Please be aware that the PDF is supplied solely for your convenience and off-line use.

The Author Instructions are frequently refined and updated , and they take precedence over the contents of the PDF.

Submission Website

For submission of your manuscript to any Genomic Press journal, kindly follow this LINK.

Although the portal is labeled “Brain Medicine,” it accommodates submissions for Brain Medicine, Genomic Psychiatry, and Psychedelics alike.

In your cover letter, please make sure to specify the particular journal to which you are directing your paper. This information will help us route your submission appropriately.

Fee Structure

Genomic Press launches an innovative model in scientific publishing that emphasizes academic integrity over profitability. Our mission is to support and empower scientists, educators, and readers. We are committed to fair pricing, ensuring that quality scientific work remains accessible and that knowledge thrives without financial barriers.

Until 30 June 2024, we will waive all Article Processing Charges (APCs), making it even easier for researchers to publish and share their findings worldwide through our Open Access model.

Author Instructions

The instructions for our authors are conveniently detailed on this page, and they are also available for download via this link. The content online is the most updated. In case of small discrepancies, please follow the online instructions. At Genomic Press, we have prioritized consistency and ease for our authors. Consequently, our ‘Manuscript Types’ and ‘Author Instructions’ remain uniform across all our journals, enabling a streamlined and simplified submission process.

Each submission must include a cover letter that provides:

  1. The manuscript title, a synopsis of its primary objective, and a rationale for its fit with the journal.

  2. Details for an unbiased review, including related submissions to other periodicals.

  3. Any pre-submission communications with the journal’s editorial team or invited submissions.

  4. Peer reviewer details who examined the manuscript pre-submission; include names, institutions, countries, email addresses, and ORCID numbers if available.

  5. At least 12 potential peer reviewers with no collaborations or joint publications with the authors in the past five years; include names, institutions, countries, and email addresses.

  6. Optionally, identify up to 4 individuals who should not review the paper due to conflicts of interest; include a brief explanation for each.

  7. Confirmation that the content has not been published or is under review elsewhere.

  8. For human subject research, assurance that informed consent was obtained.

  9. For animal research, a statement of compliance with care guidelines.

  10. Data availability, including any restrictions like Material Transfer Agreements.

  11. Supplementary materials or data files submission details (see Auxiliary Files section for uploading instructions).

  12. Submission of additional documents in the Supplementary Material, Auxiliary Supplementary Material and Other Supporting Files, and Multimedia sections.

Authors must confirm in the cover letter that the manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere and will only be submitted to another journal after receiving our decision.

English language variant

There are essentially two main variants of standard written English in use in the world at the present time – British English and American English, with variations that fall under one or both of these variants. In our journals we accept either British or American English and to facilitate copy editing as ask authors to list in the title page (see infra) whether they are using British or American English. 

Software and settings

All submissions must include original Word document files that can be edited. All manuscripts should be written in Arial or Helvetica, font size 11 or 12, space: 1.5 lines. 

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Define all abbreviations and acronyms at their first mention, providing the abbreviated form in parentheses, e.g., “sensory long-term facilitation (sLTF),” and subsequently use the abbreviated form without redefining it.

Gene and Protein Names and Symbols

Comply with the official NCBI Gene Nomenclature for all gene and protein names and symbols. Italicize gene symbols, genotypes, and species names, but avoid italicization for terms like “in vivo” and “in vitro.”

Unpublished Data and Personal Communications

Cite unpublished data, manuscripts in preparation or under review, and personal communications within the main text using the following format: (Jane L. Doe, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA, unpublished observations).

For citing unpublished observations from individuals outside the author’s research team, obtain written permission (an email is sufficient).

Reference Citations

Place reference citations in parentheses, preceded by a space, e.g., “as described previously (5, 6)”; “several research groups (7–12) have found.”

Avoid using superscript or other formatting for reference citations.

Note that our reference style is modified Vancouver, which is modified to add DOI and PMCID at the end of the citation, in order to ensure compliance with requirements from funding agencies and Crossref. See our Reference sub-section for further details.

Figure and Table Callouts

Call out figures and tables in numerical order, appearing within parentheses without boldface or other formatting, unless grammatically part of the surrounding text, e.g., “the levels increased (Figure 1)”; “as exemplified in Figure 4B.”

Spell out “Figure,” “Table,” “Supplemental Figure,” “Supplemental Table,” etc.

Call out figure parts as follows: “Figure 3A,” “Figure 3, A and B,” “Figure 4, B–D,” and “Figures 2–5.”

If a figure is called out globally without reference to individual parts, cite it as “Figure 2” (e.g., Figure 2 has parts A–D), but if specific parts are mentioned, ensure they are also referenced in the text (e.g., Figure 2A is called out, so B–D must also be cited).

Peer review is the cornerstone of the scientific evaluation process, and it is widely used in evaluating research funding (grants) and research results (papers). We firmly believe in the integrity of the editorial process that is based on impartial peer review.

The peer review process can be configured in different ways, with the vast majority of journals worldwide adhering to one of three formats: (i) Single-blind peer reviews are anonymous only to the authors. Authors do not know the reviewers’ names or backgrounds, but reviewers know theirs. (ii) Both authors and reviewers in double-blind peer reviews are anonymous; only the editor knows their identities. A truly double-blind peer review process is hard to attain, as a knowledgeable review can infer authorship based on specific methods and areas of research and cited work. (iii) In open peer review the identity of the author and the reviewer is known by all participants, during or after the review process.

