Author guidance
Instructions for Authors
Everything needed to prepare a manuscript for the Journal of Current Scientific Research — the article types and their limits, how a manuscript is structured, what each study design must report, and the checks to run before submitting.
JCSR considers all scientific disciplines. Apply the guidance below according to the article category and study design; theoretical, qualitative and methodological work need not follow laboratory-study conventions.
Article types and limits
What to submitWord counts exclude the abstract, references, tables and figure legends. They support focused reporting for readers and reviewers with the relevant expertise.
| Article type | Words | Abstract | Figures and tables | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original research article | 3,000–6,000 | Up to 300 words, structured | Up to 10 combined | Up to 50 |
| Review article | 4,000–8,000 | Up to 300 words, unstructured | Up to 12 combined | Up to 100 |
| Systematic review or meta-analysis | 4,000–8,000 | Up to 300 words, structured | Up to 12 combined | Up to 100 |
| Scoping review | 4,000–8,000 | Up to 300 words, structured | Up to 12 combined | Up to 100 |
| Short communication | 1,500–3,000 | Up to 200 words, unstructured | Up to 4 combined | Up to 30 |
| Technical note | 1,500–3,000 | Up to 200 words, unstructured | Up to 6 combined | Up to 30 |
| Methods and protocols | 2,000–5,000 | Up to 250 words, structured | Up to 8 combined | Up to 40 |
| Data descriptor | 1,500–4,000 | Up to 250 words, structured | Up to 8 combined | Up to 30 |
| Replication study | 2,500–5,000 | Up to 300 words, structured | Up to 8 combined | Up to 40 |
| Perspective | 1,500–3,000 | Up to 200 words, unstructured | Up to 4 combined | Up to 30 |
| Scientific case study | 3,000–6,000 | Up to 300 words, structured | Up to 10 combined | Up to 50 |
| Editorial | Up to 1,500 | Not required | Up to 2 combined | Up to 20 |
| Letter | Up to 1,200 | Not required | Up to 2 combined | Up to 15 |
Where the subject genuinely requires more — a synthesis that needs a longer reference list, a protocol that needs a further figure — write to the editorial office before submitting rather than exceeding a limit unannounced.
Scoping reviews
Scoping reviews use the same preparation limits as systematic reviews and meta-analyses: 4,000–8,000 words, a structured abstract of up to 300 words, up to 12 figures and tables combined, and up to 100 references. Use three to six keywords. Organize the manuscript into introduction and objectives, methods, results or evidence map, discussion and limitations, and conclusions; report according to PRISMA-ScR. Critical appraisal is reported if undertaken and is not required for every scoping review.
Perspectives and scientific case studies
Perspectives use the Short Communication preparation limits above and develop a substantiated scholarly interpretation, critical synthesis or scientific argument. Suggested structure: introduction and purpose, evidence and argument, implications and limitations, conclusion. New experiments are not required.
Scientific case studies use the Original Research preparation limits above. State the scientific question, case or setting and selection rationale, methods or evidence sources, analysis, findings, and limitations. A systematic case analysis must contribute beyond anecdotal description. Applicable ethics approval, confidentiality and consent for publication are required; the number of cases should follow the research question, not an arbitrary minimum.
Both categories use three to six keywords and the file, figure, reference, declaration and reporting rules on this page where applicable.
Three to six terms that reflect the primary methods and findings, not repeating words already in the title. Terms drawn from an established vocabulary in the field are preferred, because they are what a reader outside it will search on.
A short running title of up to 60 characters.
American English, in a consistent style, with every abbreviation defined at first use and used consistently thereafter.
Stated at submission. The accepted types are also listed on Aims and Scope, where the scope each one is assessed against is set out.
Manuscript structure
How it is builtOriginal research, replication studies and methods papers use the standard structure below unless the study design requires another recognized one. Theoretical, computational, qualitative, synthesis and perspective work uses a structure appropriate to its argument. The structure below is guidance, not a requirement to manufacture empirical results for non-empirical work.
