Article types

The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Journal's Editorial Board and independent experts, will review most manuscripts submitted to JMCM. However, the Editor-in-Chief and the Editors reserve the right to reject a manuscript without conducting an in-depth review if they feel that the manuscript is "out of scope" or it does not meet the minimal acceptance criteria for publication in JMCM. We accept 5 types of article as follows:

Original Articles:
Original Articles are comprehensive accounts of significant and original experimental and/or theoretical results that fit within the scope of JMCM. Research manuscripts should not exceed 5,500 words of text and a total of 15 figures and/or tables. Extra experimental and/or theoretical data in the form of figures and tables should be deposited as supplements.

Reviews should provide a comprehensive summary of broadly-based topics of general interest to medicine. Reviews are not limited as to the number of words, tables, figures and references that may be included.

Minireviews are well-focused, well-documented examinations of timely issues in the pharmaceutical sciences. The issues may be of a controversial nature, or may address a more narrowly focused area than those typically covered in a Review. Minireviews are limited to approximately 3,000-4,000 words, including tables, figures and references.

Meeting reports:
Meeting reports should focus on the key developments presented and discussed at the meeting and are intended to rely largely on the work described at the meeting, rather than being fully referenced accounts of a field. The main content of the Meeting report should focus on new research discoveries and the application of this knowledge. Meeting reports should be between 500-1500 words long with a maximum of 20 references.

A Letter is a brief report that is within the journal's scope and of particular interest to the community but not suitable as a standard research article.
Letters may be edited for clarity or length and may be subject to peer review at the editors' discretion. Letters should be a maximum of 400 words with up to 5 references.

Reporting Guidelines for Specific Study Types:
Authors are expected to comply with standard reporting guidelines for study designs. The appropriate checklist (and flow diagram, if applicable) must be included with each submission. Please choose the suitable guideline for you article and fill out the form before submitting your article. For further information regarding reporting guidelines, authors should consult the EQUATOR Network web site (, which maintains a useful, up-to-date list of guidelines as they are published, with links to articles and checklists.

Clinical Trial/Experimental Study (CONSORT Compliant)
Reports of randomized trials must conform to the revised CONSORT guidelines and should be submitted with their protocols and a completed CONSORT checklist. All reports of clinical trials must include a summary of previous research findings and explain how the submitted trial affects this summary of previous findings. Cluster randomized trials should be reported according to extended CONSORT guidelines. Randomized trials reporting harms must be described according to extended CONSORT guidelines. All reports of randomized trials should include a section entitled “Randomization and masking” within the methods section. For information regarding CONSORT guidelines, please visit

Observational Study (STROBE Compliant)*
Observational research comprises several study designs and many topic areas. The STROBE statement should be used when reporting such research. The STROBE recommendations apply to the three main analytical designs used in observational research: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. The STROBE statement consists of a 22-item checklist. For information regarding STROBE guidelines, please visit

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA Compliant)
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses must be reported according to PRISMA guidelines, an evidence-based minimum set of items created to help authors improve the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. For information regarding PRISMA guidelines, please visit

Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE Compliant)
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology should be reported according to MOOSE guidelines. For more information regarding MOOSE guidelines, please visit Medicine

Diagnostic Accuracy Study (STARD Compliant)
Investigators reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy should adhere to the STARD statement, part of the STARD initiative to improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy, to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in a study (internal validity) and to evaluate a study’s generalizability (external validity). The STARD statement consists of a 25-item checklist and recommends the use of a flow diagram to describe the design of the study and the flow of patients. For information regarding STARD guidelines, please visit

Quality Improvement Study (SQUIRE Compliant)*
The SQUIRE statement helps authors write excellent, usable articles about quality improvement in health care so that findings may be easily discovered and widely disseminated. The SQUIRE statement consists of a 19-item checklist. The SQUIRE guidelines are not exclusive of other guidelines. For example, an improvement project or effectiveness study that used a randomized controlled trial design should consider using both the CONSORT and the SQUIRE guidelines. In these cases, both checklists should be uploaded as a single document. For more information regarding SQUIRE guidelines, please visit

*Please note that Medicine® uses a customized version of the SQUIRE checklist, available only at in the “Files & Resources” section of the home page.