Instructions for Authors — PLOS Digital Health
Source: https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/s/submission-guidelines
Submission Guidelines
Related information for authors
| | Manuscript files can be in the following formats: DOC, DOCX, RTF or PDF. Microsoft Word documents should not be locked or protected. LaTeX manuscripts must be submitted as PDFs. | |||||||||| | | Manuscripts can be any length. There are no restrictions on word count, number of figures, or amount of supporting information. | |||||||||| | | Use a standard font size and any standard font, except for the font named “Symbol”. To add symbols to the manuscript, use the Insert → Symbol function in your word processor or paste in the appropriate Unicode character. | |||||||||| | | Limit manuscript sections and sub-sections to 3 heading levels. Make sure heading levels are clearly indicated in the manuscript text. | |||||||||| | | Manuscript text should be double-spaced. Do not format text in multiple columns. | |||||||||| | | Include page numbers and line numbers in the manuscript file. Use continuous line numbers (do not restart the numbering on each page). | |||||||||| | | Insert tables immediately after the first paragraph in which they are cited. | |||||||||| | | Upload Supporting Information (SI) files separately. | |||||||||| | | Footnotes are not permitted. If your manuscript contains footnotes, move the information into the main text or the reference list, depending on the content. | |||||||||| | | Manuscripts must be submitted in English. You may submit translations of the manuscript or abstract as supporting information. | |||||||||| | | Define abbreviations upon first appearance in the text. Do not use non-standard abbreviations unless they appear at least three times in the text. Keep abbreviations to a minimum. | |||||||||| | | PLOS uses “Vancouver” style, as outlined in the | |||||||||| | | We recommend using MathType for display and inline equations, as it will provide the most reliable outcome. If this is not possible, Equation Editor or Microsoft's Insert→Equation function is acceptable. Avoid using MathType, Equation Editor, or the Insert→Equation function to insert single variables (e.g., “a² + b² = c²”), Greek or other symbols (e.g., β, Δ, or ′ [prime]), or mathematical operators (e.g., x, ≥, or ±) in running text. Wherever possible, insert single symbols as normal text with the correct Unicode (hex) values. Do not use MathType, Equation Editor, or the Insert→Equation function for only a portion of an equation. Rather, ensure that the entire equation is included. Equations should not contain a mix of different equation tools. Avoid “hybrid” inline or display equations, in which part is text and part is MathType, or part is MathType and part is Equation Editor. | |||||||||| | | Use correct and established nomenclature wherever possible. |
Prior to submission, authors who believe their manuscripts would benefit from in-depth professional copyediting are encouraged to use language-editing and copyediting services. Obtaining this service is the responsibility of the author and should be done before initial submission. These services can be found on the web using search terms like “scientific editing service” or “manuscript editing service”.
Note that if your manuscript is accepted, PLOS will not perform a detailed copyediting step. Therefore, please carefully review your manuscript, paying special attention to spelling, punctuation, and grammar, as well as scientific content.
Most manuscripts should be organized as follows. Instructions for each element appear below.
- Title
- Authors
- Affiliations
- Abstract
- Author Summary
- Introduction
- Results
- Discussion
- Materials and Methods
- Acknowledgments
- References
- Supporting information captions
Uniformity in format facilitates the experience of readers and users of the journal. To provide flexibility, however, authors are also able to include the Materials and Methods section before the Results section or before the Discussion section. Please also note that the Results and Discussion can be combined into one Results/Discussion section.
Ready to format your provisionally accepted manuscript?
Refer to our downloadable sample files to ensure that your submission meets our formatting requirements:
Viewing Figures and Supporting Information in the compiled submission PDF
The compiled submission PDF includes low-resolution preview images of the figures after the reference list. The function of these previews is to allow you to download the entire submission as quickly as possible. Click the link at the top of each preview page to download a high-resolution version of each figure. Links to download Supporting Information files are also available after the reference list.
Include a full title and a short title for the manuscript.
| Title | Length | Guidelines | Examples | | Full title | 200 characters | Specific, descriptive, concise, and comprehensible to readers outside the field | Impact of cigarette smoke exposure on innate immunity: A Solar drinking water disinfection (SODIS) to reduce childhood diarrhoea in rural Bolivia: A cluster-randomized, controlled trial | | Short title | 70 characters | State the topic of the study | Cigarette smoke exposure and innate immunitySODIS and childhood diarrhoea |
Titles should be written in sentence case (only the first word of the text, proper nouns, and genus names are capitalized). Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible. For clinical trials, systematic reviews, or meta-analyses, the subtitle should include the study design.
Authorship requirements
All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the
authorship policy. Those who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship can be mentioned in the Acknowledgments.
Read more about Acknowledgments.
The corresponding author must provide an ORCID iD at the time of submission by entering it in the user profile in the submission system.
Author names and affiliations
Enter author names on the title page of the manuscript and in the online submission system.
On the title page, write author names in the following order:
- First name (or initials, if used)
- Middle name (or initials, if used)
- Last name (surname, family name)
Each author on the list must have an affiliation. The affiliation includes department, university, or organizational affiliation and its location, including city, state/province (if applicable), and country. Authors have the option to include a current address in addition to the address of their affiliation at the time of the study. The current address should be listed in the byline and clearly labeled “current address.” At a minimum, the address must include the author’s current institution, city, and country.
If an author has multiple affiliations, enter all affiliations on the title page only. In the submission system, enter only the preferred or primary affiliation. Author affiliations will be listed in the typeset PDF article in the same order that authors are listed in the submission.
The submitting author is automatically designated as the corresponding author in the submission system. The corresponding author is the primary contact for the journal office and the only author able to view or change the manuscript while it is under editorial consideration.
The corresponding author role may be transferred to another coauthor. However, note that transferring the corresponding author role also transfers access to the manuscript. (To designate a new corresponding author while the manuscript is still under consideration, watch the video tutorial below.)
Only one corresponding author can be designated in the submission system, but this does not restrict the number of corresponding authors that may be listed on the article in the event of publication. Whoever is designated as a corresponding author on the title page of the manuscript file will be listed as such upon publication. Include an email address for each corresponding author listed on the title page of the manuscript.
If a manuscript is submitted on behalf of a consortium or group, include its name in the manuscript byline. Do not add it to the author list in the submission system. You may include the full list of members in the Acknowledgments or in a supporting information file.
PubMed only indexes individual consortium or group author members listed in the article byline. If included, these individuals must qualify for authorship according to our criteria.
Provide at minimum one contribution for each author in the submission system. Use the CRediT taxonomy to describe each contribution. Read the policy and the full list of roles.
Contributions will be published with the final article, and they should accurately reflect contributions to the work. The submitting author is responsible for completing this information at submission, and we expect that all authors will have reviewed, discussed, and agreed to their individual contributions ahead of this time.
PLOS Digital Health will contact all authors by email at submission to ensure that they are aware of the submission.
Upload a cover letter as a separate file in the online system.
The cover letter should address the following questions:
- Why is this manuscript suitable for publication in PLOS Digital Health?
- Why will your study inspire other members of your field, and how will it drive research forward?
You may recommend a suitable Academic Editor to handle your submission; however, the editors reserve the right to contact an alternative—either from the board or a guest editor.
The cover letter will only be available to the editor and the journal staff.
The title, authors, and affiliations should all be included on a title page as the first page of the manuscript file.
The Abstract comes after the title page in the manuscript file. The abstract text is also entered in a separate field in the submission system.
The Abstract should be succinct; it must not exceed 300 words. Authors should mention the techniques used without going into methodological detail and should summarize the most important results.
While the Abstract is conceptually divided into three sections (Background, Methodology/Principal Findings, and Conclusions/Significance), do not apply these distinct headings to the Abstract within the article file.
Do not include any citations. Avoid specialist abbreviations.
We ask that all authors of research articles include a 150-200 word non-technical summary of the work as part of the manuscript to immediately follow the abstract. This text is subject to editorial change, should be written in the first-person voice, and should be distinct from the scientific abstract.
Aim to highlight where your work fits within a broader context; present the significance or possible implications of your work simply and objectively; and avoid the use of acronyms and complex terminology wherever possible. The goal is to make your findings accessible to a wide audience that includes both scientists and non-scientists.
Authors may benefit from consulting with a science writer or press officer to ensure they effectively communicate their findings to a general audience.
Example Author Summary
Mosquitoes Inoculate High Doses of West Nile Virus as They Probe and Feed on Live Hosts
The introduction should put the focus of the manuscript into a broader context. As you compose the Introduction, think of readers who are not experts in this field. Include a brief review of the key literature. If there are relevant controversies or disagreements in the field, they should be mentioned so that a non-expert reader can delve into these issues further. The Introduction should conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the experiments and a comment about whether that aim was achieved.
The Results section should provide details of all of the experiments that are required to support the conclusions of the paper. There is no specific word limit for this section, but details of experiments that are peripheral to the main thrust of the article and that detract from the focus of the article should not be included. The section may be divided into subsections, each with a concise subheading. The section should be written in the past tense.
PLOS journals require authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception. When submitting a manuscript online, authors must provide a Data Availability Statement describing compliance with PLOS's policy.
Large data sets, including raw data, may be deposited in an appropriate public repository. See our list of recommended repositories.
For smaller data sets and certain data types, authors may provide their data within supporting information files accompanying the manuscript. Authors should take care to maximize the accessibility and reusability of the data by selecting a file format from which data can be efficiently extracted (for example, spreadsheets or flat files should be provided rather than PDFs when providing tabulated data).
For more information on how best to provide data, read our policy on data availability. PLOS does not accept references to “data not shown.”
The Discussion should spell out the major conclusions of the work along with some explanation or speculation on the significance of these conclusions. How do the conclusions affect the existing assumptions and models in the field? How can future research build on these observations? What are the key experiments that must be done?
The Discussion should be concise and tightly argued.
The Results and Discussion may be combined into one section, if desired.
The Materials and Methods should provide enough detail to reproduce the findings. Submit detailed protocols for newer or less established methods. Well-established protocols may be referenced.
Details of algorithms and protocol documents for clinical trials, observational studies, and other non-laboratory investigations may be uploaded as supporting information. These are not included in the typeset manuscript, but are downloadable and fully searchable from the HTML version of the article. Read the supporting information guidelines for formatting instructions.
We recommend and encourage you to deposit laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where protocols can be assigned their own persistent digital object identifiers (DOIs).
To include a link to a protocol in your article:
- Describe your step-by-step protocol on protocols.io
- Select Get DOIto issue your protocol a persistent digital object identifier (DOI)
- Include the DOI link in the Methods section of your manuscript using the following format provided by protocols.io: http://dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.[PROTOCOL DOI]
At this stage, your protocol is only visible to those with the link. This allows editors and reviewers to consult your protocol when evaluating the manuscript. You can make your protocols public at any time by selecting Publish on the protocols.io site. Any referenced protocol(s) will automatically be made public when your article is published.
PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io articles. Read more information on Lab Protocol articles.
Consult our reporting guidelines, and include an ethics statement in the Materials and Methods section when reporting results from human subjects research and animal research.
Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named.
Do not include funding sources in the Acknowledgments or anywhere else in the manuscript file. Funding information should only be entered in the financial disclosure section of the submission system.
Any and all available works can be cited in the reference list. Acceptable sources include:
- Published or accepted manuscripts
- Manuscripts on preprint servers, providing the manuscript has a citable DOI or arXiv URL.
Do not cite the following sources in the reference list:
- Unavailable and unpublished work, including manuscripts that have been submitted but not yet accepted (e.g., “unpublished work,” “data not shown”). Instead, include those data as supplementary material or deposit the data in a publicly available database.
- Personal communications (these should be supported by a letter from the relevant authors but not included in the reference list)
- Submitted research should not rely upon retracted research. You should avoid citing retracted articles unless you need to discuss retracted work to provide historical context for your submitted research. If it is necessary to discuss retracted work, state the article’s retracted status in your article’s text and reference list.
