HomePublish with usSubmission Checklist

Submission Checklist

Submission Checklist

Download as PDF

1. How to use this checklist

  • Tick every item that applies before you click “Submit”.

  • Requirements are journal-by-journal (peer review model, OA license, APC/waivers). Always confirm the selected journal’s “For Authors” section.

2. A) Journal fit (scope + article type)

  • I selected the correct journal for my topic and methods (aims & scope match).

  • I selected the correct article type (e.g., Research Article / Review / Case Study / Short Communication).

  • My manuscript length fits the journal’s expectations (word count, figures/tables, references).

  • If the journal requires double-blind review, I prepared the correct blinded files (see section C).

3. B) Submission package (files)

Required files (typical)

  • Main manuscript file is ready (DOCX preferred unless journal requests PDF).

  • Figures are included correctly (embedded OR uploaded separately, as required).

  • Tables are editable (not pasted as images).

  • Supplementary material (if any) is clearly labeled and referenced in the manuscript.

  • Cover letter is included (recommended).

4. C) Double-blind review compliance (if applicable)

(Only if the selected journal uses double-blind peer review)

  • I created a separate Title Page file with all author information.

  • The main manuscript file is blinded:

  • No author names or affiliations anywhere.

  • No acknowledgements that identify authors/institutions.

  • Funding information removed if it identifies authors/institutions (journal-dependent).

  • Self-citations are written neutrally (e.g., “Prior work has shown…” rather than “In our previous work…”).

  • File metadata does not contain author names (Word → File → Info → Inspect Document).

5. D) Manuscript structure: APA 7 base

Front matter

  • Title is clear, specific, and reflects the main contribution.

  • Abstract is complete (typical 150–250 words unless journal says otherwise).

  • Keywords included (3–7 keywords).

Main text

  • Headings are consistent and use Word styles (Heading 1/2/3).

  • Sections are logically structured (e.g., Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion, Conclusion) or appropriate for the article type.

  • Methods are detailed enough to reproduce the work (data, sampling, measures, analysis).

  • Limitations are stated appropriately.

  • All abbreviations are defined at first use.

Language/quality

  • Grammar and clarity checked (professional academic writing).

  • Units, notation, and terminology are consistent.

  • All claims are supported with evidence or citations.

6. E) Tables, figures, and permissions

  • Every table/figure is cited in the text in the correct order (Table 1, Figure 1, etc.).

  • Captions are clear and complete (APA-style sentence case is recommended).

  • Tables are editable (created with Word table tool).

  • Figure quality is sufficient (recommendation: 300 dpi for images).

  • If any figure/table is reproduced or adapted:

  • I obtained permission if needed.

  • I included an attribution note/credit line in the caption.

  • I did not manipulate images/data in a misleading way (no unethical enhancements).

7. F) References (APA 7)

In-text citations

  • All in-text citations follow APA author–date format.

  • Every in-text citation appears in the reference list.

  • Every reference list entry is cited in the text.

Reference list

  • Reference list is alphabetized by first author surname.

  • Hanging indent is applied (APA 7 format).

  • DOIs are included when available in URL format: https://doi.org/xxxxx

  • URLs are included only when appropriate (e.g., webpages, reports, items without DOI).

8. G) Ethics, transparency, and required statements

Funding statement

  • Included a Funding statement.

  • If none: “This research received no specific grant from any funding agency.”

Competing interests (COI)

  • Included a Competing Interests statement.

  • If none: “The authors declare no competing interests.”

Ethics approval (if applicable)

  • Human subjects: ethics approval stated (committee name + approval ID/date) and consent described.

  • Animal research: institutional welfare approvals stated.

Data availability statement

  • Included a Data Availability statement (one of the following applies):

  • Open: “Data and code are available at [Repository], https://doi.org/[DOI].”

  • On request: “Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.”

  • Restricted: “Data are restricted due to [reason], but may be accessed under [conditions].”

  • Not applicable: “No datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.”

AI use disclosure (if applicable)

  • If I used AI tools (writing, coding, analysis, image generation), I disclosed:

  • tool name(s) and purpose

  • where AI was used (Methods / Acknowledgements / AI statement)

  • AI tools are not listed as authors.

Preprints / prior dissemination

  • If the manuscript was posted as a preprint, I disclosed the preprint link/DOI.

  • I disclosed any overlap with prior publications and explained what is new.

Duplicate submission

  • This manuscript is not under review elsewhere (no duplicate submission).

10. I) Submission form metadata (commonly missed)

  • Author names and affiliations entered correctly (spelling, order).

  • Corresponding author details are correct (email especially).

  • Keywords entered (match manuscript keywords).

  • Abstract entered matches the manuscript abstract.

  • Funding information entered (if required in the system).

  • ORCID included for authors (if available).

  • Declarations completed (COI, ethics, AI use, data availability).

11. Common reasons a submission is returned (avoid these)

  • 1. Missing ethics approval / consent statement (when required)

  • 2. Missing COI or funding statement

  • 3. Missing data availability statement

  • 4. Incomplete author information or wrong corresponding email

  • 5. Tables pasted as images / figures missing captions

  • 6. In-text citations not matching reference list

  • 7. Not blinded correctly for double-blind journals

  • 8. Scope mismatch with the journal