Information For Authors
01 Eligibility & pre-submission checklist
Confirm every item below before opening a submission. Click each criterion to mark it complete.
✓ Originality The work — or any substantial portion of it — must not have been published elsewhere, nor be under concurrent review at another journal. Preprints deposited on arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, or SSRN are acceptable prior venues. Self-plagiarism is grounds for rejection.
✓ Ethics and research integrity Research must comply with applicable ethics requirements for your discipline, including all relevant institutional, national, and international standards.
✓ Data availability Raw data underlying original results must be deposited in an open-format repository with a persistent identifier (DOI) and a reuse licence, in accordance with FAIR principles. A Data Availability Statement is mandatory for every submission — including those with no associated datasets.
✓ Reproducibility All methods, reagents, and resources must be described in sufficient detail for others to replicate the work. The manuscript must comply with the reporting standards applicable to your study type.
✓ Author information The manuscript must include full author names, institutional affiliations, CRediT contribution roles (selected during submission), and a conflict-of-interest declaration for every named author.
✓ Policy acknowledgement All co-authors must have read and agreed to the journal's editorial policies and must understand the post-publication peer review model before the article is submitted.
02 Choosing your article type
Select the type that best describes your work. Each type carries specific format requirements — consult the dedicated Author Instructions for your chosen category before preparing your manuscript.
| Article type | Scope and description |
|---|---|
| Research Article |
Original findings across any field — natural sciences, engineering, humanities, social sciences, law, economics, or the arts. Null results, replications, and re-analyses are equally welcome. |
| Brief Report |
Single-finding papers presentable with one or two figures or tables; unexpected observations; and descriptions of laboratory protocols. |
| Data Note |
Short descriptions of scientific datasets to promote reuse. No analyses or conclusions are included. |
| Method Article |
New or substantially modified experimental, statistical, or computational methods — including innovative applications to new models or research questions. |
| Software Tool Article |
Rationale and code description for a software tool, with example inputs, expected outputs, and guidance on interpreting results. |
| Study Protocol |
Detailed designs for experimental, clinical, or review research. Randomised trial protocols must be registered and conform to SPIRIT guidelines. |
| Registered Report |
Methods and proposed analyses reviewed and accepted before data collection begins — mitigating selective reporting and insufficient statistical power. |
| Review |
Balanced, comprehensive synthesis of current knowledge in a defined subject area. |
| Systematic Review |
Evidence synthesis using explicit, reproducible methods to address a clearly formulated question. PRISMA guidelines apply. |
| Clinical Practice Article |
Case series involving groups of patients who received analogous treatment. For single patients, see Case Report. |
| Case Report |
Detailed account of a single patient case. Standard and unusual presentations are equally welcome. |
| Open Letter |
Policy discussions, guidelines, white papers, or announcements of new initiatives relevant to a broad research community. No new data or analyses. |
03 Submitting your manuscript
Contact the editorial team with any questions about file formats before submitting. Track all your submissions at any time via My Account → Submissions.
| Format | Extension(s) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Word | .doc.docx |
Preferred format; a Word template is available from the editorial office on request. |
| Rich Text Format | .rtf | Accepted as an alternative to Word. |
During submission you will assign CRediT contributor roles for each author, select your primary subject area, and attach any supplementary data files.
ORCID iD — optional but recommended
Linking your ORCID iD at submission ensures that every appearance of your name — as author or reviewer — carries a verified badge connecting to your full research profile. Co-authors receive an invitation to link their own iDs at the point of publication. Registration is free. Once your article is published, remember to add it to your ORCID record.
04 Pre-publication checks
Because peer review takes place openly after publication, every submission undergoes rigorous in-house editorial checks before it is accepted for publication. Please respond to all editorial queries within two weeks — unresolved issues will result in the article not being accepted.
1 Author criteria : All CRediT contribution statements are verified to be complete and accurate for every listed author.
2 Article type compliance : The submission is assessed against the format and content criteria for the chosen article type as defined in the Article Guidelines.
3 Originality : Textual similarity is assessed using iThenticate. Apparent plagiarism — including self-plagiarism — is grounds for immediate rejection.
4 Language and readability : Articles must be coherent and clearly written. A light copyedit is provided, but submissions with severe language deficiencies may be returned for professional editing before resubmission.
5 Methods and reproducibility : Sufficient methodological detail must be present for the work to be assessed during peer review and independently replicated.
6 Policy compliance : Verified against all relevant policies: competing interests, trial and systematic-review registration (SPIRIT, PROSPERO), reproducibility requirements, and community reporting standards.
7 Data availability : A Data Availability Statement must be present. Articles reporting original results require openly deposited raw data with a persistent identifier, a reuse licence, and FAIR-compliant metadata.
8 Ethics compliance : Research must comply with applicable disciplinary ethics standards, international law, and all national regulations. Relevant institutional and national ethics approvals must be confirmed.
05 Production & proof review
Once accepted, your article undergoes light copyediting and moves to typesetting. A final proof is sent to the submitting author by email. At this stage you may also suggest potential peer reviewers — the editorial team will work to secure at least two peer review reports.
One-week deadline. Proof corrections must be returned within seven days. If no response is received, the file may be closed for publication. Errors not corrected at proof stage remain the author's responsibility in the published version.
What to verify in your proof
- All author names spelled correctly and listed in the agreed order
- Affiliations accurate and complete for every author
- Copyright section information correct
- Figures rendered correctly with accurate legends
- All supplementary and external data files accounted for
- All hyperlinks functional and pointing to the intended destinations
- All queries from the editor or typesetter addressed
06 After publication — open peer review
Nexus Open Research operates a post-publication peer review model. Articles are published first; invited expert reviewers then assess them openly and on the record.
- The article remains published regardless of reviewer conclusions. It is not retracted solely on the basis of peer review reports.
- All reviewer reports are published alongside the article, ensuring complete transparency of the review process.
- Reviewer ORCID iDs are publicly visible, making the identity and accountability of reviewers clear.
- Authors are encouraged to respond publicly to reviewer comments directly on the platform.
- Authors may submit revised versions of their article at any point after initial publication.
Each peer review report carries one of three outcomes:
| Outcome | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Approved |
The reviewer considers the article scientifically sound and ready for the record without modification. |
| Approved with Reservations |
The reviewer finds the work acceptable but identifies specific concerns the authors are invited to address in a revision. |
| Not Approved |
The reviewer identifies significant methodological or interpretive concerns that, in their view, require substantial revision before the work can be endorsed. |
After publication: remember to add this article to your ORCID record to maximise the visibility of your research output.