Our journals adhere to the single-blind peer review model, ensuring that authors do not know who the reviewers are. In contrast, reviewers have access to the authors’ identities. The single-blind anonymity allows reviewers to be honest without fear of criticism from an author; furthermore, knowing who the authors are allows the reviewer to use their knowledge of the authors’ previous research. This traditional and widely adopted format is the most prevalent in scientific publishing. This is also the same process used by most government funding agencies worldwide.

The research content of Genomic Press journals will be entirely peer-reviewed. Although all our journals are fully peer-reviewed, certain document types within an issue may not be, such as article types that are purely informational, such as editorials, correspondence, or new items. Those will be clearly labelled and typeset in a way that differentiate them from research articles, research reports, research letters and reviews. All research articles, high priority research communications, research reports, research letters, and reviews in our journals are subject to peer review, without exception.

All research and review content submitted to Genomic Press journals, will be—without exception— sent by our editorial office to outside experts for single-blind peer review. To maintain the international makeup of Genomic Press journals from the outset, we typically send each submission to eight experts, inviting experts in such a manner that avoids all reviewers being in any one country. We aim to make editorial decisions based on at least three reviews, but if only two reviews are obtained, we may use them for an editorial decision.

It is essential that before submission authors identify the manuscript type, and strictly adhere to those guidelines.

IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION: The word counts and reference limits provided below represent the strict upper limits and should not be exceeded under any circumstances. We anticipate that the majority of submissions will fall significantly below these thresholds. These maximums are established to encompass rare cases without necessitating individual exceptions. Brevity is encouraged.

This summary of specifications is followed by further details on specific manuscript types.

Research Articles, Thought Leaders: Invited Review (only by invitation), Reviews (uninvited), and Systematic Reviews: Abstract maximum of 300 words, maximum of 8,000 words in the body of the paper (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion), no more than 8 display items (tables/figures), and a maximum of 200 references.

High Priority Research Communications: Abstract maximum of 250 words, under 6,000 words in the body of the paper (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion), no more than 6 display items (tables/figures), and a maximum of 150 references.

Research Reports: Abstract maximum of 200 words, maximum of of 3,000 words in the body of the paper (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion), no more than 4 display items (tables/figures), and a maximum of 80 references.

Perspectives, Emerging Topics (overviews of new material), Bench to Bedside (topical overviews on translational strategies for specific and recent advances in basic science): Abstract maximum of 200 words, maximum of of 4,000 words in the body of the paper (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion), no more than 4 display items (tables/figures), and a maximum of 100 references.

Commentary, Viewpoint, Hypotheses, News & Views, Insights, Guest Editorials, Innovators & Ideas, Book Reviews, and Obituaries: No abstract, no section headings, maximum of 2,000 words, no more than 2 display items (tables/figures), and a maximum of 15 references. Supplementary material is limited to two display items (figures/tables).

Brevia: Brief contributions (600 to 800 words) accompanied by one illustration or table, and up to 8 references. Authors should include within the 800 words a brief introductory paragraph of 100 words or less that concisely summarizes the work. Authors can very succintly recognize funding sources in a section titled “Funding Sources.” That section should be placed after the text of the article and just before references. Materials and methods should be included in supporting online material (up to 500 words and one figure/table), and referred to it in the text of the article by these words “supporting online material” in italics. For example: “For further details see supporting online material.” The words “supporting online material” will be hyperlinked to the supporting online material. We discourage acknowledgements on Brevia – other than to funding sources. If other acknowledgements are absolutely required, please keep them very brief and add them at the very end of supporting online material. The Brevia section requires a submission (article) title of absolutely no more than 75 characters, including spaces.

Correspondence: No abstract, no section headings, maximum of 800 words, no display items (no tables/figures), and a maximum of 8 references. This section requires a submission title of absolutely no more than 75 characters, including spaces.

CRITICAL NOTE: For tagging purposes, we will print in bold the first paragraph of all manuscript types which do not contain abstracts, except for Brevia and Correspondence. This serves as a tag for machine reading and natural language processing. Therefore in manuscript types without abstract, except for Brevia and Correspondence, write a clear and very short first paragraph that crisply summarizes your submission. In your submission, that first paragraph must be set in boldface.

We provide here further clarification on our manuscript types.

As listed below, we have multiple formats for reviews  and “thought” articles; we also have four formats for reporting original research: Research Articles, High Priority Research Communications, Research Reports, and Brevia. If one compares these four research formats to movies (films), Research Articles would be similar to full feature, longer-duration movies such as Seven Samurai (3h 27min), The Godfather Part II (3h 22min), or Lawrence of Arabia (3h 38min), High Priority Research Communications would be like average-duration movies of considerable appeal like Vertigo (2h 8min), 2001: A Space Odyssey (2h 29min), or Jaws (2h 4min), and Research Reports would be akin to shorter, but complete movies such as Bicycle Thieves (1h 29min), Reservoir Dogs (1h 39min), or The Lion King (1h 28min). In contrast, Brevia would be analogous to a TikTok video.

Research articles serve as thorough communications of groundbreaking and comprehensive studies of broad appeal. These pieces should be succinct, without compromising from the comprehensiveness of the data presentation. All research-containing submissions will undergo rigorous peer review. We expect that few papers will meet the high thresholds and comprehensiveness required for a research article.

