation and does not include the diagnosis. Do not include the patient's race, ethnicity, or country of origin in the title or the first line of the article. If this information is clinically relevant and necessary, it can be included in the case description.

In addition, the JAMA Network Patient Permission form must be completed and signed by the patient (or a family member if the patient has died, is a minor, or is an adult without decisional capacity) and included at the time of manuscript submission. Please read Patient Identification before submitting your manuscript.

The image and case presentation should be from the same patient and must not have been published previously. In some cases, additional figures may be included to accompany the answer explanations (see description of additional figure(s) above). All images submitted should be high-quality .jpg or .tif files. Submit the original version of all image files at the highest resolution possible without labels. In general, the original image file should have a minimum resolution of 350 dpi at a width of about 5 inches. Do not increase the original resolution, resize, or crop the image; where applicable, we will crop to maintain patient confidentiality. If any labels, arrowheads, or A/B panel indicators are desired, provide a separate labeled version of the figure(s) for reference. All labels will be reformatted to journal style.

For more information on how to submit figures, see Figures.

We would like to receive common problems presenting uncommonly, rather than unusual or rare conditions (ie, "zebras"). These cases should be of interest to clinicians; they should be problems that clinicians are likely to encounter and have an outstanding image that illustrates the disorder and contributes to the diagnostic challenge.

Manuscripts not meeting these guidelines will not be considered.

Diagnostic Test Interpretation presents the results of a diagnostic test from a single patient and explores the clinical application of the test result. The Diagnostic Test Interpretation is intended to help clinicians understand the underlying rationale in ordering tests, interpreting test results, and acting on the diagnostic test findings.

The diagnostic test result must be obtained from the care of an actual patient and must include that patient's written permission. The JAMA Network Patient Permission form should be read and completed and signed by the patient (or a family member if the patient has died, is a minor, or is an adult without decisional capacity) and included at the time of manuscript submission. The results of laboratory, pathologic, or radiographic tests are appropriate but clinical images are not. Results of the diagnostic test of interest (and related tests) and the range of reference values should be included after the case. Authors of manuscripts based on clinical images should consult the instructions for Clinical Challenge .

Provide a short title that briefly describes the disease entity or case presentation and does not include the diagnosis. Do not include the patient's race, ethnicity, or country of origin in the title or first line of the article. If this information is clinically relevant and necessary, it can be included in the case description.

Manuscripts for Diagnostic Test Interpretation should have the following sections:

Case presentation. The case presentation should be brief and focus on the diagnostic test in question. At the end of the case presentation the pertinent diagnostic test results and reference ranges should be provided (200 words). Include: JAMA Exclude: Specialty Journals, JNO Comments: How do you interpret these test results? How do you interpret these test results? (or What would you do next?) Four plausible responses should be provided. While most Diagnostic Test Interpretation articles will pose the question "How do you interpret these results?" a subset may more appropriately focus on the next best step regarding workup of the abnormal test result. In these cases, the question "How do you interpret these test results?" can be replaced with "What would you do next?" Either question should be presented in the format of a multiple choice question with a single correct (or best) answer. The answers may be brief phrases or short sentences, should be similar in length, and should be arranged alphabetically by first word in the answer. Response options should not describe treatments (about 50 words). Include: CAR,ONC Exclude: JAMA, DER, IMD, NEU, OPH, PED, OTO, PSY, SUR, JNO Comments: How do you interpret these test results? Test characteristics. A brief review of the diagnostic test should be provided (approximately 200 words). For biomarkers, this should include a brief description of the related physiology. Test accuracy should be reported using sensitivity and specificity or likelihood ratios, and predictive values should be provided for common clinical scenarios. Please use likelihood ratios whenever possible, since they do not depend on disease prevalence. The prevalence of the disease should be stated so that the pretest probability may be estimated. For example, "For patients with a typical disease prevalence of 10%, the predictive values of positive and negative test results are approximately 50% and 1%, respectively." Discussion of the application and utility of the diagnostic test should be based on a high-quality systematic review or authoritative practice guideline. If a more recent, original study supersedes or adds meaningfully to the prior synthesis of research, that article also should be cited. The approximate fee for the test should be provided. For example, some fees for laboratory tests can be obtained from the Medicare fee schedules . Radiology procedure fees can be found at the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule website . Application of test result to this patient. A brief discussion of how the diagnostic test result will facilitate the next steps in a patient's management should be presented. Please also address the correct answer to the question about test interpretation in this section (200 words). What Are Alternative Diagnostic Testing Approaches? If there are different testing strategies that can be used to evaluate patients to establish a diagnosis, please discuss them (100 words). Patient Outcome. Long-term follow-up (most recent as possible) regarding the patient's condition and outcome of treatment is necessary (100 words). Clinical Bottom Line. Please provide a bulleted list of 3-5 items that reflect the most important message readers should obtain from this article.

The overall text of the manuscript should have a maximum of 850 words, no more than 10 references, and no more than 3 authors. At least 1 of the authors, ideally the corresponding author, should have sufficient expertise and experience with the topic. The case presentation must not have been previously published.

For an example of this article type, see JAMA . 2022;327(13):1284-1285. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.2037 .

If there are questions about patient identifiability, please contact the editorial office. Authors interested in submitting a manuscript for Diagnostic Test Interpretation should contact the editorial office prior to manuscript preparation and submission by sending an email to Kristin Walter at [email protected] .

Viewpoints may address virtually any important topic in medicine, public health, research, discovery, prevention, ethics, health policy, or health law and generally are not linked to a specific article. Viewpoints should be well focused, scholarly, and clearly presented but should not include the findings of new research or data that have not been previously published.

Viewpoints must have no more than 3 authors. Editors encourage diversity of gender, race, ethnicity, geographic location, and discipline for Viewpoint authors, and the first author should have sufficient expertise and experience with the topic to provide an authoritative opinion. The text should include the full name, academic degrees, and no more than 2 institutional affiliations for each author. Maximum length: up to 1200 words of text—or 1000 words of text with 1 small table or figure—and no more than 7 references, which should be as current as possible. Viewpoints not meeting these guidelines will not be considered.

Most essays published in A Piece of My Mind are personal vignettes (eg, exploring the dynamics of the patient-physician relationship) taken from wide-ranging experiences in medicine; occasional pieces express views and opinions on the myriad issues that affect the profession. If the patient(s) described in these manuscripts is identifiable, a Patient Permission form , which provides consent for publication, must be completed and signed by the patient(s) or family member(s) and submitted with the manuscript. Manuscripts that describe identifiable patients that do not have a signed form will not be reviewed. Omitting data or making data less specific to deidentify patients is acceptable, but changing any such data is not acceptable. Fictional or composite accounts are not permitted.

Manuscripts are not published anonymously or pseudonymously and must have no more than 3 authors. All manuscripts must be submitted formally via the journal's manuscript submission system; we do not review drafts or unfinished manuscripts prior to submission. Length limit: 1600 words.

Poems related to the medical experience, whether from the point of view of a health care worker or patient, or simply an observer, will be considered. Poems should be original, not previously published or under consideration elsewhere, and no longer than 44 lines. Authors should submit each poem separately (ie, one poem per submission record). Submissions containing multiple poems will be returned with instructions to split into individual files. All poems must be submitted online via the online manuscript submission and review system .

Questions about submitting poems (but not submissions) may be sent to [email protected] .

Letters discussing a recent article in this journal should be submitted within 4 weeks of publication of the article in print. 3 Letters received after 4 weeks will rarely be considered. Letters should not exceed 400 words of text and 5 references, 1 of which should be to the recent article. Letters may have no more than 3 authors. The text should include the full name, academic degrees, and a single institutional affiliation for each author and the email address for the corresponding author. Letters must not duplicate other material published or submitted for publication and should not include unpublished data. Letters not meeting these specifications are generally not considered. Letters being considered for publication ordinarily will be sent to the authors of the original article, who will be given the opportunity to reply. Letters will be published at the discretion of the editors and are subject to abridgement and editing for style and content. To read more about Letters, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Replies by authors should not exceed 500 words of text and 6 references. They should have no more than 3 authors.

Clinical Trial

These manuscripts include reports of Randomized Clinical Trials, Parallel-Design Double-blind Trials, Crossover Trials, Equivalence and Noninferiority Trials, Cluster Trials, and Nonrandomized Controlled Trials.

The ICMJE defines a clinical trial as any research project that prospectively assigns human participants to intervention or comparison groups to study the cause-and-effect relationship between an intervention and a health outcome. 4 Interventions include but are not limited to drugs, surgical procedures, devices, behavioral treatments, educational programs, dietary interventions, quality improvement interventions, process-of-care changes, and the like. All manuscripts reporting clinical trials, including those limited to secondary exploratory or post hoc analysis of trial outcomes, must include the following:

  • Copy of the original trial protocol, including the complete statistical analysis plan and any amendments. The journal recommends using the SPIRIT reporting guidelines when preparing original protocols (see Protocols ).
  • CONSORT flow diagram (see Figure ).
  • Completed trial checklist (see Checklist ).
  • Registry at an appropriate online public clinical trial registry (see Trial Registration requirements).
  • A Data Sharing Statement to indicate if data will be shared or not. Specific questions regarding the sharing of data are included in the manuscript submission system.

For additional guidance on reporting Randomized Clinical Trial, Parallel-Design Double-blind Trial, Crossover Trial, Equivalence and Noninferiority Trial, Cluster Trial, and Nonrandomized Controlled Trial, see Study Types .

Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study setting and dates, patients or participants with inclusion and exclusion criteria, or data sources, and how these were selected for the study); the essential features of any interventions; the primary and secondary outcome measures (consistent with those reported in the trial protocol); the main results of the study; a discussion section placing the results in context with the published literature and addressing study limitations; and the conclusions.

A structured abstract is required, and trial registration information (registry name, trial ID, and URL) must be listed at the end of the abstract; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and supplemental material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references. The subtitle should include the phrase "A Randomized Clinical Trial" or, for Nonrandomized Controlled Trials, "A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial." To read more about clinical trials, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Trial Registration:

In concert with the ICMJE, JAMA Network requires, as a condition of consideration for publication, registration of all trials in a public trials registry that is acceptable to the ICMJE (ie, the registry must be owned by a not-for-profit entity, be publicly accessible, and require the minimum registration data set as described by ICMJE). 4 , 8 , 9

Acceptable trial registries include the following and others listed at http://www.icmje.org :

  • anzctr.org.au
  • clinicaltrials.gov
  • trialregister.nl
  • umin.ac.jp/ctr

All clinical trials, regardless of when they were completed, and secondary analyses of original clinical trials must be registered before submission of a manuscript based on the trial. Secondary data analyses of primary (parent) clinical trials should not be registered as separate clinical trials, but instead should reference the trial registration number of the primary trial. Please note: for clinical trials starting patient enrollment after July 2005, trials must have been registered before onset of patient enrollment. For trials that began before July 2005 but that were not registered before September 13, 2005, trials must have been registered before journal submission. Trial registry name, registration identification number, and the URL for the registry should be included at the end of the abstract and also in the space provided on the online manuscript submission form.

Authors of manuscripts reporting clinical trials must submit trial protocols (including the complete statistical analysis plan) along with their manuscripts. Protocols in non-English languages should be translated into English. This should include the original approved protocol and statistical analysis plan, and all subsequent amendments to either document. Do not submit a summary version that was published as an article in another journal. If the manuscript is accepted, the protocol and statistical analysis plan will be published as a supplement.

CONSORT Flow Diagram and Checklist:

Manuscripts reporting the results of randomized trials must include the CONSORT flow diagram showing the progress of patients throughout the trial. The CONSORT checklist also should be completed and submitted with the manuscript. 10

Figure. Profile of a Randomized Clinical Trial

cover letter for case study report

Trial Protocol

These manuscripts are documents that describe the organization and plan for a randomized clinical trial, including the trial's objective(s), design, methodology, all outcomes to be measured, and statistical analysis plan. All trial protocol manuscripts must include a copy of the trial protocol including the complete statistical analysis plan (see Protocols ). All clinical trials that have begun randomization must be registered at an appropriate online public registry (see Trial Registration requirements). Follow SPIRIT Reporting Guidelines .

A structured abstract is required, and trial registration information (registry name, trial ID, and URL) must be listed at the end of the abstract; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Trial Protocols . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and supplemental material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references. The subtitle should include the phrase "A Trial Protocol."

These manuscripts are systematic, critical assessments of literature and data sources pertaining to clinical topics, emphasizing factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention, and that includes a statistical technique for quantitatively combining the results of multiple studies that measure the same outcome into a single pooled or summary estimate. All articles or data sources should be searched for and selected systematically for inclusion and critically evaluated, and the search and selection process should be described in the manuscript. The specific type of study or analysis, population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes should be described for each article or data source. The data sources should be as current as possible, ideally with the search having been conducted within several months of manuscript submission. Authors of reports of meta-analyses of clinical trials should submit the PRISMA flow diagram and checklist . Authors of meta-analyses of observational studies should submit the MOOSE checklist . Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines .

A structured abstract is required; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Meta-analysis . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and online-only material), with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references. The subtitle should include the phrase "A Meta-analysis." To read more about meta-analyses, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Other Observational Studies

These manuscripts include Cohort Study, Case-Control Study, Cross-sectional Study, Case Series, Economic Evaluation, Decision Analytical Model, Comparative Effectiveness Research, Genetic Association Study, Diagnostic/Prognostic Study, Quality Improvement Study, Survey Study, and Qualitative Study. Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study setting and dates, patients or participants with inclusion and exclusion criteria and/or participation or response rates, or data sources, and how these were selected for the study); the essential features of any interventions or exposures; the main outcome measures; the main results of the study; a discussion section placing the results in context with the published literature and addressing study limitations; and the conclusions and relevant implications for clinical practice or health policy. Data included in research reports must be original and should be as timely and current as possible (see Timeliness of Data ). Follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines .

A structured abstract is required; for more information, see instructions for preparing Abstracts for Reports of Original Data . A list of 3 Key Points is required (see guidance on preparing Key Points ). Maximum length: 3000 words of text (not including abstract, tables, figures, acknowledgments, references, and supplemental material) with no more than a total of 5 tables and/or figures and no more than 50-75 references.

Format My Manuscript

Manuscript preparation and submission requirements.

All manuscripts must be submitted online via the online manuscript submission and review system .

At the time of submission, complete contact information (affiliation, postal/mail address, email address, and telephone numbers) for the corresponding author is required. First and last names, email addresses, and institutional affiliations of all coauthors are also required. After the manuscript is submitted, the corresponding author will receive an acknowledgment confirming receipt and a manuscript number. Authors will be able to track the status of their manuscripts via the online system. After manuscript submission, all authors of papers under consideration for publication will be sent a link to the Authorship Form to complete and submit. See other details in these instructions for additional requirements. 2 , 4

As recommended by the ICMJE, "if the manuscript has been submitted previously to another journal, it is helpful to include the previous editors' and reviewers' comments with the submitted manuscript, along with the authors' responses to those comments." 4 It is not uncommon for manuscripts to have been submitted to and peer reviewed by other journals and sharing this information will not bias an editor's decision for this journal. Thus, authors are encouraged to submit these previous comments in their entirety and indicate how they have revised the manuscript in response to these comments, which may expedite the review process. In the submission system, there is a file type for Previous Peer Review and Editorial Comments.