Ensure that your reference list includes full and current bibliography details for every cited work at the time of your article’s submission (and publication, if accepted). If cited work is corrected, retracted, or marked with an expression of concern before your article is published, and if you feel it is appropriate to cite the work even in light of the post-publication notice, include in your manuscript citations and full references for both the affected article and the post-publication notice. Email the journal office if you have questions.
References are listed at the end of the manuscript and numbered in the order that they appear in the text. In the text, cite the reference number in square brackets (e.g., “We used the techniques developed by our colleagues [19] to analyze the data”). PLOS uses the numbered citation (citation-sequence) method and first six authors, et al.
Do not include citations in abstracts.
Make sure the parts of the manuscript are in the correct order before ordering the citations.
PLOS uses the reference style outlined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), also referred to as the “Vancouver” style. Example formats are listed below. Additional examples are in the ICMJE sample references.
style filethat can assist you with the formatting of your references. If you have problems with any reference management program, please contact the source company's technical support.
Journal name abbreviations should be those found in the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) databases.
| Source | Format |
|---|---|
| Published articles | Hou WR, Hou YL, Wu GF, Song Y, Su XL, Sun B, et al. cDNA, genomic sequence cloning and overexpression of ribosomal protein gene L9 (rpL9) of the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Genet Mol Res. 2011;10: 1576-1588. Devaraju P, Gulati R, Antony PT, Mithun CB, Negi VS. Susceptibility to SLE in South Indian Tamils may be influenced by genetic selection pressure on TLR2 and TLR9 genes. Mol Immunol. 2014 Nov 22. pii: S0161-5890(14)00313-7. doi: 10.1016/j.molimm.2014.11.005. Note: A DOI number for the full-text article is acceptable as an alternative to or in addition to traditional volume and page numbers. When providing a DOI, adhere to the format in the example above with both the label and full DOI included at the end of the reference (doi: 10.1016/j.molimm.2014.11.005). Do not provide a shortened DOI or the URL. |
| Accepted, unpublished articles | Same as published articles, but substitute “Forthcoming” for page numbers or DOI. |
| Online articles | Huynen MMTE, Martens P, Hilderlink HBM. The health impacts of globalisation: a conceptual framework. Global Health. 2005;1: 14. Available from: |
| Books | Bates B. Bargaining for life: A social history of tuberculosis. 1st ed. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1992. |
| Book chapters | Hansen B. New York City epidemics and history for the public. In: Harden VA, Risse GB, editors. AIDS and the historian. Bethesda: National Institutes of Health; 1991. pp. 21-28. |
| [Deposited articles (preprints, e-prints, or arXiv)] | Krick T, Shub DA, Verstraete N, Ferreiro DU, Alonso LG, Shub M, et al. Amino acid metabolism conflicts with protein diversity. arXiv:1403.3301v1 [Preprint]. 2014 [cited 2014 March 17]. Available from: Kording KP, Mensh B. Ten simple rules for structuring papers. BioRxiv [Preprint]. 2016 bioRxiv 088278 [posted 2016 Nov 28; revised 2016 Dec 14; revised 2016 Dec 15; cited 2017 Feb 9]: [12 p.]. Available from: |
| Published media (print or online newspapers and magazine articles) | Fountain H. For Already Vulnerable Penguins, Study Finds Climate Change Is Another Danger. The New York Times. 2014 Jan 29 [Cited 2014 March 17]. Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/30/science/earth/climate-change-taking-toll-on-penguins-study-finds.html |
| New media (blogs, web sites, or other written works) | Allen L. Announcing PLOS Blogs. 2010 Sep 1 [cited 17 March 2014]. In: PLOS Blogs [Internet]. San Francisco: PLOS 2006 - . [about 2 screens]. Available from: http://blogs.plos.org/plos/2010/09/announcing-plos-blogs/. |
| Masters' theses or doctoral dissertations | Wells A. Exploring the development of the independent, electronic, scholarly journal. M.Sc. Thesis, The University of Sheffield. 1999. Available from: https://papers.cumincad.org/cgi-bin/works/Show?2e09 |
| Databases and repositories (Figshare, arXiv) | Roberts SB. QPX Genome Browser Feature Tracks; 2013 [cited 2013 Oct 5]. Database: figshare [Internet]. Available from: http://figshare.com/articles/QPX_Genome_Browser_Feature_Tracks/701214 |
| Multimedia (videos, movies, or TV shows) | Hitchcock A, producer and director. Rear Window [Film]; 1954. Los Angeles: MGM. |
Authors can submit essential supporting files and multimedia files along with their manuscripts. All supporting information will be subject to peer review. All file types can be submitted, but files must be smaller than 20 MB in size.
Authors may use almost any description as the item name for a supporting information file as long as it contains an “S” and number. For example, “S1 Appendix” and “S2 Appendix,” “S1 Table” and “S2 Table,” and so forth.
Supporting information files are published exactly as provided, and are not copyedited.
Supporting information captions
List supporting information captions at the end of the manuscript file. Do not submit captions in a separate file.
The file number and name are required in a caption, and we highly recommend including a one-line title as well. You may also include a legend in your caption, but it is not required.
Example caption
S1 Text. Title is strongly recommended.Legend is optional.
S1 Text. Title is strongly recommended.
In-text citations
We recommend that you cite supporting information in the manuscript text, but this is not a requirement. If you cite supporting information in the text, citations do not need to be in numerical order.
supporting information guidelinesfor more details about submitting supporting information and multimedia files.
Figure files
You can include figures in the main manuscript file at initial submission. If the manuscript reaches the revise stage, prepare and submit each figure as an individual file.
Cite figures in ascending numeric order at first appearance in the manuscript file.
read the guidelines for figures.
Figure Captions
Insert figure captions in manuscript text, immediately following the paragraph where the figure is first cited (read order). Don’t include captions as part of the figure files themselves or submit them in a separate document.
At a minimum, include the following in your figure captions:
- A figure label with Arabic numerals, and “Figure” abbreviated to “Fig” (e.g. Fig 1, Fig 2, Fig 3, etc). Match the label of your figure with the name of the file uploaded at submission (e.g. a figure citation of “Fig 1” must refer to a figure file named “Fig1.tif”).
- A concise, descriptive title
The caption may also include a legend as needed.
Tables
Cite tables in ascending numeric order upon first appearance in the manuscript file.
Place each table in your manuscript file directly after the paragraph in which it is first cited (read order). Do not submit your tables in separate files.
Tables require a label (e.g., “Table 1”) and brief descriptive title to be placed above the table. Place legends, footnotes, and other text below the table.
All data and related metadata underlying the findings reported in a submitted manuscript should be deposited in an appropriate public repository, unless already provided as part of the submitted article.
Repositories may be either subject-specific (where these exist) and accept specific types of structured data, or generalist repositories that accept multiple data types. We recommend that authors select repositories appropriate to their field. Repositories may be subject-specific (e.g., GenBank for sequences and PDB for structures), general, or institutional, as long as DOIs or accession numbers are provided and the data are at least as open as CC BY. Authors are encouraged to select repositories that meet accepted criteria as trustworthy digital repositories, such as criteria of the Centre for Research Libraries or Data Seal of Approval. Large, international databases are more likely to persist than small, local ones.
To support data sharing and author compliance of the PLOS data policy, we have integrated our submission process with a select set of data repositories. The list is neither representative nor exhaustive of the suitable repositories available to authors. Current repository integration partners include Dryad and FlowRepository. Please contact [email protected] to make recommendations for further partnerships.
Instructions for PLOS submissions with data deposited in an integration partner repository:
- Deposit data in the integrated repository of choice.
- Once deposition is final and complete, the repository will provide you with a dataset DOI (provisional) and private URL for reviewers to gain access to the data.
- Enter the given data DOI into the full Data Availability Statement, which is requested in the Additional Information section of the PLOS submission form. Then provide the URL passcode in the Attach Files section.
If you have any questions, please email us.
All appropriate data sets, images, and information should be deposited in an appropriate public repository. See our list of recommended repositories.
Accession numbers (and version numbers, if appropriate) should be provided in the Data Availability Statement. Accession numbers or a citation to the DOI should also be provided when the data set is mentioned within the manuscript.
In some cases authors may not be able to obtain accession numbers of DOIs until the manuscript is accepted; in these cases, the authors must provide these numbers at acceptance. In all other cases, these numbers must be provided at full submission.
Identifiers
As much as possible, please provide accession numbers or identifiers for all entities such as genes, proteins, mutants, diseases, etc., for which there is an entry in a public database, for example:
- Ensembl
- Entrez Gene
- FlyBase
- InterPro
- Mouse Genome Database (MGD)
- Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man (OMIM)
- PubChem
Identifiers should be provided in parentheses after the entity on first use.
You can upload a visually striking image alongside your submission, which we may use to showcase your article through PLOS’ online channels. The Editors-in-Chief choose the monthly issue image from the striking images submitted with articles scheduled for publication.
Submission Criteria
- Choose an image that represents the article in a striking and eye-catching way.
- It can be derived from a figure or supporting information file from the paper, and it may be a cropped portion of an image or the entire image.
- Alternatively, you can create or source an image, as long as it adheres to our CC BY license.
- High resolution: between 300-600 dpi
- Single panel
- Ideally avoid added details like text, scale bars, and arrows.
How to Submit
- Submit your striking image to the submission system using the file type “Striking Image”.
- Upload a separate file with corresponding caption.
If no striking image is uploaded, a member of the journal team will choose an appropriate image, which may be a figure from the submission or a separately sourced CC BY image.
Read our policy on identifying information.
The PLOS licenses and copyright policyalso applies to striking images.
This information should describe sources of funding that have supported the work. If your manuscript is published, your statement will appear in the Funding section of the article.
Include your statement in the Financial Disclosure section of the initial submission form.
The statement should include:
- Specific grant numbers
- Initials of authors who received each award
- URLs to sponsors’ websites
Also state whether any sponsors or funders (other than the named authors) played any role in:
- Study design
- Data collection and analysis
- Decision to publish
- Preparation of the manuscript
If they had no role in the research, include this sentence: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”
If the study was unfunded, include this sentence as the Financial Disclosure statement: “The author(s) received no specific funding for this work."
The corresponding author is asked at submission to declare, on behalf of all authors, whether there are any financial, personal, or professional interests that could be construed to have influenced the work.
Any relevant competing interests of authors must be available to editors and reviewers during the review process and will be stated in published articles.
When submitting a manuscript, all authors are asked to indicate that they do not have a related or duplicate manuscript under consideration (or accepted) for publication elsewhere. If related work has been or will be submitted elsewhere or is in press elsewhere, then a copy must be uploaded with the article submitted to PLOS. Reviewers will be asked to comment on the overlap between related submissions.
related manuscripts.
PLOS encourages authors to post preprints to accelerate the dissemination of research. Posting a manuscript on a preprint server does not impact consideration of the manuscript at any PLOS journal.
Authors posting on medRxiv can choose to concurrently submit their manuscripts to relevant PLOS journals through the direct transfer service.
Authors submitting manuscripts in the health sciences to * PLOS Digital Health *may choose to have PLOS forward their submission to medRxiv for consideration for posting as a preprint.
[Reviewer and editor suggestions]
We ask authors to suggest suitable editors and at least four potential reviewers when submitting their manuscript. Bear in mind any potential competing interests when making these suggestions. It is not appropriate to suggest recent collaborators or other researchers at your institution. See our policy on competing interests for more information.
Authors may choose to request that an individual is excluded from the review process and not involved in their manuscript. When making these suggestions, please provide specific reasons why each person should not review your submission in each “Reason” box. The editorial team will respect these requests so long as this does not interfere with the objective and thorough assessment of the submission.
Study design, reporting, and analyses are assessed against all relevant research and methodological technique standards held by the community. Guidelines for specific study types are outlined below.
Declaration of Helsinki. Authors should be able to submit, upon request, a statement from the IRB or ethics committee indicating approval of the research. We reserve the right to reject work that we believe has not been conducted to a high ethical standard, even when formal approval has been obtained.