High Priority Research Communications (HPRC) serve to disseminate seminal, groundbreaking research characterized by extraordinary innovation and far-reaching implications. Targeted for accelerated distribution, these articles feature substantial advancements that pivot markedly from extant paradigms. The modus operandi for this category prioritizes expeditious yet rigorous peer review, with an agenda firmly aligned towards accelerated publication. Authors submitting HPRCs should provide reasons why the work is urgent and requires accelerated processing and rapid publication. Preliminary evaluations will ascertain the manuscript’s compatibility with the stringent criteria of the HPRC manuscript type. In instances where the submission falls short of the requisites for HPRC, following consultation with the authors, the work may be reclassified into alternative manuscript categories such as Research Articles or Research Reports. We expect that few papers will meet the stringent criteria for substantial advancement and extraordinary innovation required for a high priority research communication.

Research Reports are more concise compared to Research Articles and focus on observations of immediate significance. Such reports are well-suited for findings that are both conclusive and unexpectedly groundbreaking, possessing the capacity to spawn new investigative directions. They also suit contributions that offer resolutions to enduring, unresolved debates or furnish succinct advancements in rapidly evolving disciplines. All research-containing submissions will undergo rigorous peer review.

Brevia is a format tailored to very compact scholarly communications that need rapid publication. This short manuscript type  is ideal for presenting nuggets of groundbreaking insight or initial observations with considerable implications. These briefs are tailored for findings that, while preliminary, offer compelling arguments or preliminary answers to pressing questions in the field. Given their concise nature, Brevia should amalgamate the Introduction, Results and Discussion segments into one continuous text and make brief reference to supporting online material that may contain up to 500 words and one figure/table. Submissions to this section will undergo rigorous and expedited peer review.

Thought Leaders: Invited Reviews (invited) are curated articles authored by authorities in the field, only by editorial invitation. These pieces provide comprehensive, critical evaluations of existing research and trends, aiming to synthesize knowledge and offer expert perspectives. These articles are peer reviewed.

Reviews (uninvited) are submissions that undertake an extensive analysis and critique of existing literature or methodologies within a particular subject area. These articles aim to consolidate existing knowledge, identify gaps, and suggest future directions for research. They are usually subject to rigorous peer review to ensure scholarly integrity.

Systematic Reviews (incorporating PRISMA): are methodologically rigorous articles that utilize the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to structure their review process. These pieces meticulously synthesize existing research by applying predefined criteria for article selection, data extraction, and data analysis. The objective is to offer a comprehensive and unbiased overview of all available evidence related to a specific research question. Given their structured nature and adherence to PRISMA standards, these reviews typically undergo stringent peer review to ensure methodological integrity and scholarly rigor. The PRISMA Statement is a widely recognized set of guidelines designed to improve the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The original PRISMA Statement was published in 2009 by Moher et al.[1] For the most up-to-date information and supplementary materials, authors may also want to refer to the PRISMA website. The official PRISMA website can be found at On this website, authors find a wealth of information, including the PRISMA guidelines, checklist, flow diagram, and other resources that can assist you in conducting a systematic review. Please note that it is essential for authors to follow our own citation guidelines when referencing PRISMA or any other source.

Perspectives are analytical articles that delve into specific issues, trends, or areas of interest, often drawing on the authors’ expertise and viewpoints. These pieces offer a multi-dimensional look at the subject matter, providing readers with valuable context, and typically undergo peer review for scholarly rigor.

Emerging Topics are articles focused on providing overviews of nascent research areas or innovative technologies. These pieces serve as introductory guides to cutting-edge subjects, aiming to inform a broad audience about new developments. These articles are subject to peer review to validate the presented material.

Bench to Bedside are articles offering in-depth analyses of how recent advances in basic science are being translated into clinical applications. These topical overviews aim to bridge the gap between laboratory research and patient care, focusing on actionable insights and strategies for translational medicine. Due to their specialized content, these articles are usually subject to rigorous peer evaluation.

Commentary covers critical essays that offer interpretive or evaluative perspectives on key research findings or emerging trends. These pieces often serve as a forum for scholarly dialogue and will be subject to external peer review if the content includes research results.

Viewpoints are either concise reviews or an expert’s point of view, featuring a somewhat greater subjective emphasis. Such interpretive pieces undergo external single-blind peer review.

Hypotheses present new and scientifically plausible ideas aimed at advancing understanding in a particular field. These articles often lay the groundwork for future empirical research and may prompt scholarly debate. Typically, these are subject to peer review to ensure academic rigor.

News & Views are brief articles that provide timely commentary on recent research findings or developments in the field. Written in a more journalistic style, these pieces are designed to engage a wide audience by offering context and analysis. While these articles may be subject to editorial review, they are generally not peer-reviewed.

Insights consist of overviews of particular trends, breakthroughs, or methodologies. Typically penned by experts, these pieces aim to clearly summarize complex topics, providing a nuanced understanding to readers who not are familiar with the subject matter. They usually undergo an editorial review process, but peer review may or may not be involved depending on the whether there is research content.

Correspondence are are brief comments on material published in the journal within the last 12 months or they can alternatively be focused on current topics relevant to society and policy within the realm of research and medicine.