Include a cover letter and complete contact information for the corresponding author (affiliation, postal/mail address, email address, and telephone number) and whether the authors have published, posted, or submitted any related papers from the same study (see Previous Publication, Related Manuscripts and Reports, and Preprints ).

Manuscripts should be prepared in accordance with the AMA Manual of Style , 11th edition, 2 and/or the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals . 4

Include in the manuscript file a title page, abstract, text, references, and as appropriate, figure legends and tables. Start each of these sections on a new page, numbered consecutively, beginning with the title page. Figures should be submitted as separate files (1 file per figure) and not included in the manuscript text.

We recommend individual file sizes of no more than 500 kB and not exceeding 1 MB, with the total size for all files not exceeding 5 MB (not including any video files).

For submission and review, please submit the manuscript as a Word document. Do not submit your manuscript in PDF format.

Use 10-, 11-, or 12-point font size, double-space text, and leave right margins unjustified (ragged).

The title page should be the first page of your manuscript file. It should include a manuscript title; the full names, highest academic degrees, and affiliations of all authors (if an author's affiliation has changed since the work was done, the new affiliation also should be listed); name and complete contact information for corresponding author; and manuscript word count (not including title, abstract, acknowledgment, references, tables, and figure legends).

Titles should be concise, specific, and informative. 2(p8) Please limit the length of titles to 100 characters (including spaces) for reports of research and other major articles and 60 characters for shorter article types such as opinion articles and Letters as well as for subtitles to major articles. For scientific manuscripts, do not use overly general titles, declarative titles, titles that include the direction of study results, or questions as titles. For reports of clinical trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews, include the type of study as a subtitle (eg, A Randomized Clinical Trial, A Meta-analysis, A Systematic Review). For reports of other types of research, do not include study type or design in the title or subtitle. Depending on the context, avoid inclusion of specific locations (eg, state, province, or country) and specific years. To read more about titles, see the AMA Manual of Style .

In the manuscript, include a separate section called "Key Points" before the Abstract.

This feature provides a quick structured synopsis of the findings of your manuscript (required only for research and review manuscripts), following 3 key points: Question, Findings, and Meaning. Limit this section to 75-100 words or less.

Question: Focused question based on the study hypothesis or goal/purpose. Limit to 1 sentence. Findings: Results of the study/review. Include the design (eg, clinical trial, cohort study, case-control study, meta-analysis). Focus on primary outcome(s) and finding(s). Do not emphasize secondary outcomes. Report basic numbers only but state if results are statistically significant or not significant; do not include results of statistical tests or measures of variance (see example below). Can include 1 to 2 sentences. Meaning: Key conclusion and implication based on the primary finding(s). Limit to 1 sentence. Example of Research Article Question: What is the immunogenicity of an inactivated influenza A vaccine with and without adjuvant? Findings: In this randomized clinical trial that included 980 adults, the proportion achieving an effective antibody response was 84% with adjuvant vs 2% without adjuvant, a significant difference. Meaning: In an influenza pandemic the use of an adjuvant with inactivated influenza A vaccine may be warranted. Include: All Journals except JNO and JHF Exclude: JNO and JHF Comments: Example of Review Article Example of Review Article Question: What are the most effective medical treatments for adult chronic sinusitis? Findings: In this systematic review, symptoms of chronic sinusitis were improved with saline irrigation and topical corticosteroid therapy compared to no therapy. Compared with placebo, 3-week courses of systemic corticosteroids or oral doxycycline were associated with reduced polyp size, and a 3-month course of macrolide antibiotic was associated with improved symptoms in patients without polyps. Meaning: First-line therapy for chronic sinusitis should begin with daily topical intranasal corticosteroid in conjunction with saline irrigation; subsequent therapies should be based on the patient's polyp status and severity of symptoms.

Include a structured abstract for reports of original data, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews. Abstracts should be prepared in JAMA Network style—see instructions for preparing abstracts below. Abstracts are not required for Editorials, Viewpoints, and special features. No information should be reported in the abstract that does not appear in the text of the manuscript. To read more about abstracts, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Abstracts for Reports of Original Data:

Reports of original data should include an abstract of no more than 350 words using the headings listed below. For brevity, parts of the abstract may be written as phrases rather than complete sentences. Each section should include the following content:

Importance: The abstract should begin with a sentence or 2 explaining the clinical (or other) importance of the study question. Objective: State the precise objective or study question addressed in the report (eg, "To determine whether..."). If more than 1 objective is addressed, the main objective should be indicated and only key secondary objectives stated. If an a priori hypothesis was tested, it should be stated. Design: Describe the basic design of the study and include the specific study type (eg, randomized clinical trial, cohort, cross-sectional, case-control, case series, survey, meta-analysis, bibliometric analysis). State the years of the study and the duration of follow-up. For older studies (eg, those completed >3 years ago), add the date of the analysis being reported. If applicable, include the name of the study (eg, the Framingham Heart Study). As relevant, indicate whether observers were blinded to patient groupings, particularly for subjective measurements. Setting: Describe the study setting to assist readers to determine the applicability of the report to other circumstances, for example, multicenter, population-based, primary care or referral center(s), etc. Participants: State the clinical disorders, important eligibility criteria, and key sociodemographic features of patients (or other study participants). The numbers of eligible participants and how they were selected should be provided, including the number approached but who refused or were excluded. For selection procedures, these terms should be used, if appropriate: random sample (where random refers to a formal, randomized selection in which all eligible individuals have a fixed and usually equal chance of selection); population-based sample; referred sample; consecutive sample; volunteer sample; convenience sample. If matching is used for comparison groups, characteristics that are matched should be specified. In follow-up studies, the proportion of participants who completed the study must be indicated.

Note: The preceding 3 sections are usually combined for accepted papers during the editing process as "Design, Setting, and Participants," but for manuscript submission these sections should be kept separate.

Intervention(s) (for clinical trials) or Exposure(s) (for observational studies): The essential features of any interventions, or exposures, should be described, including their method and duration. The intervention, or exposure, should be named by its most common clinical name, and nonproprietary drug names should be used. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): Indicate the primary study outcome measurement(s) as planned before data collection began. If the manuscript does not report the main planned outcomes of a study, this fact should be stated and the reason indicated. State clearly if the hypothesis being tested was formulated during or after data collection. Explain outcomes or measurements unfamiliar to a general medical readership. Results: Summary demographic information (eg, characteristics such as sex and age) and the number of study participants should be reported in the first sentence of the Results paragraph. The main outcomes of the study should be reported and quantified, including final included/analyzed sample. When possible, present numerical results (eg, absolute numbers and/or rates) with appropriate indicators of uncertainty, such as confidence intervals. Use means and standard deviations (SDs) for normally distributed data and medians and ranges or interquartile ranges (IQRs) for data that are not normally distributed. Avoid solely reporting the results of statistical hypothesis testing, such as  P  values, which fail to convey important quantitative information. For most studies,  P  values should follow the reporting of comparisons of absolute numbers or rates and measures of uncertainty (eg, 0.8%, 95% CI −0.2% to 1.8%;  P  =.13).  P  values should never be presented alone without the data that are being compared. See also Reporting Standards and Data Presentation . Measures of relative risk also may be reported (eg, relative risk, hazard ratios) and should include confidence intervals. Studies of screening and diagnostic tests should report sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratio. If predictive value or accuracy is reported, prevalence or pretest likelihood should be given as well. All randomized clinical trials should include the results of intention-to-treat analysis as well. In intervention studies, the number of patients withdrawn because of adverse effects should be given. Approaches such as number needed to treat to achieve a unit of benefit may be included when appropriate. All surveys should include response/participation rates. Conclusions and Relevance: Provide only conclusions of the study that are directly supported by the results. Give equal emphasis to positive and negative findings of equal scientific merit. Also, provide a statement of relevance indicating implications for clinical practice or health policy, avoiding speculation and overgeneralization. The relevance statement may also indicate whether additional study is required before the information should be used in clinical settings. Trial Registration: For clinical trials only (not nontrial observational studies), the name of the trial registry, registration number, and URL of the registry must be included. See Trial Registration .

Abstracts for Meta-analysis:

Manuscripts reporting the results of meta-analyses should include an abstract of no more than 350 words using the headings listed below. The text of the manuscript should also include a section describing the methods used for data sources, study selection, data extraction, and data synthesis. Each heading should be followed by a brief description:

Importance: A sentence or 2 explaining the importance of the systematic review question that is used to justify the meta-analysis. Objective: State the precise primary objective of the meta-analysis. Indicate whether the systematic review for the meta-analysis emphasizes factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention and include information about the specific population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes that are being analyzed. Data Sources: Succinctly summarize data sources, including years searched. The search should include the most current information possible, ideally with the search being conducted within several months before the date of manuscript submission. Potential sources include computerized databases and published indexes, registries, meeting abstracts, conference proceedings, references identified from bibliographies of pertinent articles and books, experts or research institutions active in the field, and companies or manufacturers of tests or agents being reviewed. If a bibliographic database is used, state the exact indexing terms used for article retrieval, including any constraints (for example, English language or human study participants). If abstract space does not permit this level of detail, summarize sources in the abstract including databases and years searched, and place the remainder of the information in the Methods section. Study Selection: Describe inclusion and exclusion criteria used to select studies for detailed review from among studies identified as relevant to the topic. Details of selection should include particular populations, interventions, outcomes, or methodological designs. The method used to apply these criteria should be specified (for example, blinded review, consensus, multiple reviewers). State the proportion of initially identified studies that met selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Describe guidelines (eg, PRISMA , MOOSE ) used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity. The method by which the guidelines were applied should be stated (for example, independent extraction by multiple observers). Indicate whether data were pooled using a fixed-effect or random-effects model. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): Indicate the primary study outcome(s) and measurement(s) as planned before data collection began. If the manuscript does not report the main planned outcomes of a study, this fact should be stated and the reason indicated. State clearly if the hypothesis being tested was formulated during or after data collection. Explain outcomes or measurement unfamiliar to a general medical readership. Results: Provide the number of studies and patients/participants in the analysis and state the main quantitative results of the review. When possible, present numerical results (eg, absolute numbers and/or rates) with appropriate indicators of uncertainty, such as confidence intervals. Use means and standard deviations (SDs) for normally distributed data and medians and ranges or interquartile ranges (IQRs) for data that are not normally distributed. Avoid solely reporting the results of statistical hypothesis testing, such as  P  values, which fail to convey important quantitative information. For most studies,  P  values should follow the reporting of comparisons of absolute numbers or rates and measures of uncertainty (eg, 0.8%, 95% CI −0.2% to 1.8%;  P  = .13).  P  values should never be presented alone without the data that are being compared. See also Reporting Standards and Data Presentation . Meta-analyses should state the major outcomes that were pooled and include odds ratios or effect sizes and, if possible, sensitivity analyses. Evaluations of screening and diagnostic tests should include sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, receiver operating characteristic curves, and predictive values. Assessments of prognosis should summarize survival characteristics and related variables. Major identified sources of variation between studies should be stated, including differences in treatment protocols, co-interventions, confounders, outcome measures, length of follow-up, and dropout rates. Conclusions and Relevance: The conclusions and their applications (clinical or otherwise) should be clearly stated, limiting interpretation to the domain of the review.

Abstracts for Systematic Reviews or Special Communications:

Systematic Review articles should include a structured abstract of no more than 350 words using the headings listed below.

Importance:  Include 1 or 2 sentences describing the clinical question or issue and its importance in clinical practice or public health. Objective:  State the precise primary objective of the review. Indicate whether the review emphasizes factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention and include information about the specific population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes that are being reviewed. Evidence Review:  Describe the information sources used, including the search strategies, years searched, and other sources of material, such as subsequent reference searches of retrieved articles. Methods used for inclusion of identified articles and quality assessment should be explained. Findings:  Include a brief summary of the number of articles included, numbers of various types of studies (eg, clinical trials, cohort studies), and numbers of patients/participants represented by these studies. Summarize the major findings of the review of the clinical issue or topic in an evidence-based, objective, and balanced fashion, with the highest-quality evidence available receiving the greatest emphasis. Provide quantitative data. Conclusions and Relevance:  The conclusions should clearly answer the questions posed if applicable, be based on available evidence, and emphasize how clinicians should apply current knowledge. Conclusions should be based only on results described in the abstract Findings subsection.

Abstracts for Narrative Reviews or Special Communications:

Importance:  An overview of the topic and discussion of the main objective or reason for this review. Observations:  The principal observations and findings of the review. Conclusions and Relevance:  The conclusions of the review that are supported by the information, along with clinical applications. How the findings are clinically relevant should be specifically stated.

Ratings of the quality of the evidence

Tables summarizing evidence should include ratings of the quality of the evidence. Use the rating scheme listed below with ratings of 1-5 for Reviews that include individual studies (modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine for ratings of individual studies).

Do not use abbreviations in the title or abstract and limit their use in the text. Expand all abbreviations at first mention in the text. To read more about abbreviation use, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Laboratory values are expressed using conventional units of measure, with relevant Système International (SI) conversion factors expressed secondarily (in parentheses) only at first mention. Articles that contain numerous conversion factors may list them together in a paragraph at the end of the Methods section. In tables and figures, a conversion factor to SI should be presented in the footnote or legend. The metric system is preferred for the expression of length, area, mass, and volume. For more details, see the Units of Measure conversion table on the website for the AMA Manual of Style . 2

To read more about units of measure, click here .

Use nonproprietary names of drugs, devices, and other products and services, unless the specific trade name of a drug is essential to the discussion. 2(pp567-569) In such cases, use the trade name once and the generic or descriptive name thereafter. Do not include trademark symbols. To read more about names of drugs, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Authors describing genes or related structures in a manuscript should include the names and official symbols provided by the US National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) or the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee . Before submission of a research manuscript reporting on large genomic data sets (eg, protein or DNA sequences), the data sets should be deposited in a publicly available database, such as NCBI's GenBank , and a complete accession number (and version number if appropriate) must be provided in the Methods section or Acknowledgment of the manuscript. To read more about gene nomenclature, see the AMA Manual of Style .

JAMA does not republish text, tables, figures, or other material from other publishers, except under rare circumstances. Please delete any such material and replace with originals.

The submission and publication of content created by artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies is discouraged, unless part of formal research design or methods, and is not permitted without clear description of the content that was created and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors must take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated by these models and tools.

Authors are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of their references and for correct text citation. Number references in the order they appear in the text; do not alphabetize. In text, tables, and legends, identify references with superscript arabic numerals. When listing references, follow AMA style and abbreviate names of journals according to the journals list in PubMed . List all authors and/or editors up to 6; if more than 6, list the first 3 followed by "et al." Note: Journal references should include the issue number in parentheses after the volume number.