| Section | What it must establish |
|---|---|
| Title | What was studied, in what system or setting, and by what approach. Abbreviations are avoided, and a claim the design cannot support does not belong in a title. |
| Abstract | State the purpose, approach, principal findings or argument, and conclusion. Report numerical results and uncertainty where applicable; for theoretical or perspective work, summarize the reasoning and contribution without inventing measurements. |
| Introduction | What is already known, where the gap is, and the specific question this work answers. |
| Methods | Describe procedures, sources, assumptions, formal derivations or analytic reasoning appropriate to the work. Experimental reports include materials, instruments and calibration; computational reports include data and code details; qualitative work explains sampling and interpretation. Distinguish exploratory and confirmatory analyses. |
| Results | Present findings in a logical order, with units, uncertainty and statistical treatment where relevant. Formal results, qualitative findings and scholarly arguments use the conventions appropriate to their study type and must be traceable to the stated approach. |
| Discussion | What the findings mean, how they sit against existing evidence, and their limitations — including the ones that bear on the main claim. |
| Conclusion | What the work supports, at the strength the evidence carries. |
Preparing for double-blind review
Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request. A request is made at submission, and it changes what the reviewer manuscript may contain.
For double-blind review, remove author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, funding details, institution names, and other identifying information from the reviewer manuscript. Provide identifying information separately in the title-page file or submission form.
Title page — a separate file
Title; all authors with affiliations and ORCID iDs; the corresponding author's contact details; and every declaration in Declarations. Keeping these in a separate file is what makes a double-blind request workable.
Corresponding author
One corresponding author provides an active email address and a full postal address and is responsible for correspondence through review, proofs and after publication. An institutional email address is preferred where available.
Line and page numbers
Continuous line numbers and page numbers throughout the main manuscript. A reviewer cannot point precisely at a manuscript that has neither.
Formats, figures and tables
PreparationAn editable word-processor format (.docx or .rtf), or LaTeX with a compiled PDF. Not a scanned or flattened PDF.
One file per figure, supplied separately. TIFF, EPS, PDF or high-quality PNG. Photographs, micrographs and screen captures at 300 dpi or better; line art, plots and diagrams at 600 dpi or as vector.
In the manuscript, not inside the image. Each legend explains its figure without reference to the text, defines every symbol and abbreviation, and states the scale bar, magnification or axis units where they apply.
Adjustments to brightness, contrast or color are applied to the whole image and must not obscure, move, introduce or remove any feature. Where an image is assembled from separate acquisitions, the composition is stated in the legend. Original unprocessed files may be requested at any stage.
Editable text, one table per numbered block, with a caption above and footnotes below. Never supplied as an image. Units belong in the column heading, not repeated in every cell.
Use SI units; accepted non-SI units may be used when the SI equivalent is provided at first use. Chemical, biological, mineralogical and taxonomic nomenclature follows the accepted convention of the field, stated where more than one is in use.
The test, the software and version, the significance level, and the treatment of multiplicity where several comparisons are made. Report effect estimates with confidence intervals rather than p-values alone, and give the sample size for every group.
Cited in the text in order, each with a short title. Protocols, instrument specifications, questionnaires, code listings, spectra and extended results belong here rather than in the main text.
Written permission compatible with CC BY 4.0 for any reused figure, table, instrument or extended quotation, obtained before submission and acknowledged in the caption.
References
CitationNumber references in the order they first appear, cite them in the text as bracketed or superscript numerals, and list them in that order. Include a DOI wherever one exists. Every reference must be verifiable, and any reference produced with the help of an AI tool must be checked against the source before submission.
| Source | Format |
|---|---|
| Journal article | Author AA, Author BB. Title of the article. Journal Abbrev. 2024;12(3):145–158. doi:10.xxxx/xxxxx |
| Book | Author AA. Title of the Book. 3rd ed. Publisher; 2023. |
| Chapter | Author AA. Title of the chapter. In: Editor BB, ed. Title of the Book. Publisher; 2023:112–140. |
| Conference paper | Author AA. Title of the paper. In: Proceedings of the Conference Name; June 3–6, 2024; City, Country. Publisher; 2024:88–95. |
| Web page | Organization Name. Title of the page. Published March 4, 2024. Accessed June 12, 2025. https://example.org/page |
| Dataset | Author AA. Title of the Dataset. Version 2.1. Repository Name; 2024. doi:10.xxxx/xxxxx |
| Software or code | Author AA. Name of the Software. Version 1.4.0. Published 2024. https://github.com/example/repo |
| Preprint | Author AA, Author BB. Title of the preprint. Preprint. Server Name. Posted January 9, 2025. doi:10.xxxx/xxxxx |
| Standard | Standards Body. Title of the Standard. Designation 1234:2024; 2024. https://example.org/standard |
| Trial registration | Title of the trial. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01234567. Updated May 2, 2024. Accessed June 12, 2025. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01234567 |
Reporting standards
By study designWhere a reporting guideline applies to the study design, complete its checklist and submit it with the manuscript, giving the page or section for each item. Use only the guideline that fits the design — a checklist attached to a study it was not written for tells a reviewer nothing.