Subjects must have been properly instructed and have indicated that they consent to participate by signing the appropriate informed consent paperwork. Authors may be asked to submit a blank, sample copy of a subject consent form. If consent was verbal instead of written, or if consent could not be obtained, the authors must explain the reason in the manuscript, and the use of verbal consent or the lack of consent must have been approved by the IRB or ethics committee.
All efforts should be made to protect patient privacy and anonymity. Identifying information, including photos, should not be included in the manuscript unless the information is crucial and the individual has provided written consent by completing the
Consent Form for Publication in a PLOS Journal (PDF). Download additional translations of the form
here. More information about patient privacy, anonymity, and informed consent can be found in the
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors(ICMJE)
Privacy and Confidentiality guidelines.
Manuscripts should conform to the following reporting guidelines:
- Studies of diagnostic accuracy: STARD
- Observational studies: STROBE
- Microarray experiments: MIAME
- Other types of health-related research: Consult the EQUATORweb site for appropriate reporting guidelines
Methods sections of papers on research using human subjects or samples must include ethics statements that specify:
- The name of the approving institutional review board or equivalent committee(s). If approval was not obtained, the authors must provide a detailed statement explaining why it was not needed
- Whether informed consent was written or oral. If informed consent was oral, it must be stated in the manuscript:- Why written consent could not be obtained
- That the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved use of oral consent
- How oral consent was documented
For studies involving humans categorized by race/ethnicity, age, disease/disabilities, religion, sex/gender, sexual orientation, or other socially constructed groupings, authors should:
- Explicitly describe their methods of categorizing human populations
- Define categories in as much detail as the study protocol allows
- Justify their choices of definitions and categories, including for example whether any rules of human categorization were required by their funding agency
- Explain whether (and if so, how) they controlled for confounding variables such as socioeconomic status, nutrition, environmental exposures, or similar factors in their analysis
In addition, outmoded terms and potentially stigmatizing labels should be changed to more current, acceptable terminology. Examples: “Caucasian” should be changed to “white” or “of [Western] European descent” (as appropriate); “cancer victims” should be changed to “patients with cancer.”
For papers that include identifying, or potentially identifying, information, authors must download the Consent Form for Publication in a PLOS Journal, which the individual, parent, or guardian must sign once they have read the paper and been informed about the terms of PLOS open-access license. The signed consent form should not be submitted with the manuscript, but authors should securely file it in the individual's case notes and the methods section of the manuscript should explicitly state that consent authorization for publication is on file, using wording like:
The individual in this manuscript has given written informed consent (as outlined in PLOS consent form) to publish these case details.
For more information about * PLOS Digital Health* policies regarding human subjects research, see the
Publication Criteriaand
Manuscripts describing observational clinical studies are subject to all policies regarding human research and community standards for reporting observational research as outlined by the STROBE statement. Furthermore, authors submitting work of this nature should pay special attention to the following requirements:
- If the submitted manuscript is very similar to previous work, authors must provide a sound scientific rationale for the submitted work and clearly reference and discuss the existing literature.
- The sampling strategy and eligibility criteria of enrolled subjects should be described in sufficient detail.
- Sample size calculations should be justified with relevant inputs defined.
- Independent and dependent variables considered for statistical analysis should be clearly defined and justified.
- The validity and reliability testing of self-developed data collection tools should be reported.
- Conclusions should be appropriate for the study design, with indications on how the study results will contribute to the base of academic knowledge.
Clinical trials are subject to all policies regarding human research. * PLOS Digital Health* follows the
World Health Organization's (WHO) definition of a clinical trial:
A clinical trial is any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate the effects on health outcomes [...] Interventions include but are not restricted to drugs, cells and other biological products, surgical procedures, radiologic procedures, devices, behavioural treatments, process-of-care changes, preventive care, etc.
All clinical trials must be registered in one of the publicly-accessible registries approved by the WHO or ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors). Authors must provide the trial registration number. Prior disclosure of results on a clinical trial registry site will not affect consideration for publication. We reserve the right to inform authors' institutions or ethics committees, and to reject the manuscript, if we become aware of unregistered trials.
- PLOS Digital Health* supports prospective trial registration (i.e. before participant recruitment has begun) as recommended by the ICMJE's
clinical trial registration policy.
Where trials were not publicly registered before participant recruitment began, authors must:
- Register all related clinical trials and confirm they have done so in the Methods section
- Explain in the Methods the reason for failing to register before participant recruitment
Clinical trials must be reported according to the relevant reporting guidelines, i.e. CONSORT for randomized controlled trials, TREND for non-randomized trials, and other specialized guidelines as appropriate. The intervention should be described according to the requirements of the TIDieR checklist and guide. Submissions must also include the study protocol as supporting information, which will be published with the manuscript if accepted.
Authors of manuscripts describing the results of clinical trials must adhere to the CONSORT reporting guidelines appropriate to their trial design, available on the CONSORT Statement web site. Before the paper can enter peer review, authors must:
- The name of the registry and the registration number must be included in the Abstract.
- Provide a copy of the trial protocol as approved by the ethics committee and a completed CONSORT checklistas supporting information (which will be published alongside the paper, if accepted). This should be named S1 CONSORT Checklist.
- Include the CONSORT flow diagramas the manuscript's “Fig 1”
Any deviation from the trial protocol must be explained in the paper. Authors must explicitly discuss informed consent in their paper, and we reserve the right to ask for a copy of the patient consent form.
The name of the registry and the registry number must be provided in the Abstract. If the trial is registered in more than one location, please provide all relevant registry names and numbers.
All research involving vertebrates or cephalopods must have approval from the authors' Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) or equivalent ethics committee(s), and must have been conducted according to applicable national and international guidelines. Approval must be received prior to beginning research.
Manuscripts reporting animal research must state in the Methods section:
- The full name of the relevant ethics committee that approved the work, and the associated permit number(s).
- Where ethical approval is not required, the manuscript should include a clear statement of this and the reason why. Provide any relevant regulations under which the study is exempt from the requirement for approval.
- Relevant details of steps taken to ameliorate animal suffering.
Example ethics statement
This study was carried out in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. The protocol was approved by the Committee on the Ethics of Animal Experiments of the University of Minnesota (Protocol Number: 27-2956). All surgery was performed under sodium pentobarbital anesthesia, and all efforts were made to minimize suffering.
Authors should always state the organism(s) studied in the Abstract. Where the study may be confused as pertaining to clinical research, authors should also state the animal model in the title.
To maximize reproducibility and potential for re-use of data, we encourage authors to follow the Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines for all submissions describing laboratory-based animal research and to upload a completed ARRIVE Guidelines Checklist to be published as supporting information.
Manuscripts describing research involving non-human primates must report details of husbandry and animal welfare in accordance with the recommendations of the Weatherall report, * The use of non-human primates in research*, including:
- Information about housing, feeding, and environmental enrichment.
- Steps taken to minimize suffering, including use of anesthesia and method of sacrifice, if appropriate.
Manuscripts describing studies that use random source (e.g. Class B dealer-sourced in the USA), shelter, or stray animals will be subject to additional scrutiny and may be rejected if sufficient ethical and scientific justification for the study design is lacking.
Manuscripts reporting studies in which death of a regulated animal (vertebrate, cephalopod) is a likely outcome or a planned experimental endpoint, must comprehensively report details of study design, rationale for the approach, and methodology, including consideration of humane endpoints. This applies to research that involves, for instance, assessment of survival, toxicity, longevity, terminal disease, or high rates of incidental mortality.
Definition of a humane endpoint
A humane endpoint is a predefined experimental endpoint at which animals are euthanized when they display early markers associated with death or poor prognosis of quality of life, or specific signs of severe suffering or distress. Humane endpoints are used as an alternative to allowing such conditions to continue or progress to death following the experimental intervention (“death as an endpoint”), or only euthanizing animals at the end of an experiment. Before a study begins, researchers define the practical observations or measurements that will be used during the study to recognize a humane endpoint, based on anticipated clinical, physiological, and behavioral signs.
Please see the NC3Rs guidelines for more information. Additional discussion of humane endpoints can be found in this article:
Nuno H. Franco, Margarida Correia-Neves, I. Anna S. Olsson (2012) How “Humane” Is Your Endpoint? — Refining the Science-Driven Approach for Termination of Animal Studies of Chronic Infection. PLoS Pathog 8(1): e1002399
doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1002399.
Full details of humane endpoints use must be reported for a study to be reproducible and for the results to be accurately interpreted.
For studies in which death of an animal is an outcome or a planned experimental endpoint, authors should include the following information in the Methods section of the manuscript:
- The specific criteria (i.e. humane endpoints) used to determine when animals should be euthanized.
- The duration of the experiment.
- The numbers of animals used, euthanized, and found dead (if any); the cause of death for all animals.
- How frequently animal health and behavior were monitored.
- All animal welfare considerations taken, including efforts to minimize suffering and distress, use of analgesics or anaesthetics, or special housing conditions.
If humane endpoints were not used, the manuscript should report:
- A scientific justification for the study design, including the reasons why humane endpoints could not be used, and discussion of alternatives that were considered.
- Whether the institutional animal ethics committee specifically reviewed and approved the anticipated mortality in the study design.
Methods sections for submissions reporting on any type of field study must include ethics statements that specify:
- Permits and approvals obtained for the work, including the full name of the authority that approved the study; if none were required, authors should explain why
- Whether the land accessed is privately owned or protected
- Whether any protected species were sampled
- Full details of animal husbandry, experimentation, and care/welfare, where relevant
A systematic review paper, as defined by The Cochrane Collaboration, is a review of a clearly formulated question that uses explicit, systematic methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review. These reviews differ substantially from narrative-based reviews or synthesis articles. Statistical methods (meta-analysis) may or may not be used to analyze and summarize the results of the included studies.
Reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses should include a completed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist and flow diagram to accompany the main text. Blank templates are available here:
Authors must also state in their “Methods” section whether a protocol exists for their systematic review, and if so, provide a copy of the protocol as supporting information and provide the registry number in the abstract.
If your article is a systematic review or a meta-analysis you should:
- State this in your cover letter
- Select “Research Article” as your article type when submitting
- Include the PRISMA flow diagram as Fig 1 (required where applicable)
- Include the PRISMA checklist as supporting information
[Mendelian randomization studies]
Manuscripts reporting a Mendelian randomization study must report results of value to the field and should be reported according to STROBE-MR (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology using Mendelian Randomization) guidelines.
Reports of Mendelian randomization studies must include a STROBE-MR checklist completed with page number and relevant text. This checklist should be provided as supporting information alongside the submitted manuscript. A blank template is available here:
On submission, manuscripts will be assessed for the rationale of the Mendelian randomization study and how it contributes to the base of scientific knowledge in the light of previously published results. If Mendelian randomization studies replicate previously published work, authors must provide a sound scientific rationale for the submitted work and clearly reference and discuss the existing literature
For all studies using personal data from internet-based and other third-party sources (e.g., social media, blogs, other internet sources, mobile phone companies), data must be collected and used according to company/website Terms and Conditions, with appropriate permissions. All data sources must be acknowledged clearly in the Materials and Methods section.
In the Ethics Statement, authors should declare any potential risks to individuals or individual privacy, or affirm that in their assessment, the study posed no such risks. In addition, the following Ethics and Data Protection requirements must be met.
For interventional studies, which impact participants’ experiences or data, the study design must have been prospectively approved by an Ethics Committee, and informed consent is required. The Ethics Committee may waive the requirement for approval and/or consent.
For observational studies in which personal experiences and accounts are not manipulated, consultation with an Ethics or Data Protection Committee is recommended. Additional requirements apply in the following circumstances:
- If information used could threaten personal privacy or damage the reputation of individuals whose data are used, an Ethics Committee should be consulted and informed consent obtained or specifically addressed.
- If authors accessed any personal identifying information, an Ethics or Data Protection Committee should oversee data anonymization. If data were anonymized and/or aggregated before access and analysis, informed consent is generally not required.