Examples of reference style:

Youngster I, Russell GH, Pindar C, Ziv-Baran T, Sauk J, Hohmann EL. Oral, capsulized, frozen fecal microbiota transplantation for relapsing Clostridium difficileinfection. JAMA . 2014;312(17):1772-1778. Murray CJL. Maximizing antiretroviral therapy in developing countries: the dual challenge of efficiency and quality [published online December 1, 2014]. JAMA . doi:10.1001/jama.2014.16376 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. CMS proposals to implement certain disclosure provisions of the Affordable Care Act. http://www.cms.gov/apps/media/press/factsheet.asp?Counter=4221. Accessed January 30, 2012. McPhee SJ, Winker MA, Rabow MW, Pantilat SZ, Markowitz AJ, eds. Care at the Close of Life: Evidence and Experience . New York, NY: McGraw Hill Medical; 2011.

For more examples of electronic references, click here .

General Considerations

Authors are encouraged to consult "Reporting Statistical Information in Medical Journal Articles." 1 In the Methods section, describe statistical methods with enough detail to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to reproduce the reported results. Such description should include appropriate references to the original literature, particularly for uncommon statistical methods. For more advanced or novel methods, provide a brief explanation of the methods and appropriate use in the text and consider providing a detailed description in an online supplement.

In the reporting of results, when possible, quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty, such as confidence intervals (see Reporting Standards and Data Presentation ). Avoid relying solely on statistical hypothesis testing, such as the use of P values, which fails to convey important quantitative information. For observational studies, provide the numbers of observations. For randomized trials, provide the numbers randomized. Report losses to observation or follow up (see Missing Data ). For multivariable models, report all variables included in models, and report model diagnostics and overall fit of the model when available (see Statistical Procedures ).

Define statistical terms, abbreviations, and symbols, if included. Avoid nontechnical uses of technical terms in statistics, such as correlation, normal, predictor, random, sample, significant, trend. Do not use inappropriate hedge terms such as marginal significance or trend toward significance for results that are not statistically significant. Causal language (including use of terms such as effect and efficacy) should be used only for randomized clinical trials. For all other study designs (including meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials), methods and results should be described in terms of association or correlation and should avoid cause-and-effect wording.

Sample Size Calculations

For randomized trials, a statement of the power or sample size calculation is required (see the EQUATOR Network CONSORT Guidelines ). For observational studies that use an established population, a power calculation is not generally required when the sample size is fixed. However, if the sample size was determined by the researchers, through any type of sampling or matching, then there should be some justification for the number sampled. In any case, describe power and sample size calculations at the beginning of the Statistical Methods section, following the general description of the study population.

Descriptive Statistics

It is generally not necessary to provide a detailed description of the methods used to generate summary statistics, but the tests should be briefly noted in the Methods section (eg, ANOVA or Fisher exact test).

Statistical Procedures

Identify regression models with more than 1 independent variable as multivariable and regression models with more than 1 dependent variable as multivariate. Report all variables included in models, as well as any mathematical transformations of those variables. Provide the scientific rationale (clinical, statistical, or otherwise) for including variables in regression models.

For regression models fit to dependent data (eg, clustered or longitudinal data), the models should account for the correlations that arise from clustering and/or repeated measures. Failure to account for such correlation will result in incorrect estimates of uncertainty (eg, confidence intervals). Describe how the model accounted for correlation. For example, for an analysis based on generalized estimating equations, identify the assumed correlation structure and whether robust (or, sandwich) variance estimators were used. Or, for an analysis based on mixed-effects models, identify the assumed structure for the random effects, such as the level of random intercepts and whether any random slopes were included. Fixed-effects estimation should be described as conditional likelihood. Avoid the term fixed effects for describing covariates.

Missing Data

Report losses to observation, such as dropouts from a clinical trial or those lost to follow-up or unavailable in an observational study. If some participants are excluded from analyses because of missing or incomplete data, provide a supplementary table that compares the observed characteristics between participants with complete and incomplete data. Consider multiple imputation methods to impute missing data and include an assessment of whether data were missing at random. Approaches based on "last observation carried forward" should not be used.

Primary Outcomes, Multiple Comparisons, and Post Hoc Comparisons

Both randomized and observational studies should identify the primary outcome(s) before the study began, as well as any prespecified secondary, subgroup, and/or sensitivity analyses. Comparisons arrived at during the course of the analysis or after the study was completed should be identified as post hoc. For analyses of more than 1 primary outcome, corrections for multiple testing should generally be used. For secondary outcomes, address multiple comparisons or consider such analyses as exploratory and interpret them as hypothesis-generating. The reporting of all outcomes should match that included in study protocols. For randomized clinical trials, protocols with complete statistical analysis plans should be cited in the Methods section and submitted as online supplementary content. Randomized clinical trials should be primarily analyzed according to the intention-to-treat approach. Deviations from strict intention-to-treat analysis should be described as "modified intention-to-treat," with the modifications clearly described.

Statistical Analysis Subsection

At the end of the Methods section, briefly describe the statistical tests used for the analysis. State any a priori levels of significance and whether hypothesis tests were 1- or 2-sided. Also include the statistical software used to perform the analysis, including the version and manufacturer, along with any extension packages (eg, the svy suite of commands in Stata or the survival package in R). Do not describe software commands (eg, SAS proc mixed was used to fit a linear mixed-effects model). If analysis code is included, it should be placed in the online supplementary content.

Reporting Standards and Data Presentation

Analyses should follow EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines and be consistent with the protocol and statistical analysis plan, or described as post hoc.

When possible, present numerical results (eg, absolute numbers and/or rates) with appropriate indicators of uncertainty, such as confidence intervals. Use means and standard deviations (SDs) for normally distributed data and medians and ranges or interquartile ranges (IQRs) for data that are not normally distributed. Avoid solely reporting the results of statistical hypothesis testing, such as P values, which fail to convey important quantitative information. For most studies, P values should follow the reporting of comparisons of absolute numbers or rates and measures of uncertainty (eg, 0.8%, 95% CI −0.2% to 1.8%; P  = .13). P values should never be presented alone without the data that are being compared. If P values are reported, follow standard conventions for decimal places: for P values less than .001, report as " P <.001"; for P values between .001 and .01, report the value to the nearest thousandth; for P values greater than or equal to .01, report the value to the nearest hundredth; and for P values greater than .99, report as " P >.99." For studies with exponentially small P values (eg, genetic association studies), P values may be reported with exponents (eg, P  = 1×10 −5 ). In general, there is no need to present the values of test statistics (eg, F statistics or χ² results) and degrees of freedom when reporting results.

For secondary and subgroup analyses, there should be a description of how the potential for type I error due to multiple comparisons was handled, for example, by adjustment of the significance threshold. In the absence of some approach, these analyses should generally be described and interpreted as exploratory, as should all post hoc analyses.

For randomized trials using parallel-group design, there is no validity in conducting hypothesis tests regarding the distribution of baseline covariates between groups; by definition, these differences are due to chance. Because of this, tables of baseline participant characteristics should not include P values or statements of statistical comparisons among randomized groups. Instead, report clinically meaningful imbalances between groups, along with potential adjustments for those imbalances in multivariable models. To read more about statistical tests and data presentation, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Tables and Figures

Restrict tables and figures to those needed to explain and support the argument of the article and to report all outcomes identified in the Methods section. Number each table and figure and provide a descriptive title for each. Every table and figure should have an in-text citation. Verify that data are consistently reported across text, tables, figures, and supplementary material.

See also Tables and Figures .

Frequency data should be reported as "No. (%)," not as percentages alone (exception, sample sizes exceeding ~10,000). Whenever possible, proportions and percentages should be accompanied by the actual numerator and denominator from which they were derived. This is particularly important when the sample size is less than 100. Do not use decimal places (ie, xx%, not xx.xx%) if the sample size is less than 100. Tables that include results from multivariable regression models should focus on the primary results. Provide the unadjusted and adjusted results for the primary exposure(s) or comparison(s) of interest. If a more detailed description of the model is required, consider providing the additional unadjusted and adjusted results in supplementary tables.

Tables have a minimum of 2 columns. Comparisons must read across the table columns.

Do not duplicate data in figures and tables. For all primary outcomes noted in the Methods section, exact values with measures of uncertainty should be reported in the text or in a table and in the Abstract, and not only represented graphically in figures.

Pie charts and 3-D graphs should not be used and should be revised to alternative graph types.

Bar graphs should be used to present frequency data only (ie, numbers and rates). Avoid stacked bar charts and consider alternative formats (eg, tables or splitting bar segments into side-by-side bars) except for comparisons of distributions of ordinal data.

Summary data (eg, means, odds ratios) should be reported using data markers for point estimates, not bars, and should include error bars indicating measures of uncertainty (eg, SDs, 95% CIs). Actual values (not log-transformed values) of relative data (for example, odds ratios, hazard ratios) should be plotted on log scales.

For survival plots, include the number at risk for each group included in the analysis at intervals along the x-axis scale. For any figures in which color is used, be sure that colors are distinguishable.

All symbols, indicators, line styles, and colors in statistical graphs should be defined in a key or in the figure legend. Axes in statistical graphs must have labels. Units of measure must be provided for continuous data.

Note: All figures are re-created by journal graphics experts according to reporting standards using the JAMA Network style guide and color palette.

  • Number all tables in the order of their citation in the text.
  • Include a brief title for each table (a descriptive phrase, preferably no longer than 10 to 15 words).
  • Include all tables at the end of the manuscript file.
  • Refer to Categories of Articles for limits on the number of tables.
  • NOTE: Do not embed tables as images in the manuscript file or upload tables in image formats, and do not upload tables as separate files.

Table Creation

Use the table menu in the software program used to prepare the text. Tables can be built de novo using Insert→Table or copied into the text file from another document (eg, Word, Excel, or a statistical spreadsheet).

Avoid using tabs, spaces, and hard returns to set up the table; such tables will have to be retyped, creating delays and opportunities for error.

Tables should be single-spaced and in a 10- or 12-point font (do not shrink the point size to fit the table onto the page). Do not draw extra lines or rules—the table grid will display the outlines of each cell.

Missing data and blank space in the table field (ie, an empty cell) may create ambiguity and should be avoided; use abbreviations such as NA for not applicable or not available. Each piece of data needs to be contained in its own cell. Do not try to align cells with hard returns or tabs; alignment will be imposed in the production system if the manuscript is accepted. To show an indent, add 2 spaces.

When presenting percentages, include numbers (numerator and denominator).

Include statistical variability where applicable (eg, mean [SD], median [IQR]). For additional detail on requirements for data presentation in tables, see Statistical Methods and Data Presentation .

Place each row of data in a separate row of cells, and note that No. (%) and measures of variability are presented in the same cell as in the example Table 1 below:

Table 1. Baseline Values in the Editors' Health Study

cover letter for case study report

SI conversion factors: To convert cholesterol to mmol/L, multiply values by 0.0259.

Note that JAMA Network journals report laboratory values in conventional units. In a table, provide a footnote with the conversion factor to SI units. For a calculator of SI and conventional units, see the AMA Manual of Style . 2

To present data that span more than 1 row, merge the cells vertically. For example, in Table 2 the final column presents the P value for overall age comparisons.

Table 2. Blood Pressure Values Stratified by Age

cover letter for case study report

The table should be constructed such that the primary comparison reads horizontally. For example, see Table 3 (incorrect) and Table 4 (correct).

Table 3. Patient Data by Study Group

cover letter for case study report

Table 4. Patient Data by Study Group

cover letter for case study report

If a table must be continued, repeat the title and column headings on the second page, followed by "(continued)."

Table Footnotes

Footnotes to tables may apply to the entire table, portions (eg, a column), or an individual entry.

The order of the footnotes is determined by the placement in the table of the item to which the footnote refers.

When both a footnote letter and reference number follow data in a table, set the superscript reference number first followed by a comma and the superscript letter.

Use superscript letters (a, b, c) to mark each footnote and be sure each footnote in the table has a corresponding note (and vice versa).

List abbreviations in the footnote section and explain any empty cells.

If relevant, add a footnote to explain why numbers may not sum to group totals or percentages do not add to 100%.

For more detail on the components and recommended structure of tables, see the AMA Manual of Style . 2

Number all figures (graphs, charts, photographs, and illustrations) in the order of their citation in the text. The number of figures should be limited. Avoid complex composite or multipart figures unless justified. See Categories of Articles for limits on the number of figures and/or tables according to article type.

For initial manuscript submissions, figures must be of sufficient quality and may be embedded at the end of the file for editorial assessment and peer review. If a revision is requested and before a manuscript is accepted, authors will be asked to provide figures that meet the requirements described in Figure File Requirements for Publication .

Graphs, charts, some illustrations, titles, legends, keys, and other elements related to figures in accepted manuscripts will be re-created and edited according to JAMA Network style and standards prior to publication. Online-only figures will not be edited or re-created (see Online-Only Supplements and Multimedia ).

Image Integrity

Preparation of scientific images (clinical images, radiographic images, micrographs, gels, etc) for publication must preserve the integrity of the image data. Digital adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color applied uniformly to an entire image are permissible as long as these adjustments do not selectively highlight, misrepresent, obscure, or eliminate specific elements in the original figure, including the background. Selective adjustments applied to individual elements in an image are not permissible. Individual elements may not be moved within an image field, deleted, or inserted from another image. Cropping may be used for efficient image display or to deidentify patients but must not misrepresent or alter interpretation of the image by selectively eliminating relevant visual information. Juxtaposition of elements from different parts of a single image or from different images, as in a composite, must be clearly indicated by the addition of dividing lines, borders, and/or panel labels.

The submission and publication of images created by artificial intelligence, machine learning tools, or similar technologies is discouraged, unless part of formal research design or methods, and is not permitted without clear description of the content that was created and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors must take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated by these models and tools.

When inappropriate images or image adjustments are detected by the journal staff, authors will be asked for an explanation and will be requested to submit the image as originally captured prior to any adjustment, cropping, or labeling. Authors may be asked to resubmit the image prepared in accordance with the above standards.

Acceptable Figure Files for Initial Submission and Review

Each figure for the main article may be uploaded as a separate file or appended to the end of the manuscript with the figure titles and legends. Online-only figures must be combined into the PDF of the online-only supplement (see Online-Only Supplements and Multimedia ). Note: If a revision is requested and before acceptance, authors must upload each figure for the main article as a separate file and follow the instructions in Figure File Requirements for Publication .

See the Table of Figure Requirements for additional guidance for specific types of figures for suggested resolution and file formats. In general each figure should be no larger than 1 MB.

Figure File Requirements for Publication

Each figure for the main article must be uploaded as a separate file. Online-only figures must be combined into the PDF of the online-only supplement (see Online-Only Supplements and Multimedia ).

See the Table of Figure Requirements for additional guidance and file formats for specific types of figures.

Files created by vector programs are best for accurately plotting and maintaining data points. JAMA Network journals are unable to use file formats native to statistical software applications to prepare figures for publication; most statistical software programs allow users to save or export files in digital vector formats.

Images created digitally (by digital camera or electronically created illustrations) must meet the minimum resolution requirements at the time of creation. Electronically increasing the resolution of an image after creation causes a breakdown of detail and will result in an unacceptable poor-quality image. Each component of a composite image must be uploaded separately at submission and individually meet the minimum resolution requirement.