Guest Editorials are invited opinion pieces invited and written by respected figures in the field. These articles offer unique perspectives or critiques and serve to initiate discussion or highlight important issues. Given their opinion-based nature and the recognized expertise of the guest authors, these pieces may bypass the traditional peer-review process.

Innovators & Ideas is a section that spotlights individuals who have made noteworthy contributions to the field, beginning with a succinct summary of no more than 100 words of their recent professional endeavors. This summary should briefly address this question: “What is this person doing now?” This is followed by the Genomic Press Interview, a standardized thirty-question interview designed to probe multiple facets of an individual’s life, work, and worldview. The structure of this interview was meticulously-constructed to be universally applicable, transcending specific fields, interests, or disciplines. The interview is capped at 1,900 words, culminating in a total word count of 2,000. A color photograph of the featured individual will also be included in the publication, along with an optional second figure or photo of general interest. Importantly, there are no fees associated with publishing in this category. Proposals for potential articles of this nature are actively encouraged and should be directed via email to In your email, please specify in the subject line: “Proposal for Innovators & Ideas submission to [name of journal].” These personal interviews are not peer reviewed.

Book Reviews (by invitation only) will provide unbiased summaries of books that may be of interest to our readers. Authors, publishers or third parties interested in having specific books reviewed should contact us first at There are no fees associated with publishing in this category. Proposals for book reviews should be emailed to Please specify in the subject line: “Proposal for Book Review submission to [name of journal].” Book reviews are carefully edited, but not peer reviewed. Unsolicited book reviews that are not pre-approved by the editorial office will not be considered.

Obituaries are dedicated to commemorating the lives and contributions of distinguished individuals who have passed away. The obituary provides a brief yet thoughtful overview of the person’s career, achievements, and impact on the field. While not subject to traditional peer review, these pieces are carefully edited to capture the essence and significance of the individual’s work. These memorials serve both as a record and a tribute, aiming to inform the community while honoring the person’s legacy. A color photograph of the featured individual will also be included in the publication. There are no fees associated with publishing in this category. Obituary proposals should be emailed to Please specify in the subject line: “Proposal for Obituary submission to [name of journal].” These memorials are carefully edited, but not peer reviewed.

[1] Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; The PRISMA Group (2009). “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement.” PLoS Med 6(7): e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.


Journal title

On the first line, please list the journal title. Example: “Submitted to Brain Medicine.”

Manuscript type

On the second line, please list the manuscript type. Example: “Manuscript type:  High Priority Research Communication (HPRC).” 

English language variant

On the third line, please state the following:

English language variant: This submission is written in (British or American) English.

Article title

On the fourth line, list the article title: The title should be clear, detailed, as succinct as feasible to ensure clarity, connectives included and it should directly relate to the particular topic or disease/disorder or disease model being studied. Avoid full stops or uncommon abbreviations.

Authors and their institutions

Provide the complete names of all contributors (for instance, “John D. Doe”) in the correct sequence.

Avoid using titles, salutations, academic qualifications, or accreditations.

Include the contributors’ institutional affiliations (departments, organizations, and places, but not postal addresses) from the time the research was conducted.

Designate footnotes for affiliations in a sequential manner using superscript numerals (1, 2, 3, and so on).

Include the lead correspondent’s full name, physical address, phone number (with the country code when necessary), and email address.

For contributors whose affiliations have changed post completion of the research, provide the current affiliation and location beneath the listed numerals.

For author groups or research teams represented as contributors (like the CARDIoGRAMplusC4D Consortium), list the individual members of each team and their affiliations in supplementary materials; include the following sentence in the acknowledgments section: “Refer to Supplementary Acknowledgments for detailed information on the consortium.”

Note any occurrences of shared principal or lead authorship, or equal contributions, in a footnote without a number.

Declaration of Possible Conflicts of Interest

A declaration in line with the Journal’s policy on conflicts of interest. If no contributor has a conflict, include this: “The contributors have confirmed that no conflict of interest exists.”

If any patents are involved, provide the patent or patent application number(s) and specify the authors associated with them.

For manuscript types that require an abstract, please provide a clear abstract not exceeding words that summarizes the rationale, aims, outcomes, and conclusions of the manuscript in a single, continuous paragraph, without subheadings. The word count of the abstract varies according to the manuscript type. Therefore, check the instructions in the manuscript type subsection (supra) for the exact word count of your abstract.

The abstract should be in its own page, separate from the Title page and from the body of the manuscript.

Avoid references.

Explain any uncommon abbreviations.

For Articles and Research Reports, please use this this sequence – each element is further explained in their own headings.

  • Introduction
  • Methods
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Author Contributions
  • Acknowledgments
  • Funding sources
  • References
  • Figure legends
  • Figures
  • Table legends
  • Tables
  • Supplementary materials
  • Additional materials

While manuscript types may have different styles, we require that all papers have sections on

  • Author Contributions
  • Acknowledgments
  • References

Other manuscript types may also include the following:

  • Funding sources
  • Figure legends
  • Figures
  • Table legends
  • Tables
  • Supplementary materials
  • Additional materials

In an article or research report, the introduction should briefly focus on what is known on a topic, what is not known, why that is not known, and how the current work addresses the knowledge gap, leading naturally to the next section – methods. Results should NOT be presented in the introduction section.

Genomic Press requires the Materials and Methods section to provide sufficient detail to allow replication of the study. 