Authors reporting research using cell lines should state when and where they obtained the cells, giving the date and the name of the researcher, cell line repository, or commercial source (company) who provided the cells, as appropriate.
Authors must also include the following information for each cell line:
For de novo (new) cell lines, including those given to the researchers as a gift, authors must follow our policies for
animal research, as appropriate. The ethics statement must include:
- Details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval; AND
- For human cells, confirmation of written informed consent from the donor, guardian, or next of kin
For established cell lines, the Methods section should include:
- A reference to the published article that first described the cell line; AND/OR
- The cell line repository or company the cell line was obtained from, the catalogue number, and whether the cell line was obtained directly from the repository/company or from another laboratory
Authors should check established cell lines using the ICLAC Database of Cross-contaminated or Misidentified Cell Lines to confirm they are not misidentified or contaminated. Cell line authentication is recommended – e.g., by karyotyping, isozyme analysis, or short tandem repeats (STR) analysis – and may be required during peer review or after publication.
Manuscripts reporting experiments using antibodies should include the following information:
- The name of each antibody, a description of whether it is monoclonal or polyclonal, and the host species.
- The commercial supplier or source laboratory.
- The catalogue or clone number and, if known, the batch number.
- The antigen(s) used to raise the antibody.
- For established antibodies, a stable public identifier from the Antibody Registry.
The manuscript should also report the following experimental details:
- The final antibody concentration or dilution.
- A reference to the validation study if the antibody was previously validated. If not, provide details of how the authors validated the antibody for the applications and species used.
Qualitative research studies use non-quantitative methods to address a defined research question that may not be accessible by quantitative methods, such as people's interpretations, experiences, and perspectives. The analysis methods are explicit, systematic, and reproducible, but the results do not involve numerical values or use statistics. Examples of qualitative data sources include, but are not limited to, interviews, text documents, audio/video recordings, and free-form answers to questionnaires and surveys.
Qualitative research studies should be reported in accordance to the Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist or Standards for reporting qualitative research (SRQR) checklist. Further reporting guidelines can be found in the Equator Network's Guidelines for reporting qualitative research.
If you are submitting content other than a research article, learn more about what we publish.
Many institutional partners globally have publishing agreements with PLOS to allow their corresponding authors to publish with reduced or no APCs. To determine if your corresponding author is eligible, please visit our institutional partners page to determine what kind of agreement your institution has with PLOS.
If your corresponding author is affiliated with a participating institution, they must follow the instructions below to demonstrate eligibility.
submitting to a journal with the Flat Fee Agreement.
If your corresponding author is not from a participating institution and requires assistance paying publishing fees, please consider applying for a fee waiver at submission.
Figures
The instructions on this page pertain to figures included in the main article.
waives all formatting requirements until your manuscript has received a provisional Editorial Accept decision.PLOS Digital HealthIn order to proceed to publication, your figures must meet the requirements on this page. The more closely your figures adhere to these specifications, the more quickly your manuscript can be published once accepted.
Figures as Supporting Information
Supporting information is auxiliary to the main content of the article. Supporting information figures are held to the requirements of all supporting information files. They have fewer requirements than figures that are included in the main article, and they need to be uploaded separately.
For full instructions, follow the supporting information guidelines.
- Read our figure policies on depictions of humanslicenses and copyrightimage files
- Read the figure file requirements
- Read how to format and submit your figures and captions
- Use NAAS
The following requirements apply to any figures and supporting Information files that report blot or gel data. The underlying data requirement is in place to ensure that the results are reported in a fully transparent manner, and that readers can verify results by reviewing the primary data in its original form. The original images also provide additional information for readers about background within the experiment and the specificity of reagents used. The figure preparation guidelines that follow clarify * PLOS Digital Health* standards and requirements, and aim to ensure the integrity and scientific validity of blot/gel data reporting. If you have questions about these requirements please email us at
For manuscripts submitted on or after April 1 2026, authors must provide the original, uncropped and minimally adjusted images supporting all blot and gel results reported in an article’s figures and supporting information files. Whilst it is not necessary to provide original images at time of initial submission, we will require these files before a manuscript can be accepted.
Please follow these instructions when preparing and submitting blot/gel data files:
- Please create a single PDF file that contains all the original blot and gel images contained in the manuscript’s main figures and supplemental figures. We recommend using image software (e.g. Gimp, Photoshop) to compile and annotate the original images and then exporting/saving as a tiff file with LZW compression. You could also use a PDF program to build a single PDF compiled from multiple annotated jpeg/tiff image files. We do not recommend compiling the images in Powerpoint as resolution can be lost.
- The file should be named ‘S1_raw_images’ and uploaded as a Supporting Information file or deposited at a suitable publicly-available data repository, with the dataset identifier (DOI or other form of persistent identifier) provided in theData Availability Statement.
- Authors should label each raw blot or gel image to clearly annotate the loading order, identity of experimental samples, method used to capture the image, and to specify which figure panel was generated from that original image. Molecular weight markers should be included or indicated on the raw image, and any lanes not included in the final figure should be marked with an “X” above the lane label on the original blot/gel image. All labeling and annotation should be performed without obscuring any data or background bands.
- Please note, there is a 20 MB maximum file size. If your PDF size is larger, please use a suitable repository or discuss with the journal staff.
If any concerns arise about the availability of the original blot or gel images or compliance with the figure preparation guidelines (see below), the submission will be placed on hold while this is resolved. A manuscript must comply with the above requirements, and the guidelines below, in order to be published. If concerns are noted after publication, journal staff will follow up with authors and correct the literature as needed.
Authors must comply with the following guidelines when preparing figures that report results from blots (including, but not limited to, western blots) and electrophoretic gels:
- In accordance with our guidance on Preparing Figures from Image Filesand ourPolicy on Concerns about Data or Figures, images should not be adjusted in any way that could affect the scientific information displayed. The background and contrast should not be modified to notably alter the visibility of data, background, or non-specific bands. Any adjustments to improve visibility of the data must be consistently applied to the entire image.
- Images in figures should not be overcropped around the bands of interest. Figure panels should include some background area above and below bands. Any non-specific bands from the original image should be included in the figure and explained in the text or figure legend.
- When a comparative analysis amongst bands is performed, all relevant samples should be run on the same gel/blot.
- Each figure should include all relevant controls, and when relevant, control samples should be run on the same blot or gel as the experimental samples.
- A figure panel should not include composite images of bands originating from different blots, exposures, or gels. If data from multiple blot or gel images are needed to illustrate the results, the different images should not be spliced together; they should be clearly distinguished as separate panels within the figure and the legend should note that they represent different gels, blots, or exposures.
- If lanes from a single blot/gel image have been rearranged in preparing a figure, image splicing should be clearly denoted by vertical black lines on the figure and the figure legend should provide details of how the figure was made. This would be appropriate, for example, if fragments of the same original image were spliced together to re-order lanes or to remove irrelevant lanes.
- Please also see our guidelines on Preparing Figures from Image Filesfor further details.
The following guidelines aim to help authors prepare high quality figures and avoid common errors that result from inappropriate image manipulation. In preparing figures, image files should not be manipulated or adjusted in any way that could lead to misinterpretation of the information present in the original image.
Please read our requirements for reporting blot and gel data and uploading original image files. Additionally, if further analysis is needed, please be aware that we may also require you to supply us with your original photographic images in the original file format and at the resolution at which they were first created.
We realize that the extent to which figures can be changed as part of normal preparation can pose a dilemma. Please refer to the general guidance below on aspects to consider when preparing your figures. If evidence is found of inappropriate manipulation, we reserve the right to ask for original data and, if that is not satisfactory, we may decide not to accept the manuscript, and may also contact the authors' institutions to ask them to assist with investigation.
For further information, image examples, and more detailed guidance we advise reading What’s in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation (reprinted in the Journal of Cell Biology, 2004;166(1):11-15).
We are grateful to staff at the Journal of Cell Biology (Rockefeller University Press) for their help in establishing these guidelines and procedures.
The following examples are all considered to be unacceptable image manipulation:
- The introduction, enhancement, movement, or removal of specific feature(s) within an image
EXAMPLES: See Figures 1 and 5 of What’s in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation.
- Unmarked grouping of images that should otherwise have been presented separately (for example, from different parts of the same gel, or from different gels, fields, or exposures)
EXAMPLE: See Figure 6 of What’s in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation.
- Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance that obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any information, including non-specific signal or background details
EXAMPLE:See Figure 3 of
What’s in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation.
Additional information:
- Spliced gels need a thin dividing line added to indicate the alteration. It is fine to remove a complete lane and splice the remaining lanes together, provided the spliced fragments originate from the same original image. In such cases, the alteration must be indicated in the figure by a thin white or black line between the juxtaposed pieces and must be described in the figure legend.
- Images must contain the background “noise” they originally contained. The background should not appear as one uniform color. Do not “clean up” the background of images with rubberstamp or “wipe” tools to improve the aesthetic appearance, or over-adjust the brightness or contrast so that the background is removed.
EXAMPLE:See Figure 4 of
Poor-quality images may raise figure manipulation queries and/or result in requests to remake figures. Follow these tips for creating high-quality images:
- Ensure that your images have a resolution of at least 300 pixels per inch (ppi) and appear sharp, not pixelated.
- Be careful not to inadvertently reduce the resolution when creating a file in graphics editing software
Do not set the total number of pixels to be greater than that in the original image (e.g., from the digital camera attached to your microscope) while keeping the image size the same;otherwise, the computer must create data for you that were not present in the original, and the resulting image is a misrepresentation of the original data. The resolution (ppi) can be increased only if the image size is reduced proportionately.
The list below is an abbreviated summary of the figure specifications. Read the full details of the requirements in the corresponding sections on this page.
| TIFF or EPS | | | Width: 789 – 2250 pixels (at 300 dpi). Height maximum: 2625 pixels (at 300 dpi). | | | 300 – 600 dpi | | | <10 MB | | | Arial, Times, or Symbol font only in 8-12 point | | | Fig1.tif, Fig2.eps, and so on. Match file name to caption label and citation. | | | In the manuscript, not in the figure file. |
| TIFF or EPS only. Should I choose TIFF or EPS? TIFF tends to be easier to work with than EPS. EPS files often have missing/corrupted fonts, oversized masks, stray points, and boxes, which can result in errors and poor output. |
| Centimeters |
| 6.68 |
| 19.05 |
| 22.23 | 8.75 | 2625 | | | “Dimensions” refers to the dimensions of the entire figure, excluding any white space. The closer figures match these dimensions, the closer they will meet expectations on publication. To align your figure with the text column of the PDF version of the article, make it no wider than 5.2 inches (13.2 cm). Ensure that individual images meet the pixel dimensions indicated above when preparing and saving figures with slideshow software (like Powerpoint, OpenOffice, or Keynote). Make sure source images are 2,250 pixels wide if you want figures at full page width of 19.05cm.When adjusting the figure dimensions, be sure the Chain/Lock symbol is closed. This will maintain the width and height ratio of your figure.Go to Image → Properties(or Image → Information) to view image dimensions. | |||| | | Submit figures at the desired The quality of a low-resolution figure cannot be improved by simply increasing the resolution in graphics software. To improve its resolution, re-create the figure from the beginning.Resolution below 300 results in blurred, jagged or pixelated published figures. Resolution above 600 dpi may lead to resizing of the published figure. The quality of your figures is only as good as the lowest-resolution element present. If you created a 72 dpi line graph and placed it in a 300 dpi TIFF, the graph will look blurred, jagged, or pixilated. | ||| | | Submit files at a size of 10 MB or less. Use the Save with LZW compression.Set resolution between 300-600 dpi.Flatten. A flattened TIFF has a single layer called “background” and has a smaller file size than a TIFF with “Layer 1”.