Color photographs should be submitted in RGB mode using profiles such as Adobe RGB or sRGB. Digital cameras capture images in RGB. Do not change any color settings once the file is on the computer. Black-and-white photographs (eg, radiographs, ultrasound images, CT and MRI scans, and electron micrographs) can be submitted in either RGB or grayscale modes.

Figure Titles and Legends (Captions)

At the end of the manuscript, include a title for each figure. The figure title should be a brief descriptive phrase, preferably no longer than 10 to 15 words. A figure legend (caption) can be used for a brief explanation of the figure or markers if needed and expansion of abbreviations. For photomicrographs, include the type of specimen, original magnification or a scale bar, and stain in the legend. For gross pathology specimens, label any rulers with unit of measure. Digitally enhanced images must be clearly identified in the figure legends as enhanced or manipulated, eg, computed tomographic scans, magnetic resonance images, photographs, photomicrographs, x-ray films.

Figures With Labels, Arrows, or Other Markers

Photographs, clinical images, photomicrographs, gel electrophoresis, and other types that include labels, arrows, or other markers must be submitted in 2 versions: one version with the markers and one without. Provide an explanation for all labels, arrows, or other markers in the figure legend. The Figure field in the File Description tab of the manuscript submission system allows for uploading of 2 versions of the same figure.

Number of Figures

Refer to Categories of Articles because there may be a limit on the number of figures by article type.

General Figure Guidelines

  • Primary outcome data should not be presented in figures alone. Exact values with measure of variability should be reported in the text or table as well as in the abstract.
  • All symbols, indicators (including error bars), line styles, colors, and abbreviations should be defined in a legend.
  • Each axis on a statistical graph must have a label and units of measure should be labeled.
  • Do not use pie charts, 3-D graphs, and stacked bar charts as these are not appropriate for accurate statistical presentation of data and should be revised to another figure type or converted to a table.
  • Error bars should be included in both directions, unless only 1-sided variability was calculated.
  • Values for ratio data—odds ratios, relative risks, hazard ratios—should be plotted on a log scale. Values for ratio data should not be log transformed.
  • For footnotes, use letters (a, b, c, etc) not symbols.
  • Do not submit figures with more than 4 panels unless otherwise justified.
  • See the AMA Manual of Style for more guidance on figure types and components.

For images featuring patients or other identifiable persons, it is not acceptable to use black bars across the eyes in an attempt to deidentify. Cropping may be acceptable as long as the condition under discussion is clearly visible and necessary anatomic landmarks display. If the person in the image is possibly identifiable (not only by others but also by her/himself), permission for publication is required (see Patient Identification ).

Table of Figure Requirements

cover letter for case study report

To present frequency data (numbers or percentages). Each bar represents a category.

Bar graphs are typically vertical but when categories have long titles or there are many of them, they may run horizontally.

The scale on the frequency axis should begin at 0, and the axis should not be broken.

If the data plotted are a percentage or rate, error bars may be used to show statistical variability.

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .ai, .bmp, .docx, .emf, .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt, .psd, .tif, .wmf, .xls

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .ai, .emf, .eps, .pdf, .wmf, .xls

cover letter for case study report

To demonstrate the relationship between 2 or more quantitative variables, such as changes over time.

The dependent variable appears on the vertical axis (y) and the independent variable on the horizontal axis (x); the axes should be continuous, not broken.

Flow diagram

cover letter for case study report

To show participant recruitment and follow-up or inclusions and exclusions (such as in a systematic review).

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .ai, .docx, .emf, .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .ai, .docx, .emf, .eps, .pdf

Survival plot

cover letter for case study report

To display the proportion or percentage of individuals (represented on the y-axis) remaining free of or experiencing a specific outcome over time (represented on the x-axis).

The curve should be drawn as a step function (not smoothed).

The number of individuals followed up for each time interval (number at risk) should be shown underneath the x-axis.

Box-and-whisker plot (box plot)

cover letter for case study report

To show data distribution from 1 or more groups, particularly aggregate/summary data.

Each element should be described (the ends of the boxes, the middle line, and the whiskers). Data points that fall beyond the whiskers are typically shown as circles.

Forest plot

cover letter for case study report

To illustrate summary data, particularly in meta-analyses and systematic reviews.

The data are presented both tabularly and graphically.

The sources (with years and citations, when relevant) should comprise the first column.

Provide indicators of both directions of results at the top of the plot on either side of the vertical line (eg, favors intervention).

Typically, proportionally sized boxes represent the weight of each study and a diamond shows the overall effect at the bottom of the plot.

cover letter for case study report

To display quantitative data other than counts or frequencies on a single scaled axis according to categories on a baseline (horizontal or vertical). Point estimates are represented by discrete data markers, preferably with error bars (in both directions) to designate variability.

Scatterplot

cover letter for case study report

To show individual data points plotted according to coordinate values with continuous, quantitative x- and y-axis scales.

A curve that is generated mathematically may be fitted to the data to summarize the relationship among the variables.

Illustration

cover letter for case study report

To explain physiological mechanisms, describe clinical maneuvers and surgical techniques, or provide orientation to medical imaging.

Required minimum resolution for publication: ≥350 ppi

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .ai, .docx, .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt, .psd., tif

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .ai, .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .psd, .tif

Photographs and other clinical images

cover letter for case study report

To display clinical findings, experimental results, or clinical procedures, including medical imaging, photomicrographs, clinical photographs, and photographs of biopsy specimens.

Legends for photomicrographs should include details about the type of stain used and magnification.

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .eps, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt, .psd, .tif

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .eps, .jpg, .psd, .tif

Line drawings

cover letter for case study report

To illustrate anatomy or procedures.

Line drawings are almost always black and white.

Required minimum resolution for publication: ≥600 ppi

Acceptable File Formats for Initial Submission: .docx, .jpg, .pdf, .ppt, .psd, .tif

Acceptable File Formats for Revision and Publication: .jpg, .psd, .tif

Authors may submit supporting material to accompany their article for online-only publication when there is insufficient space to include the material in the print article. This material should be important to the understanding and interpretation of the report and should not repeat material in the print article. The amount of online-only material should be limited and justified. Online-only material should be original and not previously published.

Online-only material will undergo editorial and peer review with the main manuscript. If the manuscript is accepted for publication and if the online-only material is deemed appropriate for publication by the editors, it will be posted online at the time of publication of the article as additional material provided by the authors. This material will not be edited or formatted; thus, authors are responsible for the accuracy and presentation of all such material.

Online-only material should be submitted in a single Word document with pages numbered consecutively. Each element included in the online-only material should be cited in the text of the main manuscript (eg, eTable in the Supplement) and numbered in order of citation in the text (eg, eTable 1, eTable 2, eFigure 1, eFigure 2, eMethods). The first page of the online-only document should list the number and title of each element included in the document.

Online-Only Text

Online-only text should be set in Times New Roman font, 10 point in size, and single-spaced. The main heading of the online-only text should be in 12 point and boldface; subheadings should be in 10 point and boldface.

Online-Only References

All references cited within the online-only document must be included in a separate reference section, including those that also were cited in the main manuscript. They should be formatted just as in the main manuscript and numbered and cited consecutively in the online-only material.

Online-Only Tables

Online-only tables should be inserted in the document and numbered consecutively according to the order of citation as eTable 1, eTable 2, etc. All online-only tables should be cited in the relevant text of the main manuscript. The text and data in online tables should be Arial font, 10 point in size, and single-spaced. The table title should be set in Arial font, 12 point, and bold. Headings within tables should be set in 10 point and bold. Table footnotes should be set in 8 point and single-spaced. See also instructions for Tables above. If a table runs on to subsequent pages, repeat the column headers at the top of each page. Wide tables may be presented using a landscape orientation.

If data are better displayed in a separate Excel file, this can be submitted, provided that the Excel file is cited as an eTable and is numbered in the order cited in the text. If multiple Excel files of data are submitted, these should be placed in a single Excel file, with multiple tabs (sheets) at the bottom of the file. The first tab (sheet) should include a table of contents with eTable numbers and titles, and the subsequent tabs (sheets) should be labeled as eTable 1, eTable 2, etc. Please note: the journal is not a data repository; large data sets should be deposited into publicly accessible data repositories, and a link should be provided in the Methods or Results section and the Data Sharing Statement .

Online-Only Figures

Online-only figures should be inserted in the document and numbered consecutively according to the order of citation as eFigure 1, eFigure 2, etc. All online-only figures should be cited in the relevant text of the main manuscript. Figure titles should be set in Arial font, 12 point, bold, and single-spaced. Text within figures should be set as Arial font, 10 point. Figure legends should be set in 8 point and single-spaced. Graphs and diagrams should be exported directly out of the software application used to create them in a vector file format, such as .wmf, and then inserted into the Word document. Image file formats such as .jpg, .tif, and .gif are generally not suitable for graphs. Photographs, including all radiological images, should be prepared as .jpg (highest option) or .tif (uncompressed) files at a resolution of 300 dpi and width of 3-5 inches, but the resolution of photographic files with an original resolution <300 dpi should not be increased digitally to achieve a 300-dpi resolution. Photographs should be inserted in the document with the "Link to File" button turned off. Wide figures may be presented using a landscape orientation.

For editorial and review of an initial submission, submit videos according to the following specifications:

  • Acceptable file formats: .mov, .wmv, .mpg, .mpeg, .mp4, or .avi
  • Maximum file size: ≤25 MB
  • Preferred dimensions: 1920x1080 (HD) or greater (4k UHD footage is acceptable)
  • Minimum dimensions: 640 pixels wide by 360 pixels deep
  • Recommended frame rate: 24 fps (or 23.976 fps), 25 and 30 fps (or 29.97 fps)
  • Maximum length: ≤5 minutes
  • Desired aspect ratio: 4:3 (standard) or 16:9 (widescreen)
  • If compression is required to reduce file size for uploading, please use a minimum bit rate of 10,000 kbit/s – 20,000 kbit/s
  • When filming, please use a landscape orientation, not a portrait orientation. This is especially important when filming video or taking photographs with a smartphone or a mobile device.

Verify that the videos are viewable in QuickTime or Windows Media Player before uploading.

For each video, provide an in-text citation (eg, Video 1). At the end of the manuscript file, include a title (a brief phrase, preferably no longer than 10 to 15 words) and a caption that includes the file format and a brief explanation for each video. The same title and caption must be entered in the designated fields in the manuscript submission system when uploading each video. If multiple video files are submitted, number them in the order in which they should be viewed.

If patient(s) are identifiable in the video, authors must submit a Patient Permission form completed and signed by each patient. See also Patient Identification .

If the author does not hold copyright to the video, the author must obtain permission for the video to be published in the journal. This permission must be for unrestricted use in all print, online, and licensed versions of the journal.

NOTE: If your manuscript and accompanying videos are accepted for publication, the video files will be placed into a journal video frame and will be edited by JAMA Network video production staff according to journal style. In addition, a JAMA Network staff person may contact you to resubmit your videos to meet our production specifications. For example, a larger size may be needed, and if your videos were submitted with embedded text such as titles, annotations, labels, or captions, we will ask you to remove the text at this stage and resubmit the video without text, and JAMA Network video production will re-create all text using our house style.

Guidelines for Optimal Video Quality

  • Use plenty of diffuse light; avoid shadows.
  • Use the appropriate white-balance based on your lighting conditions. Different cameras have different settings, but most have presets for incandescent (yellow) light, fluorescent light, daylight, and tungsten light. Please make sure to select the correct one so that the color of your footage renders accurately.
  • Do not overexpose the image; a bit underexposed is preferable.
  • Use a tripod. This is especially important in close-ups.
  • Avoid excessive zooming. Use the optical zoom only; do not use a digital zoom.
  • Turn off all camera special effects.
  • Avoid using autofocus. Manual focus is more accurate. Keep the camera at a fixed distance from the subject.
  • Instruct people on camera to speak clearly and face the camera when speaking. Try to avoid large movements while speaking or immediately after speaking. Allow pauses before and after speaking for easier editing.
  • If the situation permits, ensure that individuals being filmed are not wearing white clothing or clothing with busy patterns or stripes, especially shirts, jackets, and ties. Subdued medium blue, brown, tan, beige, and green colors all work well for shirt and clothing choices.
  • Do not include an introduction by the physician as a "talking head" explaining a procedure. All footage should be of the procedure or relevant subject matter only.
  • Record a few extra seconds before and after each cut or after changing the camera's position. This allows for easier editing.

Additional Considerations for Filming Surgical Procedures

  • Coordinate with the surgical staff to establish a vantage point for the camera that has a clear view of the surgical field.
  • Before the procedure, if the situation permits, identify the surgical staff's positions for access into and out of the surgical field to ensure there is no immediate obstruction of the camera.
  • During the procedure, avoid typical obstructions of the camera's main view such as arms reaching across the field or soiled surgical sponges. Where possible, keep the heads, hands, and any instruments away from the immediate sightline of the camera. This will ensure that all moments of the procedure are captured in full view and focus.
  • If the situation permits a choice of glove type, use brown or tan. White gloves reflect bright light; vividly colored surgical gloves can distract the viewer from the teaching point of the video.
  • If the situation permits, avoid rapid movements for procedural steps that should be noticed and understood. To demonstrate a key moment or use of an instrument, movement that is deliberate and steady will allow a standard camera to focus properly.

For editorial and review of an initial submission, submit audio files according to the following minimum requirements:

  • Acceptable file formats: .mp3, .wav, or .aiff
  • Maximum file size: 25 MB
  • To achieve the best quality, use a setting of 256 kbps or higher for stereo or 128 kbps or higher for mono.
  • Sampling rate should be either 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz.
  • Bit rate should be either 16 or 24 bit.
  • To avoid audible clipping noise, please make sure that audio levels do not exceed 0 dBFS.

For each audio file, provide an in-text citation. At the end of the manuscript, include a title (a brief phrase, preferably no longer than 10-15 words) and a caption that includes the file format and a brief explanation for each audio.

NOTE: If your manuscript is accepted for publication, JAMA Network video production staff may contact you to request an original uncompressed audio file in .wav or .aiff format. There is no maximum file size requirement for publication at this stage.

After Submission

Authors will be sent notifications of the receipt of manuscripts and editorial decisions by email. During the review process, authors can check the status of their submitted manuscript via the online manuscript submission and review system . Authors should not disclose the fact that their manuscript has been submitted to anyone, except coauthors and contributors, without permission of the editor.

All submitted manuscripts are reviewed initially by one of the editors. Manuscripts are evaluated according to the following criteria: material is original and timely, writing is clear, study methods are appropriate, data are valid, conclusions are reasonable and supported by the data, information is important, and topic has general interest to readers of this journal. From these basic criteria, the editors assess a paper's eligibility for publication. Manuscripts with insufficient priority for publication are rejected promptly. Other manuscripts are sent to expert consultants for peer review. The journal uses a single-anonymized peer review process: peer reviewer identities are kept confidential (unless reviewers choose to reveal their names in their formal reviews); author identities are made known to reviewers. The existence of a manuscript under review is not revealed to anyone other than peer reviewers and editorial staff. Peer reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality about the manuscripts they review and must not divulge any information about a specific manuscript or its content to any third party without prior permission from the journal editors. Reviewers are instructed to not submit confidential manuscripts, abstracts, or other text into a chatbot, language model, or similar tool. At submission, authors may choose to have manuscripts that are not accepted by the journal referred to one of the JAMA Network specialty journals and/or JAMA Network Open along with reviewers' comments (if available). Information from submitted manuscripts may be systematically collected and analyzed as part of research to improve the quality of the editorial or peer review process. Identifying information remains confidential. Final decisions regarding manuscript publication are made by an editor who does not have any relevant conflicts of interest.

