A guide for authors submitting to the Expert Collection


The aim of a Meta-opinion is to comment on the variety of opinions given in recent papers in the field and to suggest a consensus on the direction of the field, based on these and the author’s own opinion.

Word limit

The word limit for Meta-opinions is 2,000-2,500 words (not including figures, tables and references).

Every article must contain

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

Including address, academic qualifications and job titles of all authors, as well as telephone number, fax number and email address of the author for correspondence on a separate cover sheet as the peer reviewers will not be aware of the authors’ identity.

Please note that only the address of the first author of the article will appear on Medline/PubMed, not necessarily the corresponding author.

Maximum 200 words.

The aim of the abstract is to draw in the interested reader and provide an accurate reflection of the content of the paper. We therefore request the following structure is followed for full-length review articles:
Introduction: Authors are required to describe the significance of the topic under discussion.

Areas covered: Authors are required to describe the research discussed and the literature search undertaken.

Expert opinion: The author’s expert view on the current status of the field under discussion.

References must not be included in the abstract.

A brief list of 4-10 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 and so on.

An executive summary of the authors’ main points (bulleted) for time-constrained readers requiring a rapidly accessible overview.

Introduction: Provide basic background information on the area under review and the papers considered.

Current evidence: Provide commentary on the studies/papers under discussion, highlighting key points made by the authors of those papers and summarizing the opinions discussed in the context of the current status of the field.

500-1000 words (included in overall word count).

To distinguish the articles published in the Expert Collection (Expert Review and Expert Opinion) series, authors must provide an additional section entitled ‘Expert Opinion’. This section affords authors the opportunity to provide their interpretation of the data presented in the article and discuss the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results. The intention is to go beyond a conclusion and should not simply summarize the paper.

Authors should answer the following:

1. What are the key findings and weaknesses in the research done in this field so far?
2. What potential does this research hold? What is the ultimate goal in this field?
3. What research or knowledge is needed to achieve this goal and what is the biggest challenge in this goal being achieved?
4. Where do you see the field going in the coming years? What is going to happen?
5. Is there any particular area of the research you are finding of interest at present?

Please note that ‘opinions’ are encouraged in the Expert Opinion section, and, as such, referees are asked to keep this in mind when peer-reviewing the manuscript.

Up to two figures and two tables are permitted. For further information on tables and figures, please see our formatting guide.

Important references should be highlighted with a one/two-star system and brief annotations should be given (see the journal’s Instructions for Authors page for examples and for a more detailed description of our referencing style).

All additions and changes are in line with our other guidelines if you’d like to see an example:

A maximum of 20-50 references is suggested. Ensure that all key work relevant to the topic under discussion is cited in the text and listed in the bibliography. Reference to unpublished data should be kept to a minimum and authors must obtain a signed letter of permission from cited persons to use unpublished results or personal communications in the manuscript.

Explore the Expert Collection

Discover all Expert Collection, journal specific guidelines.