Guidelines for Materials and Methods include the following: 

  • Manufacturer: For each proprietary item employed, please provide the manufacturer’s full name.
  • Animal models: Clearly define the exact genotype, strain, number of backcrosses, sex, and age of the animals studied.
  • Antibodies: Characterize all antibodies employed, specifying the source and catalog/clone number for commercially available antibodies or detailing (or referencing a detailed description of) the production of custom antibodies.
  • Cell lines: Declare the origin of all cell lines employed.
  • Large data sets: Large datasets including gene expression microarrays, SNP arrays, and high-throughput sequencing studies require deposition in a public repository. A MIAME-compliant public database is necessary for microarray data, and a MINSEQE-compliant public database is needed for high-throughput sequencing data. Relevant access numbers must be clearly visible within the main text of the manuscript. It is highly recommended that other types of extensive datasets also be placed in public repositories. Any Data Values supplementing the main manuscript and supplement material – including values corresponding to all data points presented in graphs and values behind any reported means – must be provided in Additional Materials, as stipulated below.
  • Statistical analysis: The statistical analysis methods should be summarized in a standalone paragraph towards the end of the Methods section (preceding the “Study Approval” section). Ensure the analysis appropriately adjusts for multiple comparisons (i.e., over two groups) and repeated measures (i.e., multiple measurements within subjects). If samples were omitted from the analysis, include a statement delineating the criteria for inclusion/exclusion. Clearly define the P value used for significance determination; for instance, “Significance was considered when the P value was less than 0.05.” For error bars, define them either in the Statistics section or figure legends, e.g., “Data represent mean ± SEM.”
  • Study Approval: Include a clear approval statement for human and animal studies from the relevant institutional review board(s) in a standalone paragraph titled “Study Approval,” positioned towards the end of the Methods section (preceding the “Data Availability” section). Explicitly state the official name and location of the applicable review board(s). For human studies, include a statement confirming that written informed consent was obtained before participation. When featuring photographs of patients, authors must supply a separate statement distinctly confirming that written informed consent was obtained for the use of the photographs and that the record of informed consent has been retained. As a rule, images of faces should be avoided unless crucial to the clinical message.
  • Data availability: At the end of the Methods section, in a designated paragraph, specify how the foundational data and supporting analytical code for the article can be accessed. As aforementioned, large data sets for gene expression microarrays, SNP arrays, and high-throughput sequencing studies must be deposited in a public repository. Include the accession number(s) in this paragraph. We strongly advise depositing other kinds of large data sets in a public repository. Provide supporting data values (as detailed earlier) for all data presented in graphical form or as means in a separate XLS document, with a reference in this paragraph. If data availability is restricted due to human subject involvement or third-party data, authors must declare the non-public nature of the data and clarify whether they can be accessed through the corresponding author or another entity upon request. Anonymized or deidentified human subject data should be shared when permissible. Please provide explicit details on how one may access the foundational data and the supporting analytical code for the manuscript. This could be through public data repositories (including specific access information or URLs for the dataset), within the supplemental materials of the paper itself, or via direct request to the corresponding author. Any restrictions on data availability must be clearly stated, if applicable.

Processing and Presentation of Data and Images: Data processing is sometimes inevitable. When required, please ensure that it is minimal and that the final figures faithfully represent the original data. As a general rule, all processing should be transparent. Below are specific instructions:

  • Any modifications should be uniformly applied across the entire image. In cases where this is not feasible (for instance, when a single-color channel in a microscopy image is modified), please provide a detailed explanation in the figure legend.
  • In situations where you excise lanes from gels and blots or amalgamate your data in any way, you must explicitly show these alterations.
  • Only juxtapose comparable data (for example, data from identical experiments).

Individual images should not be replicated in multiple figures unless these figures describe different facets of the same experiment (for instance, when multiple tests were conducted simultaneously with a singular control experiment). If an image is replicated in multiple figures, please clarify the rationale in the legend.

Screening of Images: We thoroughly screen all approved papers for potential irregularities in images. If there is a query concerning a figure, either during the review process or after that, we will liaise with the lead contact to address the issue. This is approached individually, but typically, we will request the original, unmanipulated data, accompanied by detailed descriptions of the experimental procedures performed and how the figures were produced. We will provide feedback on whether the current form of the figure is acceptable or if we required revisions. In severe cases, we might need to postpone publication while we resolve the issues, or we may decide against publishing the paper. Before submitting a new paper, a revision, or the final version, you must verify the original data and ensure you are satisfied with how the figures were derived from them. We regard this as the responsibility of the corresponding author(s). As the final step before submission, we urge you to review all of the figures again and map all the data in the figures back to the original, unprocessed data.

Reagent Dissemination: Upon publication, authors are obliged to ensure the availability of materials and methods utilized in their study for independent use by other researchers. This obligation extends to antibodies, cell lines, newly engineered mutant animals, or other materials crucial for replicating or building upon the findings. Authors can distribute animals through their institution or a publicly accessible repository. It is imperative that authors do not hinder the execution of material transfer agreements to suitably approved recipients needing the reagents. Authors should follow these guidelines, as inability to obtain reagents and other materials will be treated as a breach of the authorship agreement that may lead to retraction of the published article.

Should researchers face continual refusal from an author to adhere to data accessibility or reagent dissemination guidelines, they should contact the journal directly. Specific contact information will be provided during the journal’s launch.