At the time of manuscript submission, authors may preselect the option to have their manuscript and reviewers' comments automatically referred to one of the JAMA Network specialty journals if the manuscript is not accepted by JAMA .

JAMA -EXPRESS

JAMA -EXPRESS provides rapid peer review and publication of major clinical trials and other original research studies that have immediate or public health importance. Authors who wish to have manuscripts considered for JAMA -EXPRESS should send the manuscript file and a request letter to [email protected] or call (312) 464-4444. Authors will be notified promptly whether the manuscript is approved for rapid peer review. Authors of those manuscripts determined not to qualify for rapid review may be invited to submit the manuscript for further consideration under the standard review process.

Authors may appeal decisions. All appeals are reviewed by the editor in chief, on a case-by-case basis, or a designated editor if the editor in chief is recused from the review.

After Revision/Acceptance

All authors are required to complete an Authorship Form and Publishing Agreement. See Authorship Criteria and Contributions .

Accepted manuscripts are edited in accordance with the AMA Manual of Style , 2 and returned to the corresponding author (or her/his designee) for approval. Authors are responsible for all statements made in their work, including changes made during editing and production that are authorized by the corresponding author.

Authors should not disclose the fact that their manuscript has been accepted to anyone, except coauthors and contributors, until it is published without permission of the editor or as described in the guidance on Previous or Planned Meeting Presentaton or Release of Information and Embargo Policy .

If accepted for publication, all articles are published quickly in one of JAMA 's weekly print/online issues; selected articles are published Online First.

After Publication

Postpublication correspondence.

For accepted manuscripts, the corresponding author will be asked to respond to letters to the editor.

Reprints and e-prints may be ordered online when the edited manuscript is sent for approval to the corresponding author.

Requests to publish corrections should be sent to the editorial office. Errors and requests for corrections are reviewed by editors and authors, and, if warranted, a Correction notice summarizing the errors and corrections is published promptly and linked online to the original article, and the original article is corrected online with the date of correction. 15

First and last authors of peer-reviewed articles are eligible to receive CME credit. See CME From the JAMA Network .

About Previous Release of Information, Embargo, and Access

Manuscripts are considered with the understanding that they have not been published previously and are not under consideration by another publication.

Copies of all related or similar manuscripts and reports by the same authors (ie, those containing substantially similar content or using the same, similar, or a subset of data) that have been previously published or posted electronically or are under consideration elsewhere must be provided at the time of manuscript submission. All related previously published articles should be cited as references and described in the submitted manuscript along with explanation of how the submitted manuscript differs from the related previously published article(s).

Manuscripts that have been previously posted on a preprint server may be submitted for consideration for publication. When the manuscript is submitted, authors must provide information about the preprint, including a link to it and a description of whether the submitted manuscript has been revised or differs from the preprint.

See also Previous or Planned Meeting Presentation or Release of Information and Research Article Public Access, Depositing in Repositories, and Discoverability.

Meeting presentation: A complete manuscript submitted to the journal following or prior to presentation at a scientific meeting or publication of preliminary findings elsewhere (ie, as an abstract) is eligible for consideration for publication. Authors considering presenting or planning to present the work at an upcoming scientific meeting should indicate the name and date of the meeting on the manuscript submission form. For accepted papers, the editors may be able to coordinate publication with the meeting presentation. Authors of submitted papers, including those accepted but not yet published, should not disclose the status of such papers during such meeting presentations that occur before the work is published. Authors who present information contained in a manuscript that is under consideration by this journal during scientific or clinical meetings should not distribute complete reports (ie, copies of manuscripts) or full data presented as tables and figures to conference attendees or journalists. Publication of abstracts in print and online conference proceedings, as well as posting of slides or videos from the scientific presentation on the meeting website, is acceptable. However, for manuscripts under consideration by this journal, publication of full reports in meeting proceedings or online, issuing detailed news releases reporting the results of the study that go beyond the meeting abstract, or participation in formal news conferences will ordinarily jeopardize chances for publication of the submitted manuscript in this journal. 5 Media coverage of presentations at scientific meetings will not jeopardize consideration, but direct release of information through press releases or news media briefings may preclude consideration of the manuscript by this journal. 5 Rare instances of papers reporting public health emergencies should be discussed with the editor. Authors submitting manuscripts or letters to the editor regarding adverse drug or medical device reactions, reportable diseases, etc, should also report this information to the relevant government agency.

Authors should not release information about accepted manuscripts via social media until publication.

See also Previous Publication, Related Manuscripts and Reports, and Preprints . For more information, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Authors should not disclose the fact that their manuscript has been accepted to anyone, except coauthors and contributors, without permission of the editor until it is published. All information regarding the content and publication date of accepted manuscripts is strictly confidential. Unauthorized prepublication release of accepted manuscripts and information about planned publication date may result in rescinding the acceptance and rejecting the paper. This policy applies to all categories of articles, including research, review, opinion, correspondence, etc. Information contained in or about accepted articles cannot appear in print, audio, video, or digital form or be released by the news media until the specified embargo release date. 2 , 5 See also Previous or Planned Meeting Presentation or Release of Information .

The journal makes all JAMA research articles free public access 6 months after publication on the journal website.

Authors of research articles may deposit the accepted version (ie, the peer-reviewed manuscript that you submitted on which this decision is based) of the manuscript in a repository of your choice on or after the date of publication provided that it links to the final published version on the journal website. You may not deposit the published article (version of record), which is the final copyedited, formatted, and proofed version published by the journal. The journal will deposit a copy of the published research article into PubMed Central (PMC) at the time of publication, where it will be publicly available 6 months after publication. A few weeks after publication, you may obtain your PMCID on the PMC site at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/pmctopmid/ . These options apply only to research articles. Non-research articles may not be deposited into repositories.

In addition, the journal will add metadata to all articles to ensure web-based search engine discoverability and will provide publicly discoverable information about your article to PubMed/Medline and numerous other bibliographic databases on the day of publication.

Author Responsibilities

Most of the JAMA Network journals' editorial policies for authors are summarized in these instructions. Citations and links to the AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors 2 and other publications with additional information are also provided.

Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. 2 One or more authors should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article. According to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), 4 authorship credit should be based on the following 4 criteria:

  • substantial contributions to conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; and
  • drafting of the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; and
  • final approval of the version to be published; and
  • agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Each author should be accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done. In addition, each author should be able to identify which coauthors are responsible for specific other parts of the work and should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of any coauthors.

All those designated as authors should meet all 4 criteria for authorship, and all who meet the 4 criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all 4 criteria should be acknowledged (see Acknowledgment Section ).

All authors (ie, the corresponding author and each coauthor) must read, complete, and submit an electronic Authorship Form with required statements on Authorship Responsibility, Criteria, and Contributions; Confirmation of Reporting Conflicts of Interest and Funding; and Publishing Agreement. 2(pp128-133) In addition, authors are required to identify their specific contributions to the work described in the manuscript. Requests by authors to designate equal contributions or shared authorship positions (eg, co-first authorship) may be considered if justified and within reason. 6 An email with links to the Authorship Form will be sent to authors for completion after manuscripts have been submitted.

For reports of original data, authors' specific contributions will be published in the Acknowledgment section (see Manuscript Preparation and Submission Requirements , Acknowledgment section ). 2 All other persons who have made substantial contributions to the work reported in this manuscript (eg, data collection, analysis, or writing or editing assistance) but who do not fulfill the authorship criteria should be named with their specific contributions and affiliations in an Acknowledgment in the manuscript. Written permission to include the names of individuals in the Acknowledgment section must be obtained.

Nonhuman artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies do not qualify for authorship. If these models or tools are used to create content or assist with writing or manuscript preparation, authors must take responsibility for the integrity of the content generated by these tools. Authors should report the use of artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies to create content or assist with writing or editing of manuscripts in the Acknowledgment section or Methods section if this is part of formal research design or methods. See also Reproduced and Re-created Material and Image Integrity .

The authors also must certify that the manuscript represents valid work and that neither this manuscript nor one with substantially similar content under their authorship has been published or is being considered for publication elsewhere (see also About Previous Release of Information, Embargo, and Access ). 2 Authors of manuscripts reporting original data or systematic reviews must provide an access to data statement from 1 or 2 named authors, often the corresponding author (see also Data Access, Responsibility, and Analysis ). If requested, authors should be prepared to provide the data and must cooperate fully in obtaining and providing the data on which the manuscript is based for examination by the editors or their assignees.

A single corresponding author (or coauthor designee in the event that the corresponding author is unavailable) will serve on behalf of all coauthors as the primary correspondent with the editorial office during the submission and review process. If the manuscript is accepted, the corresponding author will review an edited manuscript and proof, make decisions regarding release of information in the manuscript to the news media or federal agencies, handle all postpublication communications and inquiries, and will be identified as the corresponding author in the published article.

The corresponding author also is responsible for ensuring that the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript is complete (see Acknowledgment Section ) and that the conflict of interest disclosures reported in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript are accurate, up-to-date, and consistent with the information provided in each author's potential conflicts of interest section in the Authorship Form (see Conflicts of Interest and Financial Disclosures ).

The corresponding author also must complete the Acknowledgment statement part of the Authorship Form confirming that all persons who have contributed substantially but who are not authors are identified in the Acknowledgment section and that written permission from each person acknowledged has been obtained (see Acknowledgment Section ).

Requests for co-corresponding authors will be considered on a very limited basis if justified, but no more than 2 co-corresponding authors will be permitted. In such cases, a primary corresponding author must be designated as the point of contact responsible for all communication about the manuscript and article, manage the tasks described above, and will be listed first in the corresponding author section. 6 To read more about the role and responsibilities of corresponding authors, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Authors should determine the order of authorship among themselves and should settle any disagreements before submitting their manuscript. Changes in authorship (ie, order, addition, and deletion of authors) should be discussed and approved by all authors. Any requests for such changes in authorship after initial manuscript submission and before publication should be explained in writing to the editor in a letter or email from all authors. 2(pp128-133)

The JAMA Network recognizes that authors may change their names for personal reasons, and the editors respect authors' rights to autonomy and privacy in this regard. Authors who request confidential name changes after publication because of changes in identity, marital status, religion, or other reasons may have their names changed in articles without indication of the reason for the change and without a formal correction notice. If an author prefers this change to be public, a formal Correction notice can be issued, with or without the reason per author preference. The journal will not request the approval of coauthors, but the requesting author may wish to notify coauthors if this change will affect subsequent citations to the article. The requester may be asked to notify the corresponding author about this change to the published article; alternatively, the journal may inform the corresponding author of this change (without explaining the reason for the change). The journal will make this change to the online and PDF versions of the published article and will notify postpublication indexes and databases as a standard process but cannot guarantee when or if the change will be reflected in these indexes and databases.

If authorship is attributed to a group (either solely or in addition to 1 or more individual authors), all members of the group must meet the full criteria and requirements for authorship as described above, and all group member authors must complete Authorship Forms. 6 If all members of a group do not meet all authorship criteria, a group must designate 1 or more individuals as authors or members of a writing group who meet full authorship criteria and requirements and who will take responsibility for the group. 2 , 6 Group names should appear at the end of the byline and should not be interspersed within the list of individually named authors. Group authors may not be included for article types with limited numbers of authors (eg, opinion articles).

For articles with a large number of authors (eg, >50), a long list of authors will not fit in the byline of a print/PDF version of the article. In such cases, a group byline will be recommended with the individual names of each author listed at the end of the article. All author names would still be individually indexed, displayed, and easily searchable in bibliographic records such as PubMed. 6

Nonauthor Collaborators: Other group members who do not meet the criteria for authorship (eg, investigators, advisors, assistants) may be identified. For group author manuscripts, a Nonauthor Collaborator Template (with names, academic degrees, institution, location, role/contribution, and subgroup) must be completed during revision. The template will be available to authors with the request for revision. The collaborators will be published in an online Supplement based on this template and will be deposited to PubMed.

To read more about authorship, click here .

A conflict of interest may exist when an author (or the author's institution or employer) has financial or personal relationships or affiliations that could influence (or bias) the author's decisions, work, or manuscript. All authors are required to report potential conflicts of interest including specific financial interests relevant to the subject of their manuscript in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript 2 and in the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest section of the Authorship Form. Note: These forms will be requested after a manuscript has been submitted, but authors should also include conflict of interest disclosures in the Acknowledgment section of the submitted manuscript.

Definitions and Terms of Conflicts of Interest Disclosures:

Authors are expected to provide detailed information about all relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations (other than those affiliations listed in the title page of the manuscript) including, but not limited to, employment, affiliation, funding and grants received or pending, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speakers' bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Following the guidelines of the ICMJE, 4 the definitions and terms of such disclosures include

Any potential conflicts of interest "involving the work under consideration for publication" (during the time involving the work, from initial conception and planning to present), Any "relevant financial activities outside the submitted work" (over the 3 years prior to submission), and Any "other relationships or activities that readers could perceive to have influenced, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing" what is written in the submitted work (based on all relationships that were present during the 3 years prior to submission).

Authors without conflicts of interest, including relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations, should indicate such in their disclosures and include a statement of no such interests in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. Failure to include this information in the manuscript may delay evaluation and review of the manuscript. Authors should err on the side of full disclosure and should contact the editorial office if they have questions or concerns.

Although many universities and other institutions and organizations have established policies and thresholds for reporting financial interests and other conflicts of interest, the JAMA Network requires complete disclosure of all relevant financial relationships and potential financial conflicts of interest, regardless of amount or value. For example, authors of a manuscript about hypertension should report all financial relationships they have with all manufacturers and owners of products, devices, tests, and services used in the management of hypertension, not only those relationships with entities whose specific products, devices, tests, and services are mentioned in the manuscript. If authors are uncertain about what constitutes a relevant financial interest or relationship, they should contact the editorial office.

For all accepted manuscripts, the corresponding author will have been asked to confirm that each coauthor's disclosures of conflicts of interest and relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations and declarations of no such interests are accurate, up-to-date, and consistent with the disclosures reported in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript because this information will be published in the Acknowledgment section of the article. Decisions about whether such information provided by authors should be published, and thereby disclosed to readers, are usually straightforward. Although editors are willing to discuss disclosure of specific conflicts of interest with authors, JAMA Network policy is one of complete disclosure of all potential conflicts of interest, including relevant financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations (other than those affiliations listed in the title page of the manuscript). The policy requiring disclosure of conflicts of interest applies for all manuscript submissions, including letters to the editor. If an author's disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is determined to be inaccurate or incomplete after publication, a correction will be published to rectify the original published disclosure statement, and additional action may be taken as necessary.