Source images created in EPS format need to be compressed (in your compression format of choice) and should be no larger than full page size.If your EPS files are still too large, convert them to PDF and then export to a compressed TIFF. | ||| | | Use only Arial, Times, or Symbol font in 8-12 point. Do not include author names, article title, or figure number/title/caption within figure files. That information will go into your figure caption in the manuscript. Embed fonts, or convert them to outlines to prevent missing or improperly rendered text. In those files that are created in software like Matlab, open Illustrator or Inkscape and convert text to outlines. You will not be able to change your text after it has been converted to outlines. 1. Select all (Ctrl + A) 1. Select all (Ctrl + A) | ||| | | Place all panels from a multi-part figure into a single page and single file: Combine multiple panels into one page, or break them apart into separate figures.Renumber all figures and in-text citations accordingly.
To create a multi-panel figure from individual files, use a presentation program such as OpenOffice Impress, Microsoft PowerPoint, or Keynote for Mac. Then convert to TIFF. To set up the page, use the values listed in Dimensions.Use an Insert tool to place figures. Do not drag/drop or copy/paste images into the file, because this results in a 72 dpi image.If your figures have numerous pictures, charts, or small text, they will render best at a resolution of 600 dpi. | ||| | | RGB (8 bit/channel) or grayscale only. | ||| | | A 2-point white space border around each figure is recommended to prevent inadvertent cropping of content at layout. Crop out excess white space around image content. | ||| | | Rotate and submit the figure in the orientation that you wish it to publish. Figures will be inserted into the typeset article in the orientation in which they are supplied. For example, if a vertical image is submitted in a horizontal orientation, it will be set horizontally in the article. | |||
Additional Requirements for TIFF
| | Flattened, with no layers. Figures with a single layer named “layer 1” or “layer 0” are in fact layered. | | | No alpha channels. | | | LZW compression is required. To apply: In GIMP, use “Export” instead of “Save As”. Select TIFF as the format, and then select LZW compression. In Photoshop, select “LZW compression” and “Discard Layers, and Save a Copy.” | | | We cannot publish TIFF figures that span multiple pages. To combine multiple figures onto a single page, see |
Your figures contain three elements: figure files, captions, and in-text citations.
When naming your figures, match the figure file name and the caption label with the corresponding in-text citations in the manuscript. Example: a figure file named “Fig1.tif” should match the citation “Fig 1” and the figure label “Fig 1.” in the caption.
| | Namefiles in numeric order with the format: Fig1.tif, Fig2.eps, and so on.Uploadeach figure as an individual file that is separate from the manuscript.
If at any point you change the numbering order of your figures, be sure to update all figure citations, captions, and file names accordingly. | | [Captions] | When submitting an initial or revised manuscript, embed figure captions within the manuscript text after their first mention, or group together at the end of the manuscript. Once your manuscript is formally accepted for publication, captions must be placed in the manuscript text in read order, immediately following the paragraph where the figure is first cited. Do not include captions as part of the figure files or submit them in a separate document.Formatyour figure captions. There are two required elements: figure label and figure title. Legends are optional.
Caption credit: Means JC, Venkatesan A, Gerdes B, Fan J-Y, Bjes ES, Price JL (2015) Drosophila Spaghetti and Doubletime Link the Circadian Clock and Light to Caspases, Apoptosis and Tauopathy. PLoS Genet 11(5): e1005171. Figure legends tips Be succinct: Avoid lengthy descriptions of methods. Describe the key messages of a figure: provide a description of the figure that will allow readers to understand it without referring to the text. Describe each part of a multipart figure with with a lettered panel label: for example, (A) or (a). Define all non-standard symbols and abbreviations. | | [In-text citations] | Cite figures with the format: Fig 1A, Fig 1B, Fig 2, Fig 3, etc. Cite figures in ascending numeric order upon first appearance in the manuscript file. This includes citations to text boxes and tables. In the published article, figures are inserted according to the placement of their first citation and caption in the article.Lettered subparts of whole figures may be cited in any order in the text if the first mention of each whole figure is in numerical order. For example, you can cite any subpart of Fig 3 in any order (e.g., Fig 3C before Fig 3A), as long as Figs 1 and 2 have already been cited. |
Formatting Example
Please refer to our downloadable sample manuscript (PDF) to ensure that your figure captions, citations, and file names meet our formatting requirements.
Preparation and final quality of figures is the responsibility of the author.
PLOS provides a free, simple-to-use tool called NAAS to help you review and prepare your figures for submission and achieve high publication quality figure presentation.
NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications (see Figure File Requirements). The tool can also resize and convert figures to TIFF format. In cases where NAAS cannot process your figure file, the tool will provide you with a report of what it could not fix. Please note that figures must be captured between 300 and 600 dpi in order for NAAS to successfully process your figures.
NOTE: Supporting Information figures should not be processed through NAAS.
Please review your figures after NAAS’s assessment to ensure that they adhere to journal figure guidelines and that they are not blurry or difficult to read.
Go to NAAS now.
If you prefer to assemble figures with vector graphics, we recommend that you use Adobe Illustrator or Inkscape (free). These figures must be exported to EPS format per our requirements.
If you prefer to use raster graphics, the following free programs can both manipulate and export TIFF files:
PLOS does not accept vector EPS figures generated in LaTeX. Submit TIFF or EPS figures created in standard software. Read about other software options.
Converting LaTeX-generated EPS figures to TIFF
- Compile the LaTeX files into a PDF.
- Open the PDF in Photoshop, GIMP, or another graphics program that enables TIFF.
- Crop out the figure and export as TIFF.
Creating a PLOS compatible graph
- First create your graph, and save it in SigmaPlot format.
- From the Tools menu select Options. In the dialogue box that appears, click on the Page tab. Set the Units to Millimeters (mm) and make sure the Graph Objects → Resize with Graph option is not ticked. Click OK.
- From the file menu select Page Setup. In the dialogue box that appears, click on the Margins tab. Set all the margins to 0.0 mm, then click Apply.
- Now click on the Page Size tab. Set the Width to 190.5 mm (or 132.0 mm for text column width) and the Height to 222.3 mm. Click OK.
- Set the font size of all text to 8 pt, and the width of all lines to 0.2 mm. (Consult the SigmaPlot Help files for more details, if needed.)
- Resize your graph to fit within and make full use of the page width available.
Saving an image in PDF format
This is the preferred output format when using SigmaPlot. To make sure your image is saved in a compatible format, perform the following steps.
- From the File menu in SigmaPlot, select Print. In the Print dialogue box that appears, select Adobe PDF as the printer. Click on Properties.
- Change the Default Settings pull-down to Press Quality. Uncheck the View Adobe PDF results box if you don't want Acrobat to launch.
- Click OK, then click OK. Pick where the PDF will be created, and click Save.
- Lastly, open the PDF in one of the following three programs to save the file in TIFF format: NAAS, Photoshop, or GIMP.
Export figures from RStudio in EPS format. If you prefer to submit a TIFF file, use NAAS to do the conversion and achieve a resolution of 300dpi. TIFF files exported directly from RStudio will only achieve a resolution of 72dpi.
- Image format: EPS
- Width: 789 pixels at minimum
- Check “Maintain aspect ratio”
- Submit in EPS format, or use NAASto convert to TIFF
The table below provides the export settings and instructions for authors that choose to create TIFF source images with the software indicated.
PLOS applies the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license to all the works we publish. Read about our licenses and copyright policy for figures.
When creating a figure that includes a map, be sure to check the usage rights. Several sites provide maps that are compatible with CC BY licensing, including:
- USGS: all USGS maps are in the public domain
- SEDAC: many maps from SEDAC are available under an Open Access license
- World of Maps: may include maps in the public domain
- OpenStreetMap: OpenStreetMap map tiles are free to use as long as they are accompanied by the following attribution statement: “Base map and data from OpenStreetMap and OpenStreetMap Foundation”. Maps created using OpenStreetMap data must be accompanied by the following attribution statement: "Contains information from OpenStreetMap and OpenStreetMap Foundation, which is made available under the Open Database License.”
PLOS neither endorses nor takes responsibility for the maps or geodata from the above sites.
All figures must comply with PLOS policies covering depictions of humans, and licenses and copyright.
Depictions of humans
Authors submitting manuscripts that include identifying or potentially identifying information must comply with our requirements for informed consent.
Identifying information includes, but is not limited to:
- photographs
- radiographs
- pedigrees (family trees)
- geospatial maps that can identify a specific location such as a house.
Read our guidelines for documenting informed consent. If you require further information, please contact the journal before submitting.
We will not consider submissions that include the depiction and/or analysis of the ‘Lena image’, as its use is not in line with our values. Authors using this image should replace it prior to submission.
Figures, tables, and images are published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Do not submit any figures, photos, tables, or other works that have been previously copyrighted or that contain proprietary data unless you have and can supply written permission from the copyright holder to use that content.
This includes:
- maps and satellite images
- slogans and logos
- social media content.
If you still have questions about how to prepare your figures, please contact [email protected] for assistance.
Tables
The instructions provided here pertain to tables included in the main article. The more closely your tables adhere to these requirements at submission, the fewer times you will need to revise your manuscript to meet them. Your tables will therefore publish more accurately and will be less likely to slow down publication of your accepted manuscript.
Tables as Supporting Information
Supporting Information is auxiliary to the main content of the article. Supporting Information tables have fewer requirements than tables included in the main article. For full instructions, please follow the
supporting information guidelines.
Tables must be editable, cell-based objects. We cannot typeset tables that are graphic objects. Use the table tool in your text editing software to create tables. If necessary, create tables in Excel and insert them into the manuscript. Do not insert text boxes or graphics within your tables. - Text justification. Justification of the text within cells is honored at typesetting. If you have a preference, indicate justification of content within cells by using your text editor’s alignment features (for example, centered or left justified).
insert a list.
-
Merged cells. You can use merging to indicate cells that span multiple columns and rows.
-
Multi-section tables. Tables with multiple sections must have a consistent number of columns throughout all sub-sections. If necessary, you may divide and re-number the sections as separate tables. Do not insert tables within tables or cells within cells.
- Text color and formatting. Text color is limited to black. Bolded, italicized, underlined, superscript, subscript, and strikethrough text is OK. Meaning can also be expressed with symbols that are explained in the footnotes. Text in header rows will be automatically formatted in bold type.
- Text Font. Use a standard font size and any standard font, except for the font named “Symbol”. To add symbols to the manuscript, use the Insert → Symbol function in your word processor or paste in the appropriate Unicode character.
- Cell shading. Background color can be applied to cells to convey meaningful information.- Read the instructions for applying cell shading.
- Size. Tables do not have strict width and height requirements. Do not split your table or otherwise try to make the table appear within the manuscript margins if it does not fit on one page. In Word, tables that run off of the manuscript page can be seen using Draft View. In the PDF version of the published article, very wide tables may be printed sideways, and long tables may span more than one page.
When should I make my table a figure?
If the table has a very complex structure or contains graphics, the safest solution is to make it into a figure. Export the table as a TIFF, and cite and re-label it as a figure.
Use the following rules to arrange content within individual cells and to match alignment across multiple rows and columns.
To view the marks for returns, spaces, and indents in Microsoft Word, click the ¶ (paragraph) button in the toolbar. These paragraph marks are normally hidden from the document, unless you turn on the tools to make them visible. Use the key to understand the paragraph marks shown in the examples on this page.
Arranging content within a cell
- Use only separate cells, ordered lists, unordered lists, or returns to separate content onto individual lines.
- Use a single tab to indent individual pieces of content.
- Do not use spaces to create a new line, indent, or justify content.
Aligning content across rows and columns
- Enter content in separate cells to match the text alignment used in other rows and columns.
- Do not use returns, spaces, or tabs to align content across the table. Alignment set in this manner may not be preserved in the published version of the article.
Color can only be applied to the cell background.
- You may use any shading color, but keep legibility in mind. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)advise a contrast ratio of 4.5:1 between the text and the background color. PLOS requires the text color to be black.
- Use only solid colors, with no patterns or gradients.
- Lighter shades are recommended in order to clearly contrast against the black text.