AI Implementation Description: It is critical to delineate the specific roles played by AI in the conception, analysis, and drafting of your research paper to facilitate a transparent understanding of the methods used, aid in reproducibility, and provide proper attribution.

  • In the Design Stage: Please specify if and how AI contributed to your research design. Detail the type of AI models used, their functionality, and how they informed the research hypothesis or aided in formulating the study design. This could include AI applications such as generative models for simulating scenarios, predicting outcomes, or refining research methodologies.
  • In the Analysis Stage: It is vital to describe the role of AI in interpreting and analyzing your data. Detail the AI models and algorithms employed – for instance, Supervised Machine Learning models like regression or classification. Explain how these tools helped identify patterns, correlations, or insights and their impact on the efficiency of data analysis.
  • In the Writing Stage: Where authors use generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, authors should only use these technologies to improve readability and language. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control, and authors should carefully review and edit the result, as AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be listed as an author or co-author or be cited as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Authors are required to declare the utilization of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies during the writing process. This declaration should be incorporated in a new subsection of Methods, titled “Acknowledgement of Generative AI and AI-assisted Technologies Used in Writing.” Statement: In the course of this work’s preparation, the author(s) employed [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] with the intent to [REASON]. Upon utilizing this tool/service, the author(s) undertook comprehensive review and modification as necessary and assume(s) full accountability for the content of the publication. This declaration does not pertain to the use of basic tools employed for grammar, spelling, reference checks, etc. In instances where there is no usage of such AI and AI-assisted technologies to declare, there is no necessity to include a statement.

By providing comprehensive details of the AI involvement in your study, you are not only fostering transparency and reproducibility but also acknowledging the increasing importance of AI in advancing scientific research.

We recommend that results are presented in a clear, specific, and complete way to facilitate the reproducibility and replicability of the work.  

For Systematic Reviews, we ask that a PRISMA-style flow diagram be included as an online supplement. We also ask that authors include a table with ratings of the quality of the studies/evidence. The article should the words “Systematic Review” in its title.

The Discussion section should present a brief overview of the main results, followed by a discussion of how those fit in the context with what is known in that area. Is there other work that shows consistent findings or do the finds contradict existing knowledge? After that, the weakness and limitations of the study should be discussed. We do not have a Conclusions section, but the last paragraph of the discussion serves as a conclusion, indicating how, despite potential weaknesses and limitations, the work advances the field.

Our policy on authorship caters to varied types of research, establishing a clear framework that articulates the individual contributions of each author. Therefore, all papers should encompass an author contributions section to ensure transparent attribution. Please concisely depict the specific contributions and use initials to identify each author. We endorse using the CRediT taxonomy that provides standardized descriptors of author contributions. However, this section is optional for front-matter articles.

Designation of Corresponding Author and Lead Contact: One corresponding author must be designated, and only one individual should be selected as the lead contact.

Corresponding Author: We advocate for a single corresponding author for each paper, as this promotes best practices in experimental design and execution, results analysis, original data organization and retention, and the preparation of figures and text through the ownership and responsibility inherent in such a role. However, we recognize that, particularly for interdisciplinary studies, multiple authors may need to share the responsibilities typically attributed to a corresponding author. If compelling reasons exist, additional corresponding authors may be included. We may request an explanation for this decision and confirmation that all corresponding authors are aware of their responsibilities (outlined below). The specific contributions of each corresponding author should be detailed in the author contributions section.

Lead Contact: The lead contact, also a corresponding author, assumes responsibility for liaising with the journal (both pre- and post-publication), conveying pertinent updates to co-authors, satisfying requests for reagents and resources, and mediating decisions and disputes. A single corresponding author should be appointed as the lead contact for research papers with multiple corresponding authors. If there is only one corresponding author, they automatically assume the role of lead contact. The lead contact should be denoted with a footnote in the author list (e.g., “4 Lead contact”).

Responsibilities of Corresponding Author and Lead Contact: 

  • Overseeing the work
  • Taking responsibility for all data, figures, and text
  • Ensuring appropriate attribution of authorship to contributors
  • Confirming that all authors approve the paper’s content, submission, and revisions throughout the editing and production processes
  • Ensuring compliance with all editorial and submission policies
  • Identifying and declaring any conflicts of interest on behalf of all authors
  • Identifying and disclosing any co-authors’ related work under consideration elsewhere
  • Preserving unprocessed data and ensuring accurate presentation of original data in figures (refer to data and code availability)
  • Mediating decisions and disputes, ensuring communication with the journal (both pre- and post-publication), sharing relevant updates with co-authors, and being accountable for fulfilling requests for reagents and resources.
  • All corresponding authors undertake full responsibilities, and the lead contact is responsible for the submission process.

Equal Contributions: The lead contact is the sole designation strictly limited to one author. Alongside designating corresponding authors with an asterisk, you may use numbered footnotes to highlight senior authors and other authors contributing equally. The footnote “* These authors contributed equally” should denote authors with equal contributions. Senior authors can be indicated with a footnote, for example, “6 Senior author.” Please utilize the author contributions section of the manuscript to delineate each author’s specific contributions further.