All authors must also complete the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest section of the Authorship Form. 7

All financial and material support for the research and the work should be clearly and completely identified in an Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. At the time of submission, information on the funding source (including grant identification) must also be completed via the online manuscript submission and review system. The specific role of the funding organization or sponsor in each of the following should be specified: "design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication." 7 To read more about reporting funding and other support, see the AMA Manual of Style .

For all reports (regardless of funding source) containing original data, at least 1 named author (eg, the principal investigator), and no more than 2 authors, must indicate that she or he "had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis." 7 This exact statement should be included in the Acknowledgment section at the end of the manuscript. Modified statements or generic statements indicating that all authors had such access are not acceptable. In addition, for all reports containing original data, the names and affiliations of all authors (or other individuals) who conducted and are responsible for the data analysis must be indicated in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. If the individual who conducted the analysis is not named as an author, a detailed explanation of his/her contributions and reasons for his/her involvement with the data analysis should be included.

For all reports of research, authors are required to provide a Data Sharing Statement to indicate if data will or will not be shared. Specific questions regarding the sharing of data are included in the manuscript submission system. If authors choose to share or not share data, this information will be published in a Data Sharing Statement in an online supplement linked to the published article. Authors will be asked to identify the data, including individual patient data, a data dictionary that defines each field in the data set, and supporting documentation (eg, statistical/analytic code), that will be made available to others; when, where, and how the data will be available (eg, a link to a data repository); types of analyses that are permitted; and if there will be any restrictions on the use of the data. Authors also have the option to explain why data may not be shared. A list of generalist public repositories that authors may consider using is available from the National Library of Medicine .

The Acknowledgment section is the general term for the list of contributions, disclosures, credits, and other information included at the end of the text of a manuscript but before the references. The Acknowledgment section includes authors' contributions; information on author access to data; disclosure of potential conflicts of interest, including financial interests, activities, relationships, and affiliations; sources of funding and support; an explanation of the role of funder(s)/sponsor(s); names, degrees, and affiliations of participants in a large study or other group (ie, collaborators); any important disclaimers; information on previous presentation of the information reported in the manuscript; and the contributions, names, degrees, affiliations, and indication if compensation has been received for all persons who have made substantial contributions to the work but who are not authors. 2

All other persons who have made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (eg, data collection, analysis, and writing or editing assistance) but who do not fulfill the authorship criteria should be named with their specific contributions in an Acknowledgment in the manuscript.

Authors must obtain written permission to include the names of all individuals included in the Acknowledgment section, and the corresponding author must confirm that such permission has been obtained in the Authorship Form.

Authors should report the use of artificial intelligence, language models, machine learning, or similar technologies to create content or assist with writing or editing of manuscripts in the Acknowledgment section or the Methods section if this is part of formal research design or methods. This should include a description of the content that was created or edited and the name of the language model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. (Note: this does not include basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references, etc.) See also Statistical Analysis Subsection .

Requirements for Reporting

Authors of reports of studies and systematic reviews should follow the EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines .

Causal language (including use of terms such as effect and efficacy) should be used only for randomized clinical trials. For all other study designs (including meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials), methods and results should be described in terms of association or correlation and should avoid cause-and-effect wording. To read more about use of causal language, see the AMA Manual of Style .

Research reports should be timely and current and should be based on data collected as recently as possible. Manuscripts based on data from randomized clinical trials should be reported as soon as possible after the trial has ended, ideally within 1 year after follow-up has been completed.

For cohort studies, the date of final follow-up should be no more than 5 years before manuscript submission. Likewise, data used in case-control or cross-sectional studies should have been collected as recently as possible, but no more than 5 years before manuscript submission. Manuscripts in which the most recent data have been collected more than 5 years ago ordinarily will receive lower priority for publication; thus, authors of such manuscripts should provide a detailed explanation of the relevance of the information in light of current knowledge and medical practice as well as the most recent date(s) of analysis of the study.

Researchers are encouraged to report studies that include diverse and representative participants and to indicate participant inclusion and exclusion criteria and how the findings generalize to the population(s) that are the focus of or are compatible with the research question. Aggregate, deidentified demographic information (eg, age, sex, race and ethnicity, and socioeconomic indicators) should be reported for all research reports along all prespecified outcomes. Demographic variables collected for a specific study should be reported in the Methods section. Demographic information assessed should be reported in the Results section, either in the main article or in an online supplement or both. If any demographic characteristics that were collected are not reported, the reason should be stated. Summary demographic information (eg, baseline characteristics of study participants) should be reported in the first line of the Results section of Abstracts.

Reporting Age

Study inclusion or exclusion criteria by age or age group should be defined in the Methods section. Stratification by age groups should be based on relevance to disease, condition, or population (eg, <5 or >65 years). The ages for study participants should be reported in aggregate (ie, mean and SD or median and IQR or range) in the Results section.

Reporting Sex and Gender

The term sex should be used when reporting biological factors and gender should be used when reporting gender identity or psychosocial/cultural factors. The methods used to obtain information on sex, gender, or both (eg, self-reported, investigator observed or classified, or laboratory test) should be explained in the Methods section. 12 The distribution of study participants or samples should be reported in the Results section, including for studies of humans, tissues, cells, or animals. All participants should be reported, not just the category that represents the majority of the sample. Studies that address pregnancy should follow these recommendations, and if the gender identity of participants was not assessed, use the terms "pregnant participants," "pregnant individuals," "pregnant patients," etc, as appropriate.

In research articles, sex or gender should be reported and defined, and how sex or gender was assessed should be described. Whenever possible, all main outcomes should be reported by sex (or gender if appropriate). In nonresearch reports, choose sex-neutral terms that avoid bias, suit the material under discussion, and do not intrude on the reader's attention.

Reporting Race and Ethnicity

The Methods section should include an explanation of who identified participant race and ethnicity and the source of the classifications used (eg, self-report or selection, investigator observed, database, electronic health record, survey instrument).

If race and ethnicity categories were collected for a study, the reasons that these were assessed also should be described in the Methods section. If collection of data on race and ethnicity was required by the funding agency, that should be noted.

Specific racial and ethnic categories are preferred over collective terms, when possible. Authors should report the specific categories used in their studies and recognize that these categories will differ based on the databases or surveys used, the requirements of funders, and the geographic location of data collection or study participants. Categories included in groups labeled as "other" should be defined.

Categories should be listed in alphabetical order in text and tables.

Race and ethnicity of the study population should be reported in the Results section.

For additional information, see " Updated Guidance on Reporting Race and Ethnicity in Medical and Science Journals " and the Summary Guide for Preferred Terms When Reporting Race and Ethnicity .

For all manuscripts reporting data from studies involving human participants or animals, formal review and approval, or formal review and waiver, by an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee is required and should be described in the Methods section. 2(p226) For those investigators who do not have formal ethics review committees, the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki should be followed. 13 For investigations of humans, state in the Methods section the manner in which informed consent was obtained from the study participants (ie, oral or written) and whether participants received a stipend. Authors of research studies involving humans should not make independent determinations of exemption or exclusion of IRB or ethical review; they should cite the institutional or regulatory policy for that determination and indicate if the data are deidentified and publicly available or protected by prior consent or privacy safeguards. Editors may request that authors provide documentation of the formal review and recommendation from the institutional review board or ethics committee responsible for oversight of the study.

A signed statement of informed consent to publish patient descriptions, photographs, video, and pedigrees should be obtained from all persons (parents or legal guardians for minors) who can be identified (including by the patients themselves) in such written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees and should be submitted with the manuscript and indicated in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript. Such persons should be offered the opportunity to see the manuscript before its submission. 2(pp229-232)

Omitting data or making data less specific to deidentify patients is acceptable, but changing any such data is not acceptable. Only those details essential for understanding and interpreting a specific case report or case series should be provided. Although the degree of specificity needed will depend on the context of what is being reported, specific ages, race/ethnicity, and other sociodemographic details should be presented only if clinically or scientifically relevant and important. 2 Cropping of photographs to remove identifiable personal features that are not essential to the clinical message may be permitted as long as the photographs are not otherwise altered. Please do not submit masked photographs of patients. Patients' initials or other personal identifiers must not appear in an image.

Patient Permission Form:

The Patient Permission form for publication of identifying material is available here . Translated versions in Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Hindi, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, and Spanish are available on request.

A signed statement of permission should be included from each individual identified as a source of information in a personal communication or as a source for unpublished data, and the date of communication and whether the communication was written or oral should be specified. 2(p199) Personal communications should not be included in the list of references but added to the text parenthetically.

Authors and reviewers are expected to notify editors if a manuscript could be considered to report dual use research of concern (ie, research that could be misused by others to pose a threat to public health and safety, agriculture, plants, animals, the environment, or material). 14 The editor in chief will evaluate manuscripts that report potential dual use research of concern and, if necessary, consult additional reviewers.

Journal Policies

Final decisions regarding manuscript publication are made by the editor in chief or a designated editor who does not have any relevant conflicts of interest. The journal has a formal recusal process in place to help manage potential conflicts of interest of editors. In the event that an editor has a conflict of interest with a submitted manuscript or with the authors, the manuscript, review, and editorial decisions are managed by another designated editor without a conflict of interest related to the manuscript.

All authors are required to complete and submit a Publishing Agreement that is part of the journal's electronic Authorship Form. In this agreement, authors will transfer copyright or a publication license; or indicate that they are employed by a federal government; or indicate that they are an employee of an institution that considers the work in the manuscript a work for hire, in which case an authorized representative of that institution will assign copyright or a publication license on the author's behalf.

Published articles become the permanent property of the American Medical Association (AMA) and may not be published elsewhere without written permission. Unauthorized use of the journal's name, logo, or any content for commercial purposes or to promote commercial goods and services (in any format, including print, video, audio, and digital) is not permitted by the JAMA Network or the AMA.

1. Cummings P, Rivara FP. Reporting statistical information in medical journal articles. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med . 2003;157(4):321-324. doi:10.1001/archpedi.157.4.321

2. Iverson C, Christiansen S, Flanagin A, et al. AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and Editors . 11th ed. Oxford University Press; 2020. http://www.amamanualofstyle.com

3. Golub RM. Correspondence course: tips for getting a letter published in JAMA . JAMA . 2008;300(1):98-99. doi:10.1001/jama.300.1.98

4. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Updated May 2023. Accessed May 18, 2023. http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/

5. Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A, DeAngelis CD. Update on JAMA 's policy on release of information to the public. JAMA . 2008;300(13):1585-1587. doi:10.1001/jama.300.13.1585

6. Fontanarosa P, Bauchner H, Flanagin A. Authorship and team science. JAMA . 2017;318(24):2433-2437. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.19341

7. Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A, DeAngelis CD. Reporting conflicts of interest, financial aspects of research, and role of sponsors in funded studies. JAMA . 2005;294(1):110-111. doi:10.1001/jama.294.1.110

8. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al; International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA . 2004;292(11):1363-1364. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.6933

9. DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Frizelle FA, et al; International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Is this clinical trial fully registered? a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. JAMA . 2005;293(23):2927-2929. doi:10.1001/jama.293.23.jed50037

10. The CONSORT Group. The CONSORT statement. Updated 2014. Accessed September 23, 2016. http://www.consort-statement.org/consort-2010

11. American Association for Public Opinion Research. Best practices for survey research. Accessed March 23, 2023. https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/best-practices/

12. Clayton JA, Tannenbaum C. Reporting sex, gender, or both in clinical research? JAMA . 2016;316(18):1863-1864. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.16405

13. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA . 2013;310(20):2191-2194. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053

14. Journal Editors and Authors Group. Statement on scientific publication and security. Science . 2003;299(5610):1149. doi:10.1126/science.299.5610.1149 . Published correction appears in Science . 2003;299(5614):1845.

15. Christiansen S, Flanagin A. Correcting the medical literature: "to err is human, to correct divine." JAMA . 2017;318(9):804-805. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.11833

Last Updated: February 16, 2024

Quick Links

  • Why Publish in JAMA
  • Submit and Track Your Manuscript
  • Author Reprints
  • Permissions Requests
  • Register for email alerts with links to free full-text articles
  • Access PDFs of free articles
  • Manage your interests
  • Save searches and receive search alerts

Prepare supporting information

Please make sure you have the following information available before you submit your manuscript:

Author information

Full names and email addresses of all co-authors on your manuscript.

Cover letter

A cover letter that includes the following information, as well as any additional information requested in the instructions for your specific article type (see main manuscript section above):

  • An explanation of why your manuscript should be published in Journal of Medical Case Reports
  • An explanation of any issues relating to journal policies
  • A declaration of any potential competing interests
  • Confirmation that all authors have approved the manuscript for submission
  • Confirmation that the content of the manuscript has not been published, or submitted for publication elsewhere (see our Duplicate publication policy )
  • If you are submitting a manuscript to a particular special issue, please refer to its specific name in your covering letter

Peer reviewers

You may suggest potential peer reviewers for your manuscript. If you wish to do so, please provide institutional email addresses where possible, or information which will help the Editor to verify the identity of the reviewer (for example an ORCID or Scopus ID). Intentionally falsifying information, for example, suggesting reviewers with a false name or email address, will result in rejection of your manuscript and may lead to further investigation in line with our misconduct policy.

Excluding peer reviewers

During submission you may enter details of anyone who you would prefer not to review your manuscript.

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

Annual Journal Metrics

2022 Citation Impact 1.0 - 2-year Impact Factor 0.628 - SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper) 0.284 - SJR (SCImago Journal Rank)

2022 Speed 29 days submission to first editorial decision for all manuscripts (Median) 186 days submission to accept (Median)

2022 Usage  4,155,145 downloads 6,554 Altmetric mentions 

  • More about our metrics

New Content Item

  • Follow us on Twitter

Journal of Medical Case Reports

ISSN: 1752-1947

  • Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
  • General enquiries: [email protected]
  • Tel: +81-3-5541-4400 (Monday–Friday, 09:30–18:00)

ThinkSCIENCE

Writing effective cover letters for journal submissions: Tips and a Word template

Writing a cover letter

When you need to submit a cover letter with your manuscript, you'll probably write it just before submission. Like many other authors, you may find yourself wondering what to write and taking longer than you expected, causing last-minute delays and stress.

To help you write effective cover letters—and to write them quickly and easily—in this article we offer some tips on layout and appropriate wording. Also, you can download our template cover letter (Word file) to help you save time writing and help you remember to include standard author statements and other information commonly required by journals.

If you are submitting a revised paper to the same journal, note that the response letter to the reviewers is different from the cover letter used at initial submission. You can find tips and a template on writing effective response letters to the reviewers in our previous article .

Many journals require a cover letter and state this in their guidelines for authors (alternatively known as author guidelines, information for authors, guide for authors, guidelines for papers, submission guide, etc.). For some journals, a cover letter is optional or may not be not required, but it's probably a good idea to include one.

Why do some journals ask for cover letters?

Cover letters can be helpful to journal staff in the following ways.

1. Cover letters that include standard statements required by the journal allow the journal staff to quickly confirm that the authors have (or say they have) followed certain ethical research and publishing practices.