- If using more than one shading color, avoid combinations that could make color differentiation difficult for people with colorblindness. Footnotes referencing background color should describe it using words, not images or colored text. Example: “Comparisons involving any renin-angiotensin receptor blocker are shaded orange.”
You can apply a heavy gridline to individual cells or to entire rows or columns. The line will appear 3 times heavier than a normal gridline.
To apply a heavy gridline, use the Borders and Shading options in your text editor to apply a line weight of 3 pt (point) to the appropriate border.
Note: It is OK if the surrounding normal-weight gridlines appear as dotted lines once this action is performed (as in the example below). The normal-weight gridlines will still be applied to those cells during typesetting.
Manuscript Example
Please refer to our downloadable sample manuscript (PDF) to ensure that your table captions, citations, and organization in the manuscript meet our formatting requirements.
Correctly formatted table with caption
Adapted from: Kim MH, Lee S, Koo JS, Jung KH, Park IH, et al. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase gene copy number gain in inflammatory breast cancer (IBC): prevalence, clinicopathologic features and prognostic implication. PLoS ONE. 2015. 10(3): e0120320. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0120320
If you have questions about how to format and submit your tables, contact [email protected].
Supporting Information
PLOS Digital Health waives all formatting requirements for Supporting Information until your manuscript has received a Minor Revision decision.
In order to proceed to publication, your SI files must meet the requirements on this page.
Supporting information is auxiliary to the main content of the article. In the online version of the published article, readers access the files via hyperlinks in the Supporting Information section of the article. PLOS hosts these files on its servers and also deposits them on Figshare to increase compliance with the FAIR principles of data sharing. Supporting information files are published exactly as provided, and are not copyedited. Authors are encouraged to deposit all research data in a suitable repository where appropriate.
For ease of reader access, we recommend that supporting information files be less than 10 MB.
TIP: Ways to reduce file size
- Compress very large files (e.g., LZW compression of TIFFs, etc.)
- Change format (e.g., convert a very large EPS or SVG to PDF)
- Collect as a ZIP file (e.g., multipage datasets)
Supporting figures and supporting tables need to adhere to our supporting information guidelines. They do not follow the same requirements as tables and figures in the main body of your manuscript, because we host them on servers that can handle a wider variety of file types than our published articles.
You may use almost any description as the item name of your supporting information as long as it contains an "S" and number. For example, “S1 Appendix” and “S2 Appendix,” “S1 Table” and “S2 Table,” and so forth.
Common item descriptions include, but are not limited to:
- Alternative Language Abstract
- Appendix
- Checklist
- Dataset
- Figure
- File
- Movie
- Protocol
- Supporting Information
- Table
- Text
- Video
Use whole numbers when naming your supporting information files. Combine separate parts (e.g., S1A and S1B Table) into one file (e.g. S1 Table) or rename with whole numbers (e.g., S1 and S2 Table).
Match the names of your supporting information files with the supporting information captions within your manuscript. For example, a PDF file for “S2 Fig.” must be named “S2_fig.pdf”.
The supporting information name and number are required in a caption, and we highly recommend including a one-line title as well. You may also include a legend in your caption, but it is not required. Format your supporting information captions as follows:
S1 Text. Title is strongly recommended. Legend is optional.
In the published article, supporting information files are accessed only through a hyperlink attached to the captions. For this reason, you must list captions at the end of your manuscript file. You may include a caption within the supporting information file itself, as long as that caption is also provided in the manuscript file. Do not submit a separate caption file.
We recommend that you cite supporting information in the manuscript text, but this is not a requirement. Cite the files using the format outlined in Item Description.
If you cite supporting information in the text, citations do not need to be in numerical order.
Quality and format
We expect reasonable video quality and prefer 128 kbit/s AAC audio ZD and 480p H.264 video in an MPEG-4 (mp4) container. However, we accept other video file formats: mov, avi, mpg, mpeg, mp4.
File size
Preferred size limit of videos is 10 MB. If making the dimensions smaller or recompressing the video compromises the image quality or usefulness of the video, we can accept the video file as is.
Video players
Videos must open and play in common players, such as QuickTime Player, Windows Media Player, or VLC.
Codecs
A codec (“compression-decompression”) is a software module that contains algorithms used by encoding or playback software to encode or decode video and/or audio information.
Popular proprietary codecs include Windows Media Video and QuickTime. Open source video codec alternatives include x264 or the XviD codec. XviD is a high-quality codec and is the most widely supported open source option available. It is relatively simple for most people to watch as many players have native support for XviD. For more information, see this guide to encoding.
Standards
Videos compression standards, such as the MPEG1, MPEG2, and MPEG4 standards set by the Motion Picture Experts Group, are a set of rules that video codecs and formats must be designed to adhere to. The MPEG4 standard contains several parts including Advanced Simple Profile (MPEG4 Part 2) that contains elements implemented in codecs such as XviD, 3ivX, DivX, and H.264 (MPEG4 Part 10).
Ethical Publishing Practice
PLOS is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and PLOS journals abide by COPE guidance.
Authors, editors, and reviewers are expected to be aware of, and comply with, best practice in publication ethics.
Authors are expected to be aware of, and comply with, best practice in publication ethics including but not limited to those pertaining to authorship(for example avoidance of ghost or guest authorship), dual submission, attribution, plagiarism, image integrity and figure preparation, andcompeting interests. Authors must also comply with PLOS policies on research ethics (human subjects research,animal research,global research). Details are provided below or in linked documents. Reviewers and editors are required to treat manuscripts fairly and in confidence, and to declare any competing interests. Editors should also abide by the code of conduct for editorial board members.
We encourage readers to discuss the scientific contents of PLOS articles directly with corresponding authors. Authors can request formal corrections to their PLOS publications by emailing the journal office.
If you have concerns about potential errors, research or publication ethics, misconduct, or other issues pertaining to the integrity, validity, or reliability of a PLOS article or submission, please contact PLOS directly. To do so, ** email the PLOS Publication Ethics team and cc the journal office**. Do not rely solely on posts to blogs, social media, or other third-party websites to make us aware of concerns. When notifying PLOS of concerns, provide the full citation and DOI of the article in question, details as to your specific concerns, and a declaration of any potential competing interests you have with regard to the authors, funders, and/or sponsors of the article(s) in question.
PLOS will investigate concerns raised about PLOS submissions or publications regardless of the time since publication or study completion, and regardless of whether issues are raised internally, by authors, or by anonymous, pseudonymous, or named third parties. We will take steps to correct or clarify the scientific record if necessary, which may include issuing a editorial note, correction, expression of concern, or retraction. If we anticipate a delayed or prolonged follow-up period PLOS may post an interim notice on the article(s) in question to make readers aware of the issues raised.
While PLOS values transparency in scientific communications, we also protect the confidentiality of those who raise publication ethics or research integrity concerns, where possible, so as to minimize personal and professional risks to those individuals. We consider information and materials received in ethics case follow-up discussions as confidential, but we reserve the right to share relevant information with others involved in the case (e.g. editors, reviewers, other journals, affected data repositories), discuss the case at a COPE forum, and/or contact authors’ institutions, funders or regulatory bodies, in accordance with COPE guidelines. We cooperate with institutions looking into issues that pertain to PLOS content, and in doing so we share information as needed to support the institution’s proceedings.
All who raise concerns to PLOS, inquire about issues raised to PLOS, or are otherwise involved in publication ethics cases must comply with the Standards for Professional Conduct policy.
PLOS has a central Publication Ethics team comprised of Editors who have scientific and editorial expertise as well as specialized expertise in the policies, workflows, and industry-wide guidance pertaining to ethics and integrity issues (e.g. from COPE). The Publication Ethics team supports and collaborates with all PLOS journals, and follows up on concerns raised to PLOS that have implications for the integrity, validity, or reliability of submitted or published articles. The Publication Ethics team also contributes to the development of PLOS policies pertaining to research and reporting ethics.
To contact the Publication Ethics team, email [email protected].
We are committed to ensuring the integrity of the peer review process, in accordance with COPE guidelines.
Compliance with PLOS policies
Reviewers and editors must comply with all PLOS policies, including but not limited to this Ethical Peer Review policy, the Code of Conduct for Editorial Board Members, and PLOS policies on Standards for Professional Behavior, Confidentiality, and Competing Interests.
All editors and reviewers should consider whether they may have potential competing interests before accepting an invitation to evaluate a submission for PLOS. Please contact the journal office ([email protected]) if you have questions about whether you should accept/decline an invitation to contribute to peer review for PLOS.
- Editors are expected to decline invitations to handle submissions for which they may have a potential competing interest.
- Reviewers should declare any potential competing interests on the review form, and should decline invitations if competing interests may impact one’s ability to provide an objective and unbiased evaluation.
- If a reviewer has declared a competing interest, the handling editor should consider potential impacts of the conflict when evaluating the reviewer’s comments, and secure at least one review from an individual who does not have a potential conflict.
The peer review process
Reviewers and editors are responsible for the contents of their reviews and decision letter comments, respectively. Reviewer and editor comments should reflect their own personal assessment of the content, including whether the submission meets the journal’s requirements and complies with PLOS policies.
Reviewers must declare on the review form if they obtained any third-party support for their review; the name(s) of anyone providing such support must be provided. Unpublished submissions should not be shared (including within one’s research group) with anyone who is not declared as a contributor to peer review. All relevant sources should be cited in the review or decision letter comments. Everyone who contributes to peer review is expected to abide by PLOS policies and the journal’s best practices for reviewers.
Authors, editors, and reviewers must not attempt to influence others’ contributions to peer review, and editors and reviewers must not attempt to use or manipulate the peer review process for personal gain.
Editorial board members must not alter review content. Concerns about comments in reviews or decision letters should be referred to the journal office and PLOS staff will intervene or follow-up as needed. However, editors are welcome to use the body of the decision letter to inform authors if a reviewer’s request does not need to be addressed in revisions, for example if the editor considers the request as optional or out of line with PLOS policies, or if the editor disagrees with the reviewer’s comment.
Peer review feedback and decision letters should reflect reviewers’ and editors’ personal assessments of submitted content. AI tools cannot serve as reviewers or as decision-issuing editors.
Any use of AI tools in peer review (e.g. for data assessment, translation, or language editing) must be clearly disclosed to authors in the review form (reviewers) or decision letter (editors).
As is noted in our Confidentiality policy, unpublished submission content must be held as strictly confidential. Editorial board members and reviewers should not upload submissions to web platforms, databases, generative AI tools, or other services.
Please email the journal office and cc [email protected] if you have questions or concerns about AI tool usage in peer review.
Protection of reviewer identity and the use of pseudonyms or false names
PLOS gives reviewers the option of signing their names to reviews. Under no circumstances should editorial board members disclose a reviewer’s identity to the authors or to other third parties (except in the context of discussions between the editor and PLOS journal staff or Editors-in-Chief). Editorial board members should escalate to PLOS any requests about reviewer identity.
Likewise, PLOS staff protect reviewer confidentiality where possible. However, PLOS staff may disclose a reviewer’s identity under select circumstances, which include but are not limited to:
- disclosing a reviewer’s name and involvement in a submission’s prior review to an editor handling a resubmission or appeal,
- providing information about a publication ethics case to an institutional official, and
- situations where PLOS is required by law to disclose such information (e.g. a subpoena to produce documents).
Reviewers must use their legal or professional names in their PLOS Editorial Manager accounts, and should provide their current institutional affiliation and institution-hosted email address in their Editorial Manager profiles. Reviewers must not impersonate others or use pseudonyms or false names in their PLOS accounts. Reviewers and editors are responsible for ensuring that a secure, direct email address is used for all peer review correspondence; shared accounts should not be used.
How to report concerns about unethical practices in peer review
Please email [email protected] and cc the journal office if you have questions or concerns about compliance with this policy, or if you are aware of issues that may impact the integrity of a PLOS submission’s peer review. PLOS staff will follow-up and take action as appropriate. If concerns about peer review integrity are confirmed by PLOS, we may take actions such as reassigning a submission to a different editor, offboarding an editorial board member, excluding a reviewer from peer review, omitting a reviewer’s comments from a decision letter, reporting concerns to the relevant institution(s), and/or editorial action on affected submissions/publications (e.g. rejection, retraction, publication of an editorial notice).