Disputes over Authorship: All authors should discuss and reach a consensus on the order of authors and authorship designations. We anticipate that everyone listed as an author has made substantive contributions to the paper. We do not mediate authorship disputes. Such disagreements should be resolved by the researchers involved and their institutions. If we become aware of a dispute, we will halt consideration of the paper until the disagreement is resolved. In such instances (and when authors request changes to authorship), written approval of authorship from all authors is required.

Maintain succinctness in your acknowledgements, refraining from expressing gratitude to anonymous reviewers and editors, or overly enthusiastic remarks. Furthermore, it is required to identify the help received from professional writers, proofreaders, and editors.

Please use this section to recognize grants or to identify financial contributions to the work.

Our chosen methodology for citation is the Vancouver style, a system conceived by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) during their 1978 conference held in Vancouver Canada [1]. This convention was designed to introduce a standardized framework for the structuring of manuscripts. Its widespread acceptance by over 5,000 journals within the global arenas of medicine and science underscores its significance. In our adaptation we have introduced a nuanced alteration: the inclusion of the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and PubMed Central ID (PMCID) at each citation’s conclusion. This adjustment is intended to align with the stipulations set forth by various funding bodies (including NIH) and Crossref, ensuring our adherence to their most current guidelines.

Here is an example of a citation in plain Vancouver style: Bowles KR, Silva MC, Whitney K, Bertucci T, Berlind JE, Lai JD, et al. ELAVL4, splicing, and glutamatergic dysfunction precede neuron loss in MAPT mutation cerebral organoids. Cell. 2021;184(17):4547-4563 e4517.

Here is the same citation with DOI and PMCID at the end of the citation.

Bowles KR, Silva MC, Whitney K, Bertucci T, Berlind JE, Lai JD, et al. ELAVL4, splicing, and glutamatergic dysfunction precede neuron loss in MAPT mutation cerebral organoids. Cell. 2021;184(17):4547-4563 e4517. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.07.003. PMC8635409.

We strongly urge authors to employ a bibliographic software, such as Clarivate’s EndNote™, within Microsoft Word to ascertain the correctness of the formatting.  We suggest that you opt for the Vancouver citation format when utilizing EndNote™, and furthermore that you modify it to add DOI and PMCID at the end of each citation.

Guidelines for tailoring Vancouver style within EndNote™ to seamlessly incorporate both DOI and PMCID:

In Clarivate’s EndNote™, go to the “Tools” menu.

Go to Output Styles and select Open Style Manager.

Locate the style “Vancouver” and click to highlight it.

Click on the Edit button.

The go to “FILE – Save As” and save it as “Vancouver modified” – this way, all the changes that you will make are made to the “Vancouver modified style” and the original Vancouver style is preserved.

Then on the left column choose:

“Bibliography” and under that go “Templates.”

Several templates will appear on the right. The first template is for “Journal Article.”

That should read as follows:

Author. Title|. Journal|. Year|;Volume|(Issue)|:Pages|.

Modify it to read as follows:

Author. Title|. Journal|. Year|;Volume|(Issue)|:Pages|. `DOI:` DOI. PMCID|.

As you edit, make absolutely sure to have exact spacing and characters as in the line above.

Go to “FILE – Save” and save it. 

Then format all references in any Genomic Press publication to this “Vancouver modified” style.

It is essential that each citation aligns with a corresponding reference, all references are cited, and no duplications exist. If the references fail to adhere to the Journal’s format, the submission may be sent back for revisions.

Citing References:

  • References should be sequentially cited within the text.
  • Citations should be represented as numerals enclosed in parentheses, separated by a preceding space. For instance:
    • “as noted earlier (5, 6)”
    • “numerous researchers (7–12) have discovered”
    • “as discussed earlier (12, 14, 17–21)”
  • Formatting elements such as superscript, brackets, italics, etc., should not be used.

Listing References:

  • The references should be numerically listed according to their citation order in the text.
  • Journal names should be abbreviated in accordance with Vancouver style, modified to include DOI and PMCID at the end of each reference.
  • Manuscripts approved for publication (but which may not yet have been published) are treated as numbered references.

[1] Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. CMAJ. 1994;150(2):147-154, 159-167. DOI: PMC1486225.

Figure legends must not exceed 350 words. Start with an independent title, notwithstanding the individual parts. Ensure consistency in the usage of symbols and abbreviations between captions and figures. Include the description of statistical tests utilized, wherever suitable, in each figure caption. Avoid providing variance around the mean and statistical analysis for figures with less than three independent samples. For figure panels illustrating multiple experiments, denote the exact number of samples (n). For representative experiments, specify the number of repetitions. Histological panels and insets: Indicate scale bars or delineate total original magnification (the product of objective and eyepiece powers) in the captions. Please note that definitions within the figures themselves may need to be legible in the final published article. For insets, using “higher magnification” or similar is not sufficient; precise magnification must be stipulated. Any occurrences of image or data set repetitions, including control data, presented in various figure panels in the manuscript or supplement must be explicitly stated in the figure caption.

Overview of figure specifications, followed by details and requirements:

  • Image Resolution: 600 dpi.
  • Maximum Width, Complete Figure: Ranges from 9–18 cm (3.5–7.1 inches).
  • Maximum Height, Complete Figure: 17.25 cm (6.8 inches).
  • Typeface: Choose either 8 pt Helvetica or Arial.
  • Preferred File Type: TIFF.
  • Acceptable File Formats: PowerPoint, High-Resolution PDF, EPS, Illustrator.
  • Color Mode for Images: RGB.