| Study design | Reporting standard |
|---|---|
| Randomized clinical trials | CONSORT statement |
| Observational studies | STROBE guidelines |
| Systematic reviews and meta-analyses | PRISMA checklist |
| Scoping reviews | PRISMA-ScR checklist |
| Clinical case studies | CARE guidelines |
| Randomized clinical trial protocols | SPIRIT guidelines |
| Systematic review protocols | PRISMA-P checklist |
| Qualitative studies | SRQR; COREQ for interviews and focus groups |
| Animal research | ARRIVE guidelines |
| Diagnostic accuracy studies | STARD criteria |
Use guidance appropriate to the design and relevant extensions. Narrative and critical reviews should explain their purpose, how literature was selected, the basis for critical interpretation and the limitations of the synthesis; a systematic search or PRISMA checklist is not required unless the review uses a systematic methodology. For non-clinical scientific case studies and protocols outside these designs, follow the applicable disciplinary reporting conventions.
The same table is published on Aims and Scope, where it accompanies the standards a manuscript is assessed against.
Requirements by study type
What the evidence must carryThese apply where they are scientifically appropriate to the work. A requirement that does not fit a design is addressed by saying why, not by ignoring it.
Type I
Experimental and laboratory studies
Synthesis, characterization, assay and bench work across the chemical, physical and biological sciences.
- Materials, reagents and their source, grade and lot where it affects the result
- Instruments with model, configuration and calibration
- Conditions — temperature, pressure, atmosphere, solvent, duration
- Replicates, and whether they are technical or biological
- Controls, including the negative control the claim depends on
- Measurement uncertainty, resolution and detection limits
- Characterization data sufficient to establish identity and purity
- Any deviation from a published protocol the work builds on
Type II
Computational, modeling and machine-learning studies
Simulation, numerical modeling, algorithm development and data-driven analysis across scientific disciplines.
- Model formulation, governing equations and boundary conditions
- Input data with source, period and preprocessing
- Parameters, initialization and how each value was chosen
- How training, validation and test sets were separated, and at what unit
- A comparator — current practice, an established method or a simpler model
- Metrics appropriate to the task, reported with uncertainty
- Verification against an analytical solution or benchmark where one exists
- Sensitivity analysis over the parameters the conclusion rests on
- Code, environment and version, or why they cannot be released
Type III
Clinical, population and human-participant studies
Laboratory, clinical and population research involving human participants, their data or their samples.
- Ethics-committee approval, named with its reference, or an applicable exemption with its basis and responsible authority
- Informed consent, or the waiver and the body that granted it
- Trial registry, number and registration date for interventional trials
- Setting, recruitment period, and inclusion and exclusion criteria
- Sample size with its justification, and participant flow
- Handling of missing data and of losses to follow-up
- De-identification, and the residual risk that remains
- Prespecified outcomes distinguished from exploratory analyses
Type IV
Field, environmental and observational studies
Measurement, monitoring and interpretation in natural and managed environments.
- Site description with period and sampling design, and coordinates where safe to disclose. Generalize or withhold sensitive locations where disclosure could create conservation, privacy, cultural or security risks; explain the restriction and any appropriate controlled-access process
- Instrumentation, deployment and calibration history
- Sample handling, storage and chain of custody
- Analytical methods with detection limits and blanks
- Quality control — duplicates, standards and recovery
- Permits and access approvals where a site or species requires them
- Data archiving location for the observational record
- Confounding environmental variables and how they were addressed
Type V
Reviews, syntheses and data descriptors
Work whose contribution is the assembly, evaluation or description of an existing body of evidence or data.
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: state the question, eligibility criteria, information sources, full search strategies and dates, selection and extraction methods, risk-of-bias assessment, and synthesis methods. Report any protocol or registration and deviations; use PRISMA.
- Scoping reviews: state the question and purpose, eligibility criteria, information sources, searches, selection, data-charting and presentation methods. Use PRISMA-ScR; report critical appraisal if undertaken, rather than treating it as a universal requirement.
