Key paper evaluation | Expert Collection | Author Services

We use cookies to improve your website experience. To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy. By closing this message, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

Key Paper Evaluation

A guide for authors submitting to the Expert Collection

Scope

Key Paper Evaluations review significant, recently published original research articles carefully selected and assessed by specialists in the field (not a paper from the author’s own group). The original research detailed in the chosen paper is discussed with the aim of keeping readers informed of the most promising discoveries/breakthroughs relevant to the subject of the journal through review and comment from experts.

Aim

Key Paper Evaluations are intended to extend and expand on the information presented, putting it in context and explaining why it is of importance. The ideal article will provide both a critical evaluation and the author’s opinion on the quality and novelty of the information disclosed.

Word limit

The word limit for Key Paper Evaluations is 1,000-1,500 words (not including abstract, keywords, and references).

Explore the Expert Collection

Discover all Expert Collection, journal specific guidelines.

Every article must contain

Title

Should be concise but informative, including the drug and therapeutic indication (if applicable). Titles should not contain brand names.

Authors’ names and addresses

Including address, academic qualifications and job titles of all authors. Please also provide the telephone number, fax number, and email address of the author for correspondence on a separate cover sheet, as the peer reviewers will be blinded to the authors’ identity.

Abstract

The abstract should be maximum 200 words. It should outline the article scope and briefly put it into context, with the aim of drawing in the interested casual browser. No references should be cited in the abstract.

Keywords

A brief list of keywords, in alphabetical order, is required to assist indexers in cross-referencing. The keywords will encompass the therapeutic area, mechanism(s) of action, key compounds etc

Body of the evaluation

Authors should include the following sections in the main body of their manuscript:

Introduction: The paper under discussion must be introduced and referenced as Reference [1]. The scientific and/or commercial rationale behind the paper is presented, giving some perspective on the information disclosed, placing it in context with previous research in the same area and indicating the relative importance of this new work. Authors may highlight other contemporary papers, which have relevance to the main paper; these may support or conflict the results. It is essential that a critical stand is taken when writing.

Summary of methods and results: Briefly summarise the methods the authors used and the main results obtained. Quote the number of patients, criteria for selection, doses used, route of administration, adverse effects and so on as appropriate.

Discussion: This should be the main draw of the manuscript. Comment on the extent and quality of the study, and how elegantly it was performed. It should contain your opinion of the developments; is the paper going to affect future research? Is this method/treatment likely to become standard practice? If not, indicate why you think the paper is nevertheless of interest. Give your opinion on the developments that you have discussed in the article. Comparative assessment is encouraged. When evaluating the paper, the authors should place emphasis on the therapeutic significance if possible and possibly compare this to other therapies in the same area.

Conclusion: A short concluding paragraph.

References

A maximum of 15 references is permitted.

Figures and tables

If necessary, only one of each is permitted. For further information on tables and figures, please see our formatting guide.

Financial disclosure and acknowledgements

This must include any declaration of interest by the submitting authors, including grants, fellowships or any commercial assistance or financial sponsorship received. It should also list any submitting author affiliation(s), organization(s) or entity(ies) that are relevant to the work reported. Some or all of this information may be published at the discretion of the Editor. Any contributions to the research, data analysis or assistance in manuscript preparation must also be acknowledged in this section.