Plagiarism is not acceptable in PLOS submissions. Plagiarized content will not be considered for publication. If plagiarism is identified, we will follow COPE guidelines.
Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:
- Directly copying text from other sources without attribution
- Copying ideas, images, or data from other sources without attribution
-
Reusing text from your own previous publications without attribution or agreement of the editor (see the COPE guidelines on text recyclingand thetext recycling guidancereleased by the Text Recycling Research Project)- Exception: Reusing text from the Methods section in the author’s previous publications, with attribution to the source, is acceptable
-
Using an idea from another source with slightly modified language without attribution
PLOS uses Crossref Similarity Check (powered by iThenticate) to screen submitted content for originality. Each journal screens a proportion of manuscripts. We will do a follow-up investigation if the software raises any concerns.
If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, we may issue a correction or retract the paper, as appropriate. We reserve the right to inform authors' institutions about plagiarism detected either before or after publication.
We expect that editors and reviewers will be vigilant in their evaluation of PLOS submissions and will notify the journal about any plagiarism identified.
PLOS journals support options by which authors and reviewers can share research early and increase transparency of the peer review process. These include opt-in opportunities to post unpublished work to preprint servers, publish peer review history, and sign names to reviews.
Where options for transparent peer review and/or early sharing are not selected, PLOS protects the confidentiality of unpublished content and the pre-publication peer review process except where needed to support submission checks and integrity investigations (discussed below), to the extent required by law and as otherwise set forth in our privacy policy.
PLOS will follow up on any and all breaches of confidentiality in accordance with COPE guidelines and PLOS policies. If there are special circumstances such that you wish to disclose confidential information about a PLOS submission or its peer review (e.g. to another journal, an institution, or a legal representative), please contact the journal office to discuss the situation and request permission.
Early sharing and public reviews of unpublished work
PLOS encourages and supports early sharing of research via preprint servers. Authors may also, at their discretion, discuss their unpublished research with colleagues or present their unpublished findings (e.g. at conferences) for scientific purposes. When discussing research that has not been accepted for publication with the media, authors should stress that the work is still undergoing peer review, and not disclose the journal where the work is under consideration. See here for additional information. Once accepted and assigned a publication date, all PLOS articles are subject to embargo.
If authors elect to post their PLOS submission on a preprint server, institutional server, or other forum prior to publication, editors and reviewers are welcome to attach their review comments to the preprint if this option is supported by the server. (This does not replace submission of reviews and editors’ comments directly to PLOS via Editorial Manager.)
Confidentiality of unpublished submissions that are not shared on preprint servers
If authors have not elected to share their unpublished work on a public preprint server, the submitted material should be treated as strictly confidential until published.
- We expect that editors and reviewers will not make use of any material or take advantage of any information they gain through the peer review process.
- Editors and reviewers should not share information about unpublished PLOS submissions with anyone who is not directly involved in the submission’s peer review process without explicit permission from PLOS.
- As is stated in our Ethical Peer Review policy, submission content may not be uploaded by handling editors or reviewers to generative AI platforms, websites, databases, or other tools; this is essential for protecting the confidentiality of unpublished work.
Confidentiality and peer review
PLOS requires editors to sign their decision letters, and we list handling editors’ names on PLOS primary research publications, with very rare exceptions.
Reviewers have the option of disclosing their identities to authors by signing their reviews. If reviewers choose not to sign their reviews, PLOS maintains their confidentiality during and after a manuscript’s/article’s review, and we expect handling editors to do the same. (See Sharing of unpublished content by PLOS section, below, for exceptions.)
PLOS offers authors the opportunity to publish peer review history (decision letters and reviews) alongside accepted articles. See here for more information. Unpublished peer review details should be held as confidential.
Correspondence as part of the PLOS review process is to be treated confidentially by all parties, including authors. Communications between editorial board members, reviewers, and authors that are related to a PLOS submission’s peer review should be conducted through the journal’s Editorial Manager system.
Sharing of unpublished content by PLOS
PLOS may share unpublished content and other information as outlined in the “How We Use And Disclose Your Information” section of the PLOS Privacy policy.
For example, PLOS may:
- upload unpublished content to web-based tools during submission checks and/or editorial assessments
- share submission contents, author or reviewer information, or peer review information with other trusted publishers, journals, databases, or tools as needed to support integrity checks, publication ethics investigations, and other initiatives aimed at addressing integrity issues
- share submission contents, author or reviewer information, or peer review information with academic research groups and third-party providers of tools or services that help inform improvements to submission checks, peer review, and/or scientific communication
- share unpublished contents (submissions, peer reviews) with institutional officials or other research oversight bodies in the context of publication ethics cases
In sharing unpublished content with third parties or tools we take efforts to protect confidentiality where possible and to mitigate risks to data security.
Reviewers may identify themselves by signing their names at the time reviews are submitted, if they wish.
Author requirements
Upon submission of a manuscript, authors must indicate whether there are any related manuscripts under consideration or published elsewhere. If related work has been submitted or published elsewhere, authors must include a copy of it with their submission and describe its relation to the submitted work.
Prior publication of research as a thesis, presentation at medical or scientific conferences, or posting on preprint servers will not preclude consideration of your manuscript.
PLOS supports the public disclosure of all clinical trial results, as mandated, for example, by the 2007 FDA Amendments Act. Prior disclosure of results on a clinical trial registry site will not affect consideration.
Editor and reviewer requirements
Reviewers and editors should evaluate any related content and notify the journal of overlap. Editors and reviewers should alert the journal if they identify duplicate submissions or publications during the review process.
Policy enforcement
If related content is found to be too similar to the PLOS submission, or if a duplicate submission is discovered, we will reject the manuscript.
Duplicate content discovered after publication will be addressed depending on the degree of overlap. The journal may issue a correction or a retraction as appropriate.
Systematic manipulation of the publication process (sometimes referred to as “paper mill” activity) is defined by COPE as an individual or group of individuals using dishonest or fraudulent practices to
- prevent independent assessment or inappropriately influence peer review outcomes,
- sell or misrepresent authorship, and/or
- publish fabricated or plagiarized research.
Authors should not use any third-party services that offer article content, authorship, or positive peer review outcomes.
Also, authors should not suggest/request handling editors or reviewers with whom there may be a potential competing interest (see here for our Competing Interests policy), and must not interfere with the review process whether directly or via third-party services.
PLOS will reject or retract articles suspected of any manipulation of the publication process, and may inform the relevant institution(s) (e.g. an author’s or reviewer’s employer) of our concerns. In discussing these cases with authors or other parties we may choose not to disclose detailed information about our assessment and specific concerns.
Please email [email protected] if you have concerns about the integrity of a PLOS article’s peer review process, potential paper mill activity involving PLOS content, or other issues involving manipulation of the publication process at PLOS.
When preparing figures, images should not be manipulated or adjusted in any way that could lead to misinterpretation of the information present in the original raw image data. Read more about our guidelines on Preparing Figures from Image Files.
When concerns are raised about reported results, PLOS requests the original underlying data for the experiment(s) in question. If the original data are not available or are not provided in a timely manner, we may take editorial action on the article based on our review of the materials in hand.
We recognize that some institutions and funding agencies only require retention of research data for a finite period after a project’s completion or publication. However, there are no such limits specified within the PLOS Data Availability Policy. Furthermore, in cases involving image issues or other data concerns, the original underlying data are instrumental in clarifying the issues raised and the reliability of the reported results. The unavailability of original data in such cases may impact editorial outcomes.
PLOS expects that articles should report the listed authors’ own work and ideas. Any contributions made by other sources must be clearly and correctly attributed.
Contributions by artificial intelligence (AI) tools and technologies to a study or to an article’s contents must be clearly reported in a dedicated section of the Methods, or in the Acknowledgements section for article types lacking a Methods section. This section should include the name(s) of any tools used, a description of how the authors used the tool(s) and evaluated the validity of the tool’s outputs, and a clear statement of which aspects of the study, article contents, data, or supporting files were affected/generated by AI tool usage.
In cases where Large Language Model (LLM) AI tools or technologies contribute to generating text content for a PLOS submission, the article’s authors are responsible for ensuring that:
- the content is accurate and valid,
- there are no concerns about potential plagiarism,
- all relevant sources are cited,
- all statements in the article reporting hypotheses, interpretations, results, conclusions, limitations, and implications of the study represent the authors’ own ideas.
The use of AI tools and technologies to fabricate or otherwise misrepresent primary research data is unacceptable.
Noncompliance with any aspect of this policy will be considered misrepresentation of methods, contributions, and/or results. If concerns arise about noncompliance with this policy, PLOS may notify the authors’ institution(s) and the journal may reject (pre-publication), retract (post-publication), or publish an editorial notice on the article.
PLOS staff and Editorial Boards are committed to the widespread dissemination of research while being sensitive to the issues of responsible publication standards. In this context, we assess the risks and benefits of publishing the research. If the risks outweigh the benefits, we will not publish it.
Authors are obligated to disclose whether the study is subject to consideration as dual use research of concern at the time of submission. Authors should also identify the Institutional Review Entity or equivalent committee(s) granting approval for the study, as well as providing the approval number if one was obtained.
Editors and reviewers are expected to evaluate potential risks and alert the journal with any concerns.
We follow standards set by national and public agencies, and may refer concerns to the PLOS Dual Use Committee for an assessment of the potential risks versus benefits of publication.
Manuscripts are checked at submission for any potential risks. Issues identified at submission may lead to rejection of the manuscript.
If risks are identified after publication of an article, we will take steps to minimize that risk in accordance with prevailing guidelines. We may follow up with authors’ institutions depending on the severity of the issues.
PLOS is committed to open scientific communications and professional conduct. We expect that all interactions with PLOS through any medium of communication, including correspondence, calls, posted Comments, and other forms of engagement like social media, will be courteous, respectful, and adherent to high standards of professionalism.
This policy outlines PLOS’ expectations for communications directed towards PLOS staff and/or contributors (authors, editors, reviewers) in the context of PLOS activities, and how PLOS will respond in cases where such expectations are not met.
PLOS will not tolerate any form of harassment or non-professional conduct directed to PLOS staff/contributors in the context of their work for PLOS, such as
- disparaging, insulting, or accusatory ad hominem remarks
- abusive, discriminatory, or hostile language or behavior
- threats targeting an individual
- repeated inquiries to PLOS challenging an editorial outcome, repeated resubmission or complaints after an appeal is declined, or excessive inquiries about an issue that is under investigation or has already been investigated by PLOS
- making false or frivolous allegations about PLOS articles
In cases where we are aware that communications/interactions do not meet these expectations, PLOS will take steps as needed to address the situation, which may include one or more of the following:
- providing feedback to the individual(s) involved
- ceasing to engage or communicate on a particular issue
-
making changes to the assigned editor/reviewer(s) for a submission
-
declining a manuscript without further editorial consideration or peer review
- reviewing or changing an individual’s editorial board status
- seeking support of an individual’s affiliated institution/employer in addressing concerns about that individual’s behavior
- declining to initiate a publication ethics investigation unless a complaint is received directly from a relevant institutional authority
- discussing the situation in anonymized form with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) representatives or at a COPE forum
Please contact the relevant journal office if you experience interactions or receive verbal or written communications regarding your PLOS work that do not comply with this policy.
Comments posted on third-party sites
If appropriate, PLOS will apply this policy to interactions and comments on third party platforms via its social media channels (BlueSky, Facebook and LinkedIn); however, PLOS is not responsible for content posted on third party platforms, and concerns about such content should be escalated via the relevant reporting/complaints process of the host site.
See also the “Impermissible Acts” section of the PLOS Terms of Use.
PLOS is committed to providing due process and fair consideration of concerns raised about our publications and editorial processes.