These statements assert that the authors followed standard practices, which may include (i) adhering to ethical guidelines for research involving humans ( Declaration of Helsinki ), involving animals ( ARRIVE guidelines ), or falling under institutional guidelines; (ii) obtaining ethics approval from institutional review boards or ethics committees; (iii) obtaining informed consent or assent from participants; (iv) complying with authorship criteria (e.g., ICMJE criteria ); (v) confirming no duplicate submissions have been made; and (vi) recommending reviewers for your paper, which may include specifying peers that you prefer not be contacted.

2. Cover letters can summarize your manuscript quickly for the journal editor, highlighting your most important findings and their implications to show why your manuscript would be of interest.

Some journals, such as Nature, state that while a cover letter is optional, it provides "an excellent opportunity to briefly discuss the importance of the submitted work and why it is appropriate for the journal." Some publishers, such as Springer , recommend that you write a cover letter to help "sell" your manuscript to the journal editor.

3. Cover letters that contain all of the information required by the journal (as stated in the guideline for authors) can indicate that you have spent time carefully formatting the manuscript to fit the journal's style. This creates a good first impression. Addressing the letter to a named editor at the journal also shows that you took the time to write your letter (and by extension, your manuscript) with care and considered the fit with the journal beyond just impact factor.

Get featured articles and other author resources sent to you in English, Japanese, or both languages via our monthly newsletter.

What makes an effective cover letter?

Cover letters should be short—preferably no more than 1 page—and they often use single line spacing. The content can be broadly divided into six sections:

  • Addressee's information and date of submission
  • Opening salutation
  • Purpose statement and administrative information
  • Summary of main research findings and implications
  • Statements or information required by the journal
  • Closing salutation and your contact information

Let's look at some tips for each section. And don't forget to download the template , which shows these tips already in place.

1. Addressee's information and date of submission

  • Check the journal's website for the name of the editor who handles submissions; this could be the Managing Editor or an editor assigned to your geographical region. If no handling editor is named, address your cover letter to the Editor-in-Chief. Some journals ask that you identify a specific editor for your specialty.
  • Write the name of the addressee in the top left corner of the page.
  • Write the date beneath. To minimize the number of line breaks used in your cover letter (and help keep it to one page of text), you can put the date to the right if you wish.
  • Note that dates written as numerals only can be confusing: 02/03/2017 can be read "2 March 2017" in British and "3 February 2017" in American English. Using the format "3 February 2017" or "February 3, 2017" is clear.

2. Opening salutation

  • Write the title and last name of the addressee (exclude the first name); for example, "Professor Brown" or "Dr. Baker" (British English: "Dr Baker").
  • If you can't find a named editor on the journal website, then you can use the opening salutation "Dear Editor".
  • At the end of the opening salutation, you can use a comma or a colon; that is, "Dear Dr. Baker," or "Dear Dr. Baker:" (British English uses the comma; American English uses either, but the colon is considered more formal).

3. Purpose statement and administrative information

  • Clearly state the purpose of your letter (that you are submitting a manuscript) and then state your manuscript title, author names (or first author "Brown et al."), and article type (e.g., original paper).
  • Be sure to use the journal's own terminology to refer to the article type; for example, some journals use the term "Regular Articles" for a full research paper, whereas others use "Original Submissions", "Full Papers", "Original Articles", among others.
  • See the downloadable Word template for an example sentence that presents this information clearly and concisely.
  • If your submission consists of many files, consider summarizing them in one short sentence so that the journal editor is sure all of the files have been received; for example, "There are 8 files in all: 1 main manuscript file, 1 highlights file, 3 figure files, 1 table file, 1 supplementary data file, and 1 supplementary figures file".

4. Summary of main research findings and implications

  • In a new paragraph, summarize the purpose of your research (the research gap or problem it addresses), the main findings, and finally the implications of these findings. This is your main chance to highlight the value of your work to the journal editor, so keep this short and focused. (Journal editors may receive thousands of submissions annually, and many fulfill editing duties on top of their own research and teaching schedule, so you should strive to make their jobs easier by providing as concise a summary as possible.)
  • Be sure to tailor your statements so that they're in line with the readership of the journal. For example, if you are submitting to a more general journal that has a diverse readership, underscore the possible impact your findings could have in multiple fields. Conversely, if you are submitting to a publication with narrow scope, you can write about your findings in highly focused terms.
  • Avoid simply reproducing sentences verbatim from the abstract—which the journal editor will likely read next. Instead, if you take sentences from your abstract as a base to work from, then try to craft a much shorter summary that clearly fits the journal's focus and that highlights the implications of your work for the journal's readers. In fact, Nature guidelines state specifically to "avoid repeating information that is already present in the abstract and introduction."
  • When stating that you think your work is a good fit for the journal, be sure not to use exaggerated flattery. Avoid using words like "esteemed" and "prestigious" to describe the journal: "We believe that these findings will be of interest to the readers of your esteemed/prestigious journal."
  • It's helpful to the journal editor to state if your work directly relates to a paper published by another author in the same journal. Also, mention if your study closely relates to or extends your previously published work, so it is clear why your submitted manuscript is novel or important enough to publish.

Common phrases in this paragraph:

Summarizing the purpose of your research

  • This study presents/summarizes/examines…
  • X remains a problem for (engineers/software developers/local government). In this study, we (examined/investigated/developed and tested)…

Presenting your main results

  • Our main findings/results were that…
  • The most interesting/important findings were that…
  • Most importantly, our findings can improve/reduce/help…

Highlighting the relevance of your findings

  • These findings should enable (engineers/doctors/local government) to…
  • We believe that these findings will be of interest to the readers of your journal.

5. Statements or information required by the journal

  • In this new paragraph, provide any statements that the journal requires be included in your cover letter. Be sure to review the journal's guidelines to know what information you should provide.
  • Some journals or publishers have very specific requirements. For example, PLOS requires that authors describe any prior interactions with the journal in the cover letter, as well as suggest appropriate Academic Editors from the journal's editorial board to handle the submission.
  • Some journals require that sentences are provided verbatim in the cover letter. The guidelines will tell you to copy and paste the sentence provided in quotation marks into the cover letter. For example, Springer states that cover letters should contain two specific sentences: "We confirm that this manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal" and "All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to [insert the name of the target journal]."
  • Several statements pertaining to research and publication ethics are commonly required by journals across a broad range of fields. These are given in our downloadable Word template . When using the template, you can retain the statements in full, revise them slightly as appropriate to your circumstances, replace them with any similar wording required by the journal, or delete them if they do not fit your specific situation.

Previous contact with the journal

  • We state that we have had no previous contact with the journal regarding this submission.
  • We previously contacted the journal to inquire about/to check whether…

Conflict of interests and financial disclosures

  • The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
  • X.Y. advises Company A and has received lecture fees from Company B.
  • This study was supported by a grant from Z.
  • No financial support was received for this study/work.
  • A.B. conceived the study, analyzed the data, and drafted the manuscript; C.D. analyzed the data…
  • All authors have approved the manuscript and agree with its submission to the journal.
  • All authors approved the final version of the manuscript and agree to be accountable for all aspects of this work.

Suggested reviewers

  • Potential reviewers for our manuscript are:
  • We believe that the following individual(s) would be well suited to reviewing our manuscript.

Request to exclude reviewers

  • We request that the following individual(s) not be approached to review our manuscript (because…).

Concurrent/duplicate submissions

  • We declare that this manuscript has not been published before, in whole or in part, and is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
  • This study was presented in part at…
  • This study was previously published in Japanese (citation) and…

6. Closing salutation and your contact information

  • Briefly thank the journal editor for considering the manuscript and follow this with the full contact information of the corresponding author (name, academic degrees or professional qualifications; affiliation and postal address; telephone (and fax); email).
  • Be sure to maintain a collegial tone to leave the journal editor with the best impression as he or she finishes reading your cover letter and moves on to evaluate your manuscript.
  • Avoid statements that could be construed as presuming to give instructions to the editor. For example, "we look forward to your review of our manuscript" implicitly directs the editor to review your paper. Also, we look forward to hearing from you "at your earliest convenience/as soon as possible" implicitly directs the editor to communicate with you quickly; instead, simply use a neutral but polite phrase such as "we look forward to hearing from you" or "we look forward to hearing from you in due course".
  • A suitable closing salutation is "Sincerely," or "Yours sincerely,"

Although the cover letter is not, strictly speaking, a part of your manuscript, it can affect how your submission is perceived by the journal editor. A cover letter that is tailored to the journal, introduces your work persuasively, and is free from spelling and grammatical errors can help prime the editor to view your submission positively before he or she even looks over your manuscript.

We hope our tips and Word template can help you create professional, complete cover letters in a time-effective way. Our specialist editors, translators, and writers are available to help create or revise the content to be error-free and, as part of our additional comprehensive Guidelines for Authors service , we can ensure the cover letter includes all of the statements required by the journal.

Lastly, just as a reminder for members of ThinkSCIENCE's free annual rewards program , remember to claim your reward of free editing or translation of one cover letter alongside editing or translation of a full paper before the end of the March!

cover letter for case study report

Stay up to date

Our monthly newsletter offers valuable tips on writing and presenting your research most effectively, as well as advice on avoiding or resolving common problems that authors face.

Get 10% off your first order

Looking for subject-specialists?

Your research represents you, and your career reflects thousands of hours of your time.

Here at ThinkSCIENCE, our translation and editing represent us, and our reputation reflects thousands of published papers and millions of corrections and improvements.

  • AI Content Shield
  • AI KW Research
  • AI Assistant
  • SEO Optimizer
  • AI KW Clustering
  • Customer reviews
  • The NLO Revolution
  • Press Center
  • Help Center
  • Content Resources
  • Facebook Group

Writing a Cover Letter for a Report

Table of Contents

Are you looking to write a cover letter for formal report ? You’re in luck — this article explores the detail.

What is a Report Cover Letter?

a business report with a graph showing the value of USD.

The cover letter provides a brief overview for those preparing independent reports.

Cover letters summarize the details of the report and explain why it was requested and what its contents were intended to accomplish.

We are required to include a cover letter with a larger report that might be sent by mail, special delivery, or email. You should write cover letters specifically so that it explains their contents, reaffirms their salient theme, and suggests future steps.

Report cover letters in business serve a similar purpose: They provide a snapshot and the details which follow. While similar to an executive summary, they aren’t the same. You may find an executive summary at the start of the paper, which outlines key findings and recommendations.

You see, the cover letter tells you what the report contains, while the executive summary tells us why this information is important.

How to Write a Cover Letter for Formal Report?

It is helpful to employ company letterhead stationery to compose a cover letter in recognition of the importance of the document it accompanies. If using email stationery, treat it as a paper cover letter by including an image of the company logo on the email page.

Include the day’s date and address information, including first and last names, title, business name, street address, and zip code. You can begin with the salutation “Dear,” “Mr,” or “Mrs.”

Declare the letter’s purpose without using ambiguous or obscure language. Consider briefly capturing the essence of the report. Summarize the purpose of the report in one or two sentences.

Note the conclusion of the report in this part, but don’t give away the underlying findings. You want the reader to read the entire report, not just the cover letter. Keep in mind that you are writing a cover letter, not an executive summary. Stating all the important findings is appropriate in an executive summary but not in a cover letter.

In a formal conclusion or next step section, indicate what actions you want from the recipient. Is it necessary for them to pass the document on? If so, make sure you state with a clear call to action. Or are you coordinating a larger meeting to present the findings? Be specific about the next steps as well as the day and date if necessary.

Why Write a Cover Letter for Formal Report?

Project reports have all the content necessary. However, cover letters can be useful when they include details such as the description of the goal and next steps.

We hope this article was helpful in showing you the main guidelines for writing cover letters for your business reports. In many aspects, writing cover letters for reports are similar to the cover letters for job applications. Instead of briefly explaining your skills and qualifications, you would be describing the essence of a business report.

Writing a Cover Letter for a Report

Pam is an expert grammarian with years of experience teaching English, writing and ESL Grammar courses at the university level. She is enamored with all things language and fascinated with how we use words to shape our world.

Explore All Formal Letter Articles

Writing a formal letter for leave application.

Looking to write a formal letter for leave application? That’s not surprising. What is a Leave Application? Allowing for a…

  • Formal Letter

When to Use a Formal Warning Letter

Are you wondering when to write a formal warning letter? What is a Formal Warning Letter? A warning letter is…

Writing a Subject Line in Formal Letters

Writing a subject in a formal letter is not as complex as you imagined. What is the Subject Line in…

Are you looking to write a cover letter for formal report? You’re in luck — this article explores the detail.…

A Guide to Salutation of a Formal Letter

Salutation of a formal letter can exist in various forms. What Is a Salutation? A salutation is the greeting used…

Learn to Cite Formal Letter Enclosure

For people who send business letters on a regular basis, knowing how to cite a formal letter enclosure is essential.…

We use essential cookies to make Venngage work. By clicking “Accept All Cookies”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.

Manage Cookies

Cookies and similar technologies collect certain information about how you’re using our website. Some of them are essential, and without them you wouldn’t be able to use Venngage. But others are optional, and you get to choose whether we use them or not.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are always on, as they’re essential for making Venngage work, and making it safe. Without these cookies, services you’ve asked for can’t be provided.

Show cookie providers

  • Google Login

Functionality Cookies

These cookies help us provide enhanced functionality and personalisation, and remember your settings. They may be set by us or by third party providers.

Performance Cookies

These cookies help us analyze how many people are using Venngage, where they come from and how they're using it. If you opt out of these cookies, we can’t get feedback to make Venngage better for you and all our users.

  • Google Analytics

Targeting Cookies

These cookies are set by our advertising partners to track your activity and show you relevant Venngage ads on other sites as you browse the internet.

  • Google Tag Manager
  • Infographics
  • Daily Infographics
  • Graphic Design
  • Graphs and Charts
  • Data Visualization
  • Human Resources
  • Training and Development
  • Beginner Guides

Blog Graphic Design

20 Professional Report Cover Page Examples & Templates [100% Customizable]

By Michelle Martin , Aug 11, 2023

cover letter for case study report

The combination of reports and business resembles the harmonious pairing of peanut butter and jelly, yet the process of crafting reports is often more intricate than assembling the yummy sandwich.

Fret not! Behold these 20 report cover page templates, seamlessly blending professionalism with style. These templates are guaranteed to bestow a flawless final flourish upon your most recent statistical masterpiece.

The cherry on top? Every single one of them is both cost-free and effortlessly adaptable, allowing you to personalize them to your liking in under a minute.

Looking for even more convenience? The Venngage report maker , along with an array of versatile report templates , stands ready to provide you with exceptional assistance in your endeavor.

Click to jump ahead:

What’s the purpose of a report cover page, 20 free report cover page templates, how to make a report cover page, report cover page faqs.

You didn’t spend umpteen hours researching, writing, editing, proofing and perfecting your  business report  just for nobody to read it, right? Your report cover page, also known as your title page, matters because it’s the first thing people see. Your report cover page is a first impression.

From it, people make snap judgments like:

  • What is this about?
  • Do I need to read this?
  • Is this going to be worth my time?