- Narrative and critical reviews: explain the purpose, how and why literature was selected, the interpretive or critical approach, the evidence supporting the argument and the limitations. A systematic search, exhaustive retrieval and formal risk-of-bias assessment are not mandatory unless required by the methodology the review claims to use.
- For a data descriptor — collection method, structure and file formats
- Validation of the dataset, and its known limitations
- The repository, identifier, version and license for the data
- Reuse potential, described concretely rather than asserted
Declarations
The recordThese appear on the title page and, in the published article, after the discussion. What each one has to establish is set out in the Editorial Policies.
For studies involving human participants, identifiable human data or animals, name the appropriate committee or equivalent body and approval reference, or report an applicable exemption with its basis and responsible authority.
How informed consent was obtained, or the approved waiver and the body that granted it; written consent for publication where any individual could be identifiable.
Interventional clinical trials must be registered in an accepted public trial registry at or before the first participant provides consent for enrollment. The registry name, registration number, and registration date must be reported in the manuscript.
Every empirical research manuscript must include a data-availability statement. It names where the data are, on what terms, and the process for obtaining them. "Available on request" with no named contact and no described process is not a data-availability statement.
Repository, identifier and version for custom code and models, or why they cannot be released. Reagents, materials and instruments described so that another group can obtain or build them.
What each named author did, in enough detail to support the authorship criteria.
All sources with grant numbers, and the role of the funder in design, analysis, interpretation or the decision to publish. Where the work was unfunded, say so.
Financial and non-financial interests for every author, including employment, consultancy, equity, patents and paid advisory roles relating to any product, material or software evaluated in the work.
Any generative AI tool used in preparing the manuscript or conducting the analysis, named, with what it was used for. Authors remain fully responsible for all content, including anything an AI tool produced, and such tools are not authors.
Any preprint with its identifier, and any conference abstract or poster covering the same work. A preprint is not prior publication and does not preclude submission.
Contributions that do not meet the authorship criteria, named with the person's permission.
Before you submit
Final checks- Scope and article typeThe work sits within the journal's scope, and the article type matches what the manuscript actually is.
- Within the limitsWord count, abstract length, figure and table count and reference count are within the limits for that type, or the editorial office has agreed otherwise in advance.
- Title page is separateIt is its own file and carries every declaration in Declarations, including ORCID iDs.
- Blinding, where requestedWhere double-blind review is requested, the reviewer manuscript carries no identifying information, including in file properties and supplementary material.
- Line and page numbers onContinuous line numbers and page numbers throughout, and every abbreviation defined at first use.
- Figures and tables preparedFigures are separate files at the required resolution with legends in the manuscript; tables are editable text with captions above.
- Units, statistics and uncertaintySI units, or accepted non-SI units with an SI equivalent at first use; statistical treatment reported with the software and version; and estimates given with their uncertainty.
- References checkedNumbered in order of appearance, formatted as in References, with DOIs, and every one verified against its source.
- Reporting checklist completedThe applicable guideline's checklist is completed with manuscript locations, where one applies to the design.
- Study-type requirements addressedThe requirements in Requirements by study type that apply to this design are addressed in the manuscript, or the manuscript says why one does not apply.
- Data, code and permissionsData and code statements name a location, a version and an access process, and permissions are held for all reused material.
- One route chosenOne submission route has been chosen for this manuscript.
Submission routes
Where to send it-
Primary route
ManuscriptZone
The journal's submission system, and where correspondence about the submission takes place.
Open ManuscriptZone (opens in a new tab)
-
Alternative route
Simple manuscript submission form
A short web form for authors who prefer not to create a system account. The journal is preselected on the linked form.
-
Assisted route
Editorial office
Where a submission cannot be completed by either route, the editorial office will accept the manuscript by email and enter it for you.
Authors must use only one submission route for the same manuscript. What happens after a manuscript arrives is set out on Submit Manuscript.
A requirement that does not fit your study
Editorial officeWhere a limit or a requirement on this page does not suit the work — a synthesis that needs a longer reference list, a dataset that cannot be deposited, a design no listed guideline covers — write to the editorial office before submitting and say what the manuscript needs and why.
Published by Open Access Pub. ISSN 2766-8681 (electronic). Crossref DOI prefix 10.14302. Articles are published open access under CC BY 4.0; authors retain copyright. Peer review: Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request. Editorial decisions are independent of any fee, service, membership or role. Editorial office: [email protected].