Appeals of editorial decisions should be submitted as outlined in our pre-publication and post-publication appeal policies.
Complaints about PLOS processes must be made in writing. When preparing a complaint email, please include in the Subject line the word “complaint” and the relevant manuscript ID or case number.
- Complaints about peer review or other pre-publication issuesshould be directed to the journal via [email protected].
- Complaints about correction requestsshould be directed to [email protected].
- Complaints about the handling of publication ethics casesshould be directed to [email protected].
- Complaints about other issues, and any questions about this policy, should be directed to [email protected].
When we receive a complaint, a senior member of the relevant team will review the issue and decide whether any feedback or intervention is needed. We will update the complainant when we have concluded our review process but we may not disclose details about our assessment and actions taken to address any issues.
PLOS will conduct only a single review for any complaint, and we have the sole discretion to make decisions in response to complaints. PLOS will not consider repeated complaints about the same matter or closely related issues. If you are dissatisfied with the outcome of our internal complaint process you may raise your concerns to COPE. Note: COPE should not be considered a means of appealing a decision: they will review procedural issues but do not intervene on editorial decisions.
Please note that reviews by PLOS or by COPE in response to complaints seldom result in changes to an editorial decision.
In our efforts to improve the peer review system and scientific communication, we have an ongoing research program on the processes we use in the course of manuscript handling at the PLOS journals. If you are a reviewer, author or editor at PLOS, and you wish to opt out of this research, please contact the relevant journal office. Participation does not affect the editorial consideration of submitted manuscripts, nor PLOS' policies relating to confidentiality of authors, reviewers or manuscripts.
Individual research projects will be subject to appropriate ethical consideration and approval and if necessary individuals will be contacted for specific consent to participate.
Authorship
Everyone listed as an author should meet our criteria for authorship. Everyone who meets our criteria for authorship must be listed as an author, and the contributions of all authors must be reported.
We expect that all authors will take public responsibility for the content of the manuscript submitted to PLOS.
All authors should be listed in the Editorial Manager submission form before peer review. If a submission’s authorship changes during peer review or revisions, the author fields in the Editorial Manager submission form should be updated at the next available opportunity (e.g. when submitting the revision), and authors must fulfill the requirements described here.
All authors will be contacted by email to ensure that they are aware of and approve the submission of the manuscript, its content, and its authorship. Some PLOS journals require that all co-authors confirm their assent to publication by email. Please contact the journal office ([email protected]) or the PLOS Publication Ethics team ([email protected]) if you have concerns about a submission’s authorship.
Authorship issues identified after publication may result in a correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction.
All authors are expected to have made substantial contributions to the submitted work and to be accountable for the work both before and after publication.
Most PLOS journals transitioned in May 2023 to follow the authorship guidance discussed in McNutt et al. (2018). For PLOS journals other than * PLOS Medicine*, authors must satisfy all of the following requirements (as per the 2018 article’s recommendations):
- Substantial contributions to one or more of the following: conception or design of the work; acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; creation of new software used in the work; drafting or substantially revising the article
and
- Approved the submitted version (and any substantially modified version that involves the author’s contribution to the study)
*and *
- Agrees to be personally accountable for the author’s own contributions AND to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature
For all PLOS journals, authors should follow the ICMJE guidelines on group authorship. Where authorship criteria are referenced in the ICMJE guidelines, authors should apply the criteria stated above for the applicable PLOS journal.
The ICMJE guidelines on group authorship state:
When a large multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet [authorship criteria], and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors. They will also be expected as individuals to complete disclosure forms.
Some large multi-author groups designate authorship by a group name, with or without the names of individuals. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should specify the group name if one exists, and clearly identify the group members who can take credit and responsibility for the work as authors.
An individual contributor must be designated as corresponding author even if the submission lists a consortium or group author name in the byline.
For PLOS articles published since October 2016, only the contributors (individuals and/or consortia) who are listed in the author byline are automatically indexed in PubMed. If you have questions about this, please email the journal office.
See the Submission Guidelines for more information.
The contributions of all authors must be described. PLOS has adopted the CRediT Taxonomy to describe each author’s individual contributions to the work. The submitting author is responsible for providing the contributions of all authors at submission. We expect that all authors will have reviewed, discussed, and agreed to their individual contributions ahead of this time. Contributions will be published with the final article, and they should accurately reflect contributions to the work.
| Contributor Role | Role Definition |
|---|---|
| Conceptualization | Ideas; formulation or evolution of overarching research goals and aims. |
| Data Curation | Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), scrub data and maintain research data (including software code, where it is necessary for interpreting the data itself) for initial use and later reuse. |
| Formal Analysis | Application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data. |
| Funding Acquisition | Acquisition of the financial support for the project leading to this publication. |
| Investigation | Conducting a research and investigation process, specifically performing the experiments, or data/evidence collection. |
| Development or design of methodology; creation of models | |
| Project Administration | Management and coordination responsibility for the research activity planning and execution. |
| Resources | Provision of study materials, reagents, materials, patients, laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources, or other analysis tools. |
| Software | Programming, software development; designing computer programs; implementation of the computer code and supporting algorithms; testing of existing code components. |
| Supervision | Oversight and leadership responsibility for the research activity planning and execution, including mentorship external to the core team. |
| Validation | Verification, whether as a part of the activity or separate, of the overall replication/reproducibility of results/experiments and other research outputs. |
| Visualization | Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically visualization/data presentation. |
| Writing – Original Draft Preparation | Creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically writing the initial draft (including substantive translation). |
| Writing – Review & Editing | Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work by those from the original research group, specifically critical review, commentary or revision – including pre- or post-publication stages. |
Contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be mentioned in the Acknowledgments. It is a requirement that those being acknowledged have given their permission to be named in the Acknowledgements section of your manuscript.
The corresponding author takes responsibility for and speaks on behalf of all authors.
Pre-publication:
- Ensure that the manuscript is in full adherence with all PLOS editorial and publishing policies.
- Ensure that all authors have access to the final version of the manuscript that is submitted to the journal, and agree to the author list and author contributions.
- Ensure that all authors have seen the final draft of the manuscript before it is published.
- Provide to the journal written confirmation that all authors consent to any requested changes in the manuscript’s authorship.
Post-publication:
- Continue to be the point of contact for queries about the published paper.
- Inform all coauthors of any matters arising and ensure such matters are dealt with promptly.
The involvement of any professional medical writer in the publication process must be declared. The European Medical Writers' Association Guidelines contain additional information about the role of medical writers.
PLOS journals follow the COPE guidelines for changes in authorship.
Changing the author list after submission requires agreement from all authors. This includes additions, deletions, and changes in ordering. Requests must come from the corresponding author, who will be asked to complete an Authorship Change Form and detail how any added authors contributed to the work and why author(s) are being added/removed after the initial submission. The corresponding author must also provide to PLOS documentation verifying that all authors, including any being added, deleted, or reordered, have given written consent to the change(s). Authorship change requests are subject to PLOS' approval; we may require validation of authorship contributions from an institutional official.
PLOS does not generally consider requests to add or remove authors between editorial acceptance and publication of the article. If there are special circumstances that apply to your article such that a post-accept authorship change is needed, please contact the journal office. These requests require approval by the journal’s editorial team.
In the case of an authorship dispute, the journal will not arbitrate. If the authors are unable to resolve the dispute themselves, we will defer the issue to the authors’ institution(s) in accordance with COPE guidelines. The journal will abide by institutional recommendations following authorship investigations, with rare exception.
If we encounter delays resolving pre-publication authorship issues - e.g., if pre-publication authorship disputes are not resolved in a timely fashion, or if we require but have difficulty obtaining an institution’s input - PLOS journals may withdraw or reject the submission. It is the authors’ responsibility in such cases to follow-up with one another or with the relevant institutional official(s) in order to resolve any pending issues. PLOS may consider a resubmission if/when the issue is resolved.
Authorship changes after publication are addressed via Corrections, except in rare circumstances.
We will update author bylines via silent republication (i.e., without an accompanying Correction notice) to reflect name changes of transgender or non-binary authors. Other name change requests may be granted at the journal’s discretion.
PLOS endorses ORCID and requires that all corresponding authors provide an ORCID iD when submitting a manuscript. We encourage coauthors to register and use their ORCID as well.
We publish the corresponding author's ORCID iD as well as any ORCIDs provided by coauthors if the manuscript is accepted. We participate in the auto-update feature implemented by Crossref such that when a paper is published, the authors’ ORCIDs are deposited and subsequently used to update each author’s ORCID record.
Editors should be aware of the author list and author affiliations when they invite reviewers to review a manuscript in order to reduce the likelihood of inviting individuals with potentially competing interests that would disqualify them from participating in the peer review process.
Editors and reviewers should contact the journal with any concerns about the author list or if they identify any potentially competing interests that should be declared or that mean they should recuse themselves from the process.
%PDF-1.5
%����
31 0 obj
<>
endobj
66 0 obj
<>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[<24821F94DADC83037FDDB9B4E5036657><422EAF87C127E74CACEC81D92D12F4B9>]/Index[31 61]/Info 30 0 R/Length 147/Prev 218439/Root 32 0 R/Size 92/Type/XRef/W[1 3 1]>>stream
h�bbd``b``N�� �q�d��e@$S'�]f�I�&�:D�0�ɣ�R0i�&�U���A$��m"E������.��H�d�K�s�f�D�K����رuq�b�� ��f*�_��"���:��%@� d�
endstream
endobj
startxref
0
%%EOF
91 0 obj
<>stream
h�b`f�ae<� Ā B@16�l�_:5J�00+n� ,��RBG5Y�b�$3���j����.��"Y���n��N�n[�S�&N�]z�R��V� �ݡl�.HpEpg /��1 ��J��֗'M��P�ņys!�"�=�8�n����9.1��a��e���+� ��7�X��X->~y�Wn�|������, �bA��>�
@� !�E�
endstream
endobj
32 0 obj
<>
endobj
33 0 obj
<>
endobj
34 0 obj
<>stream
hXmO�8�+�B\��"��hY�{ˋh�X)��fٞڦj�:��7c7mC
���';��x�~��i�!�hK�3D;"�n`DqF'Vbq�# cN�g�Xb4a���!�I�s�JK,��FF���XNcL��Va�x��p��\�h��p��D��uD:P���/\_�n1)�y6��c�1
J�NN��O�E��Jܸ�3�+n�������c,q\*��8��q�\*t2N5��]�VoŰ��ir{v��2�M�Ǽ��O~�<����ޔAQ��$Mz�n'[�#��Dnn��l��arEX�?]}�����d�<�7&�<���r��J�&���DT����/��㯒0Jir�G�c���qId��N�xJ��X0A�4��a�<��'��l2~X���x�s��]���l�'Wv����V�a�\_.�r�+�.�l��K<� :<�=NrB�~�O���Q=^��e�H~lE��D������S����E��*�'�Rrv/��������D�A0 � #�OEʹ�wq��TII���T3�M��^��тyiR���<��zmSd�R{�R�����(��IT���10�Y�=�|�M��VQ����Q���6���lX����q|���'+���A('BG�T�� \*EQ-߁��Q��A6b2�#�X<�m�\*���[��������{ÓR��r��
��ul8��鋿�
�vCk��D��K�8N㬎
���巣 w5h��lpl�����{��X�T��P .�iذ�S)�9�0��Ov�t�
�|(�P�9�_�l�'`)� B�C}�q�A�+���Z�s�l��,�^h��3���!I ���ӕ��L�'�2�p�:
∇���wT�����&*y=J�e�1�@ڿ��
�|2���:��z�OU�յ\k�O�⓪���4_���_rWL�Y�Y�ɬ��Q� � �?��ѻD3���6i�u/>�xno�)��-0&4r$�.z� �>[tA��O��Z ��S�XA������&��5cV���=0"h@�.���#����K[����ۆy@ �@�f]y��Ƀ��=��5�v�����C�UEc�Qt]/6��: