The manuscript is finished, the cover letter is drafted, and you assume submission will take fifteen minutes. Then the system asks for every co-author’s ORCID, wants figures as separate high-resolution files, requires a fully blinded manuscript, a reporting checklist and an author contribution statement. Three hours later you are still hunting for the email address of a co-author who changed institutions last year.
Submission is an administrative procedure with its own rules. Preparing the file set in advance avoids a particularly frustrating outcome: being returned at the technical check, before an editor has read a single sentence of your science.
The file set to prepare before you log in
| Component | Common pitfalls |
|---|---|
| Title page | Title, all authors and affiliations, corresponding author, acknowledgements, funding. Separate file if review is blinded. |
| Blinded manuscript | Remove names, affiliations, acknowledgements, author names in file properties and phrases like “our previous study”. |
| Figures | Usually separate files; photos at high resolution, line art higher still. Check accepted formats. |
| Tables | Most journals want editable text tables, not images of tables. |
| Supplementary material | Extra tables, questionnaires, analysis code. Name files clearly. |
| Reporting checklist | CONSORT for randomised trials, PRISMA for systematic reviews, STROBE for observational studies, COREQ for qualitative work. Add page numbers. |
| Author contributions | Many journals use the CRediT taxonomy (conceptualisation, methodology, formal analysis, writing, and so on). |
| Data, competing interests, ethics | Draft these as ready-to-paste paragraphs. |
Co-author details: a job for last week
Systems typically require an email address, full affiliation and sometimes an ORCID for every author. After submission, many send each co-author a confirmation request; if one does not respond, the manuscript can sit in limbo. A week before submitting, send co-authors a short form: name exactly as they want it published, official English name of their institution, institutional email, ORCID. Inconsistent affiliation names across papers cause databases to split one university into several entities, which quietly damages your own institution’s publication statistics.
The technical check: rejections that have nothing to do with content
- Abstract or main text over the word limit.
- Abstract not in the required structure, such as Background, Methods, Results, Conclusions for many medical journals.
- Author names still visible in the blinded file.
- Missing ethics or data availability statements.
- Reference style ignored: some journals are relaxed, others return the paper at once.
- High similarity score from plagiarism-detection software, often because methods text was reused from an earlier paper without citation.
A technical return is not a rejection: you fix the problem and resubmit to the same record. But each loop costs days or weeks.
Reading the waiting statuses
Labels vary between systems, but the logic is usually the same:
- Submitted / Awaiting technical check: editorial office staff are checking the files.
- With Editor / Editor assigned: an editor is reading to decide whether to send for review. This is where desk rejections happen.
- Reviewers invited / Under review: invitations have gone out. This can drag on if several people decline and the editor has to keep inviting.
- Required reviews completed: enough reports are in.
- Decision in process / Awaiting decision: the editor is weighing reports and drafting the letter.
A detail insiders notice: a status that flips from “Under review” back to “With Editor” is not necessarily bad news. It often just means a report has arrived or the editor needs to invite someone else.
When to contact the editorial office
Asking too early irritates; waiting too long risks a manuscript that has been forgotten. A reasonable trigger is when the wait clearly exceeds the journal’s published average, for example by half again. Keep the email short and polite, with manuscript number, submission date and current status. Avoid personal urgency unless it is genuinely important, and do not send repeated chasers.
What not to do while you wait
- Submit the same paper elsewhere. If you want to switch journals, withdraw in writing first.
- Publish the main data or results elsewhere without checking the journal’s policy. Most accept preprints, but not all.
- Change the author list quietly. Adding or removing authors after submission requires a reason and written agreement from everyone, and journals generally follow COPE guidance.
In practice: a 15-point pre-submission checklist
- The journal name in the cover letter is correct.
- The abstract meets the word limit and structure.
- The main text is within the limit, counted the way the journal specifies.
- The blinded file has no names in the text or file properties.
- Figures are in accepted formats and resolution, numbered to match the text.
- Tables are text, not images.
- References follow the style, and every citation appears in the list and vice versa.
- The reporting checklist includes page numbers.
- The ethics statement names the committee and approval number.
- The data statement says where data are or why they cannot be shared.
- Competing interests and funding are complete.
- Author contributions follow CRediT if required.
- All co-author details are confirmed.
- Suggested reviewers have institutional email addresses.
- You have downloaded and read the system-generated PDF before approving it.
The last item is the one most often skipped. The PDF the system assembles can lose mathematical symbols, reorder figures or mangle accented characters in author names.
Next step: create a submission folder containing the eight components in the first table, send the details form to co-authors today, and only log in once everything is ready.
Câu hỏi thường gặp
What should I remove from a blinded manuscript?
Names, affiliations, acknowledgements, identifying funding details, author names in file properties and self-references such as our previous study. Cite your own work in the third person.
Is a long With Editor status a bad sign?
Not necessarily. The editor may be busy or struggling to find reviewers. If the wait clearly exceeds the journal’s published average, a polite enquiry is reasonable.
Is a technical check return the same as a rejection?
No. You correct the formatting or add missing files and resubmit to the same record. A rejection only comes in a decision letter from an editor.
What is the CRediT author statement?
A standard taxonomy of contributor roles such as conceptualisation, methodology, formal analysis and writing. Many journals ask authors to specify who did what using it.
Can I add an author after submitting a paper?
Yes, but you must inform the editorial office, explain why and provide written agreement from all authors. Journals usually handle this following COPE guidance.
