Medical Research Paper Publication Support for Clinicians and Biomedical Researchers

Medical research paper publication support is for doctors, nurses, allied health professionals, public health researchers and biomedical scientists who are preparing a paper for a journal. It covers reporting-guideline checks, structure, language, journal route planning and submission preparation. It does not include clinical advice, analysis of patient data, or any view on whether a treatment works. Publish With Scopus is a UK-registered consultancy in London. We are not a publisher, and we do not guarantee acceptance or indexing. For the wider service, see our Scopus publication support page.

Start with the study type, because it sets the checklist

Most clinical journals expect a reporting guideline that matches the design. The EQUATOR Network library lists them. The usual ones are below.

• Randomised trial: CONSORT, with SPIRIT for trial protocols
• Systematic review or meta-analysis: PRISMA, with the review protocol registered where the journal expects it
• Cohort, case-control or cross-sectional study: STROBE
• Case report: CARE
• Diagnostic accuracy study: STARD
• Prediction model: TRIPOD
• Qualitative study: COREQ or SRQR
• Quality improvement study: SQUIRE
• Animal study: ARRIVE

Journals name the guideline they want in the instructions for authors, and many ask for the completed checklist with page numbers at submission. Use the version the journal specifies, because several guidelines have been updated.

What clinical editors look for early

• Ethics and registration. A named committee, an approval or exemption reference, and a statement on consent. The ICMJE expects clinical trials to be registered in a public registry at or before the first participant is enrolled.
• Patient privacy. No names, initials, dates, hospital numbers or identifiable images unless consent covers them, and consent from the patient or family for case reports.
• Authorship. Each author meets the ICMJE criteria, and the contributions statement says what each person did.
• Funding and conflicts. Industry links and personal interests declared in full.
• Data sharing. A statement of what data are available and how.
• Outcomes that match the plan. Primary outcomes as set out in the protocol, with any change explained.
• Conclusions that fit the design. An observational study shows association, and the wording should not suggest more.

A hypothetical worked example: a retrospective cohort

A hospital physician has two years of records on patients with one condition and wants to publish the outcomes. A sound plan could run like this.

1. Name the design as a retrospective cohort study, which points to STROBE.
2. Check the approval. If the ethics committee reviewed the project or granted a waiver before data were extracted, quote the reference. If it did not, ask the committee what it can say now. Do not write around the gap.
3. Write the methods so a stranger could judge the work: where the records came from, who was included and excluded, how missing data were handled, and who did the analysis.
4. Take every number from the statistician’s output. An editor can tidy how results are presented, but cannot change what they are.
5. Limit the discussion to association, and put the main limitation, such as a single centre, in the text instead of the last line.
6. Complete the STROBE checklist and compare it with the manuscript page by page.

Case reports and systematic reviews: honest limits

Case reports. See case report publication support for CARE-aware help. Some journals publish them only for a clear teaching point, and a number of journals no longer accept them, so check before you write. You need written consent, a short search showing what is already known, and a statement of what the case adds. A case report cannot support claims about treatment effect.

Systematic reviews. For dedicated help, see systematic review publication support. A systematic review needs a defined question, a protocol registered before screening where the journal expects one, a search strategy another team could repeat, a PRISMA flow diagram, and a stated method for judging the risk of bias. Screening, data extraction and appraisal are research work that you and your co-reviewers must carry out. We help with structure, reporting and language, and we do not do those steps for you. A narrative review should not be presented as a systematic one.

PubMed, MEDLINE and Scopus are separate things

PubMed is a search service run by the US National Library of Medicine. It includes journals indexed in MEDLINE, records from PubMed Central and other sources. Scopus is a different database. A journal can be in one, both or neither, so if your institution names an index, confirm it for the exact journal on the official source and check again near submission. Our guide on how to choose a Scopus journal shows where to look, and predatory journal warning signs matters especially in medicine, where weak journals can harm a clinician’s record.

What our support includes, and what it does not

We identify the study type and the matching guideline, restructure and edit your draft for clinical readers, align the manuscript with the checklist, work on the title and abstract, check the journal route and indexing, and prepare the submission package. We can also help with a reviewer response later.

We do not give medical advice, run or change analyses, or supply or alter data, ethics approvals or consent. We do not write case reports for clinicians who were not involved in the patient’s care, we do not write papers to be submitted under another name, and we promise no acceptance, PubMed or MEDLINE indexing, or timeline. If the design needs a statistician, you should involve one; we are not a substitute.

What to send us

Send the study type, the abstract or draft, the ethics and registration details, the target journal or index, the list of authors and the deadline. We confirm the scope and the price before work begins.

Call to action Email info@publishwithscopus.com Call +44 330 001 1136 Message us on WhatsApp