Presentation of Figures in the Submitted PDF. For preparing the PDF, maintain the following:

  • Sharp and clear representation of figures.
  • Start each figure on a fresh page.
  • Maintain portrait orientation for each page.

Figure Preparation:

  • Avoid altering your figures: no particular feature within an image should be manipulated, obscured, shifted, deleted, or added.
  • Should your figures not comply with the Journal’s guidelines, you may be requested to revise them, which could delay manuscript decision-making.

Figure Specifications:

  • Titles and Labels
    • Sequential numbering of figures using Arabic numerals (1, 2, 3, etc.).
    • Figure parts labeled with uppercase roman letters (A, B, C, etc.) containing one or more panels without designations.
    • Lane designation in figures can utilize Arabic numerals, Roman numerals, or lowercase letters.
    • Labels in 8 pt Helvetica or Arial font.
    • Gene symbols, genus, and species nomenclature, or other generally italicized terms should be in italics; refrain from using italics for emphasis.
    • Ensure all axes have their units specified.
    • Begin each label with a capital letter and use capitals subsequently only where necessary (e.g., for acronyms, proper names).
  • A key to any symbols used should be provided, either in the figure or the legend.

Figure Types:

  • Graphs:
    • Quantitative data graphs should be either:
      • Dot plots, indicating the average and suitable error bars; OR
      • Box-and-whisker plots, with values defined in the legend.
    • Bar graphs with error bars are not allowed.
  • Photographic Panels:
    • Minimum width: 3 cm.
    • Inset photos: Use borders to clearly distinguish composited images from more than one field of view.
  • Blots:
    • Width: 0.5 cm per lane.
    • Spliced lanes must be separated by a thin line (black on a gray background, white on a black background), with a note in the legend indicating noncontiguous lanes.
    • Provide Unedited blot/gel images for all figures as Additional Materials, with:
      • A PDF, PPT, or PPTX file showing the unedited blot/gel image in its entirety.
      • Clear indication of which bands were used for the figures.

Figure Files:

  • Figures should appear clear and sharp when viewed at 100% magnification in Photoshop.
  • To ensure image quality, export images from the program originally used to create them.
  • Resolution for all images: 600 pixels per inch (ppi).
  • File formats: Preferred is TIFF; acceptable are PowerPoint, high-resolution PDF, EPS, Illustrator.
  • Avoid submitting JPEG files as they decrease image quality due to compression.
  • Flatten all layers in TIFF files.
  • Grayscale images: Set these in Grayscale mode. Using RGB or CMYK will unnecessarily increase file size.
  • Bit depth: 8 bits/channel. Higher bit figures increase file size unnecessarily.

Creating and Converting Figures:

  • Use PowerPoint and Illustrator to create files, ensuring each panel has appropriate ppi and width before inserting.
  • To convert to TIFFs, save as high-resolution PDF on PC, or print to PDF on Mac, then open the file using Photoshop.
  • In Photoshop, when changing file size or resolution, uncheck the Resampling box to keep the pixel count unchanged and lock the link icon to keep image dimensions proportional. Convert from PDF to a Photoshop TIFF file with resolution set at 600 ppi, mode set at RGB or “Grayscale,” and check the Anti-aliasing box.

Table legends should include any footnotes in alphabetical order. Legends should also define abbreviations and acronyms. Undefined terms such as “Other” and “Not available” are also explained in table legends.

Table may be presented as a Word document or as an object from another application (in that case the same table must be included in Supplementary material in Word format).

  • Supplemental material may include figures, tables, videos, or appendices but excludes large data sets. We recommend that authors deposit data sets for gene expression microarrays, SNP arrays, and high-throughput sequencing studies in a public repository and provide accession number(s) in the main text of the manuscript. Deposition of other types of large data sets in a public repository is strongly encouraged.
  • Combine supplemental material (except videos and spreadsheets) into a single PDF file.
  • Before submission, carefully review all files; they will not be checked by a copyeditor. Genomic Press is not responsible for any errors contained in data supplements.
  • In the case of accepted articles, the supplemental material will be posted online along with the final published article.

While used during the review process, Additional Materials will not be published online. These additional resources should consist of the following:

  • Unaltered Blot and Gel Images: A singular PDF file containing the unedited, full-scale images of all trimmed blots and gels. Upon acceptance of the manuscript for publication, authors can publish the complete unaltered blot/gel image file.
  • Supporting Data Values: One XLS file encompasses all data presented in graphical form within the manuscript and its supplementary materials, including mean ± standard deviation. Ensure that each relevant figure panel data is placed on a separate tab within the XLS file.

Multimedia files or expansive data sets that are unsuitable for the Supplementary Materials section should be appended as Other Supporting Files, and Multimedia (up to 12 files, with a combined size not exceeding 25 MB) or Movies (each not exceeding 50 MB). Authors are encouraged to furnish video and audio files with discernible accompanying captions and attributions.


Regarding video clips, we advocate for the use of .mp4 files. Quicktime (.mov) files are acceptable, given they employ the h.264 compression setting. When feasible, we suggest the use of HD frame size (1920 x 1080 pixels). Animated GIFs are not acceptable. We recommend that your audio files have a minimum bit rate of 160 kbps and use .way, .mp3, or .m4a formats.

We look forward to receiving your submission after the launch of our journals.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Scroll to Top

Contact US