Several things subconsciously make up those judgments, including:

  • Your title, and how intriguing it is (or isn’t).
  • The cover page’s design.

Because it’s your first page, seeing a polished and professional report cover page / title page subconsciously makes people assume your report is equally as high quality, too. And that makes them more likely to actually read it and have a positive opinion of it afterwards.

All ready to impress? Let’s take a look at 20 report cover page templates that’ll help you nail those first impressions and  create an amazing report !

Return to Table of Contents

  • Classic report cover page templates

Work for a large company or presenting to a conservative audience? Play it safe with this classic professional report cover page template.

Non Profit Annual Report

For most reports, a simple cover page is all you need. Swap out the tea mug for your own logo, or another illustration that better fits your company from our collection of  over 20,000 icons .

Web Analytics Report

This report cover page template also features a large photo, but with a more refined design that’s perfect for corporations,  consulting firms  and institutions.

cover letter for case study report

An academic vibe emanates from this report cover page template, so it’s perfect for technical reports or institutions.

Simple Healthcare Annual Report

I love that this report cover features key insights on the cover to hook your potential reader right away. This would be perfect for a  white paper  or study, or even to highlight the best data from your sales or  annual report .

Blue Tech McKinsey Consulting Report Template

This template also features a large cover photo, but keeps the rest of the  report design  minimal with only a title and company name. Because of the huge photo space, it’s perfect for showing off physical projects, like real estate developments.

Project Status Report Template

This report cover page template is ideal for any type of report, although it’s particularly suited to making your  financial reports  shine.

Payroll Report Template

  • Bold report cover page templates

The bright color and chunky border set this report cover page template / title page apart from the rest. Go big and get your report noticed.

Corporate Annual Report Template

Show off your work or team with this professional, but splashy, report cover template.

Transportation Agency Annual Report Template

Perfect for promoting your brand colors, this bold template is sure to get your reader’s attention.

Simple Annual Report Template

This colorful cover page template packs a punch while being super quick to customize. Change the text to your report title and you’re done. You could leave the colored bars as is, or change them to match your brand colors.

Retro Year End Annual Report Template

An eye-catching report cover with the most minimal approach possible: Only a title. Unlike the others featured here, this one doesn’t include a company name, date, or any other text fields. You can stay with the minimal approach, or add more text fields easily in the  Venngage editor .

Annual Finance Report

This report cover template brings boldness not only with bright colors and shapes, but also being in landscape format. Ooh, rebellious.

Color Block Sales Call Report Template

Simple yet elegant, this report cover puts your products or  project  front and center with a modern flair sure to get attention.

Teal Competitor Analysis Consulting Report Template

  • Creative report cover page templates

Punch it up a notch with this colorful cover page. It’s perfect for  marketing presentations  or any report geared toward design-minded folks.

cover letter for case study report

This fun cover page template reminds me of an old-school composition notebook. Changing the colors to black and white would emphasize that effect — sure to be a hit with the elder Millennials on your team. 😉

Vibrant Business Marketing Quarterly Report Template

While it may not be suitable for a boardroom of C-suite executives, this report cover’s illustrative style will certainly turn heads. Reimagine this scene with entirely new elements from our library of  over 40,000 icons and illustrations , or simply replace a few individual items to better suit  your HR reporting  needs.

Illustrative Company Employee Handbook Template

If the above template is too casual for your audience, try this title page. It has a more classic layout while still utilizing creative illustration elements.

Annual Report Cover Template

Customizing this illustrated report cover is quick and easy: Replace the icons inside the silhouette with graphics or text that represents your industry or the subject matter of your report.

cover letter for case study report

Featuring a modern, minimal border and cute, yet still professional, illustrations, this report cover page template is perfect for study results and insightful reports.

Statistical Report Template

  • Choose a template

Pick any of the report cover page templates featured in this article, or browse our  full collection of report templates . I’ve shown you the cover pages here, but every template also comes with a full set of inner pages to make your entire report shine.

I’m using  this report cover template  for this example.

Click  Create  on the template you want to use.

report cover page

  • Add your branding

Clicking  Create  on a template opens the editor tool where you can easily swap out colors, fonts, images, edit text and more.

To swap a color, click on the element you want to change, then click the  color icon  in the top bar and choose a new one. You can use the eyedropper to pick another color from your template, or enter a HEX or RGB color code. You can also adjust the opacity.

Need some inspiration? Check out these top  color palette generators .

report cover page

To edit text, click on the text box you want to change. Double-clicking automatically selects the text. Start typing to overwrite it, or select just the section you want to change.

With the text box selected, change the font, color, size or other styles using the formatting bar at the top.

You can also upload your own font file to ensure your report cover perfectly matches the rest of your report, and brand.

report cover page

  • Swap out images

To edit an image, click on it and choose  Replace .

report cover page

You can upload your own image, or search and choose from over 3 million  royalty-free stock images  from Pexels and Pixabay, conveniently accessible right inside the editor.

You may run into what I have with this report cover page template: I changed the photo, but it’s still got the blue overlay on it. Not to worry, here’s how to change that.

Open the left side menu and click  Background . You can choose a new background color based on other colors used in your document — an easy way to keep designs on-brand — or, specify your own color. You can even add a gradient background with one click, or add a pattern on top of your background color.

The possibilities are endless for customizing your visual elements.

Once you change the background color, your photo may be too dark or too light to show up properly. To adjust this, click on the photo, then  Opacity  at the top. Play around with it until it looks just right.

report cover page

  • Optional: Create the rest of your report

Each of our report cover templates come with matching content page templates. To use them, click on the  Page Manager  on the right side.

report cover page

Click on any page to edit it and add in your report content. Click the  plus icon  to add a new blank page, or the  double-rectangle icon  to duplicate an existing page.

No time for that level of detail, or already have a completed report and only need a cover? No problem — just  export the first page  as your new cover and attach it to your existing PDF with  Adobe Acrobat ,  Preview  for Mac, or with an online tool like  MergePDF .

  • Wow your boss/team/mom

Whoever’s gonna be reading your report will be heckin’ impressed by your top notch style, friend. Nicely done.

What should be on a report cover page?

There is only one “must-have” thing on your report cover: your report title.

But, most people also include:

  • Your company name
  • Company website URL
  • Contact information, like email or phone number (usually only if giving a presentation)
  • An identifier of what type of report it is (e.g. “ Annual Report ,” “Q4 Earnings Report,” “ Progress Update ,” etc)

Ultimately, what you include is up to you and the requirements of your report. You can easily add new text fields or images — or edit existing ones — to any of our  report cover page templates  to suit your needs.

Does my report cover page need to match the rest of my report?

Well… it’d be nice if it did. But no, it’s not required.

For example, your report may be in a spreadsheet format, or listing out balance sheets and financial statements. Most of these types of reports are automatically generated from software. Trying to brand them by copy and pasting that content into a nice looking template probably isn’t worth your time.

Plus, the people reviewing those reports are likely expecting the familiar format they’re used to and may be put off by a big change.

But your report cover page and actual report don’t need to be identical to “match.”

As long as the font in your report isn’t size 36 Comic Sans, attaching a nicely designed cover page will make any report appear more professional and put together. (If your report  is  in Comic Sans, sorry, nothing can redeem it.)

Make a report cover page in 60 seconds or less

A professional, well-designed report cover page communicates the value of your report right away. It immediately gives your reader the impression of importance and competence, which is probably what you want your boss to think about you.

Plus, a great title page makes it much more likely your report will actually be read.

To recap, here’s how to make your own report cover page in less than 60 seconds:

  • Step 1:  Sign up for a free  Venngage account .
  • Step 2:  Choose a report cover page template.
  • Step 3:  Add your branding, colors, fonts, and edit the text.
  • Step 4 (Optional):  Create the rest of your report with matching report page templates.
  • Step 5:  Save, share, print or export your cover and attach it to your existing report.

It’s really that quick to make a professional report cover page using a Venngage report cover page template. Gather your brand elements and report title and go forth and rock that report!

IMAGES

  1. Case Worker Cover Letter

    cover letter for case study report

  2. Case Worker Cover Letter Examples

    cover letter for case study report

  3. cover letter for submission of manuscript

    cover letter for case study report

  4. Journal Submissions Cover Letter Sample.pdf

    cover letter for case study report

  5. 49 Free Case Study Templates ( + Case Study Format Examples + )

    cover letter for case study report

  6. Example Of Resume Application Letter Case Study

    cover letter for case study report

VIDEO

  1. MGX1010

  2. Court case letter (2)

  3. Sample OET letter case note with Sample Answer-Mr Ron Pederson.🗒️A letter to Nursing Manager✏️#oet

  4. Intro to Management Video Case Study Report

  5. ISH203

  6. MGX1010

COMMENTS

  1. How to write a cover letter for journal submission

    The cover letter should explain why your work is perfect for their journal and why it will be of interest to the journal's readers. When writing for publication, a well-written cover letter can help your paper reach the next stage of the manuscript submission process - being sent out for peer review.

  2. Writing a Cover Letter for Journal Submission [Free Template]

    Begin your cover letter with a paragraph that states the name of the manuscript and the names of the authors. You can also describe what type of manuscript your submission is (research article, review, case report, etc.). In this first paragraph and the next, describe the rationale behind your study and the major findings from your research.

  3. How To Write a Cover Letter for a Research Paper (Plus Example)

    1. Set up the formatting Set up your word processor to format your cover letter correctly. Formatting standards for research paper cover letters usually include: Using single spacing between each line Avoiding indented paragraphs Justifying the text to the left Using one line of space between each paragraph 2. Place contact information

  4. Cover letters

    Sincerely yours, A Researcher, PhD Instead, check to see whether the journal's Instructions for Authors have any cover letter requirements (e.g. disclosures, statements, potential reviewers). Then, write a letter that explains why the editor would want to publish your manuscript.

  5. Writing a Successful Journal Cover Letter (Free Templates)

    Editor and target journal Salutation (Dear Dr. …) Indication you're submitting your manuscript, along with its title, and the category of manuscript you're submitting (Original Report, Review, Case Study, etc.) based on what the journal accepts Background information regarding your work - what is already known about the subject matter?

  6. How to Write Your First Clinical Case Report

    The JACC: Case Reports authors instructions suggest a specific structure for a clinical case: history of presentation, physical examination, past medical history, differential diagnosis, investigations, management (medical/interventions), discussion, follow-up, conclusions, and learning objectives.

  7. Guideline on writing a case report

    Some scientist classifies case reports as a qualitative study design, others might consider it a quantitative approach or even a mixed method design. This polarization of the case report is unfair. ... Cover letter. This is an optional supplementary document, addressed to the editor-in-chief, in a formal letter. Explain why this report is ...

  8. Q: How to write a cover letter for my submission?

    An effective cover letter should include a brief summary of your findings and a small paragraph on why you feel the study is suitable for the journal and its target audience. Here is a template that you can use to write a cover letter: Dear Dr./Ms./Mr. [insert the editor's name],

  9. How to Write a Cover Letter for Journal Submission

    Keep all text left justified. Use spelling and grammar check software. If needed, use a proofreading service or cover letter editing service such as Wordvice to review your letter for clarity and concision. Double-check the editor's name. Call the journal to confirm if necessary.

  10. Writing a cover letter for journal submission (Download template)

    3. Motivation for submitting to the journal: After the short summary, add a sentence regarding the suitability of your study for the journal.Write about how it matches the journal scope and why the readers will find it interesting. 4. Ethical approval: The cover letter for your research paper should mention whether the study was approved by the institutional review board, in case of any ...

  11. Cover letters

    Authors usually must include a cover letter when they first submit their manuscript to a journal for publication.The cover letter is typically uploaded as a separate file into the online submission portal for the journal (for more information on using an online submission portal, see Section 12.10 of the Publication Manual).. The cover letter should be addressed to the journal editor; any ...

  12. Writing a cover letter

    Your cover letter should include. The objective and approach of your research. Any novel contributions reported. Why your manuscript should be published in this journal. Any special considerations about your submission. Related papers by you and/or your fellow authors (published or under consideration) Previous reviews of your submission.

  13. How to Write a Cover Letter When Submitting Your Research Paper

    Do Write the cover letter with your institution's letterhead to demonstrate professionalism and reliability. Personalise the cover letter by addressing the journal's editor by their name. State the article type of your manuscript at the beginning of your cover letter (original research article, methodology, case report, etc.)

  14. How to Write a Case Study

    Step 1: Select a case to analyze. After you have developed your statement of the problem and research question, the first step in writing a case study is to select a case that is representative of the phenomenon being investigated or that provides an outlier. For example, if a researcher wants to explore the impact of COVID-19 on the ...

  15. Author Instructions

    The general submission instructions (including cover letter, title page, contributors statement page, journal style guidance, and conflict of interest statements) also apply to Case Reports. Do not include "a case report" or similiar language in your title as this is redundant; published manuscripts will appear in the Case Reports section.

  16. Instructions for Authors

    Cover Letter. Include a cover letter and complete contact information for the corresponding author (affiliation, postal/mail address, email address, and telephone number) and whether the authors have published, posted, or submitted any related papers from the same study (see Previous Publication, Related Manuscripts and Reports, and Preprints).

  17. Prepare supporting information

    Cover letter A cover letter that includes the following information, as well as any additional information requested in the instructions for your specific article type (see main manuscript section above): An explanation of why your manuscript should be published in Journal of Medical Case Reports

  18. Cover Letter for Journal Submission: Sample & How To Write

    1. Start With the Proper Cover Letter for Journal Submission Template. Appearances matter. You wouldn't wear a baggy T-shirt and shorts to an academic conference. In the same way, you don't want your cover letter for journal submission to look sloppy. Follow these steps to create a professional template: Cover Letter for Journal Submission ...

  19. Writing effective cover letters for journal submissions: Tips and a

    Cover letters can be submitted as normal text files, such as Word, or input directly in a field in the journal's online submission system. Let's look at some tips for each section. And don't forget to download the template, which shows these tips already in place. 1. Addressee's information and date of submission.

  20. Author Center

    3.1.1 Cover letter. Every submission must be accompanied by a cover letter that includes the following information: Manuscript title; Manuscript classification (e.g., Research Article, Clinical/Scientific Note) Study type (e.g., case report, meta-analysis, narrative review) and the required reporting guideline provided

  21. Writing a Cover Letter for a Report

    Include the day's date and address information, including first and last names, title, business name, street address, and zip code. You can begin with the salutation "Dear," "Mr," or "Mrs.". Declare the letter's purpose without using ambiguous or obscure language. Consider briefly capturing the essence of the report.

  22. 20 Professional Report Cover Page Examples & Templates [100% ...

    By Michelle Martin, Aug 11, 2023 The combination of reports and business resembles the harmonious pairing of peanut butter and jelly, yet the process of crafting reports is often more intricate than assembling the yummy sandwich. Fret not! Behold these 20 report cover page templates, seamlessly blending professionalism with style.

  23. Cover Letter For Case Study Report Examples

    Cover Letter For Case Study Report Examples Pariss · Follow 3 min read · Jan 13, 2021 +Academic *Writing !!Help https://tinyurl.com/ya87qbec Begin your cover letter with a paragraph that...