Journal Author Guidesreputable journals' Instructions-for-Authors

Instructions for Authors — npj Digital Medicine

Source: https://www.nature.com/npjdigitalmed/for-authors-and-referees

For Authors and Referees

Guide for Authors

This section will help you when preparing your manuscript for initial submission and resubmission to * npj Digital Medicine*. Please ensure that you familiarise yourself with our editorial policies as outlined in our

Guide to Authorsand

Submission Guidelinesbefore submitting your work.

For information on our aims and scope, as well as our content types, please refer to the about the journal section.

All manuscripts must be submitted electronically through our online submission system using the Submit manuscript link, from which you can upload the cover letter and manuscript files (text, figures and supplementary information, including video) and check on the status of your manuscripts during the review process

Revised manuscripts should be uploaded through the link provided in the editor's decision letter. Please do not submit revisions as new manuscripts.

The authors must include copies of all related manuscripts with any overlap in authorship that are under consideration or in press elsewhere.

Manuscripts submitted to * npj Digital Medicine* do not need to adhere to our formatting requirements at the point of initial submission, once the manuscript undergoes peer review cycle it is mandate to adhere to the formatting requirements before formal acceptance.

Guide for Reviewers

View our guide for reviewers for detailed information on policies, workflows and criteria.

Journal Policies

Our editorial and publishing policies are consistent with those of the Nature portfolio journals.

Language Editing

Even though no paper will be rejected for poor language, authors occasionally receive feedback from editors and reviewers regarding language and grammar usage in their manuscripts. You may wish to consider asking a colleague to read your manuscript and/or to use a professional editing service such as those provided by our affiliates Nature Research Editing Service or American Journal Experts. Please note that the use of a language editing service is not a requirement for publication in * npj Digital Medicine*.

Submission guidelines

Online submission

All manuscripts must be submitted via our online submission system using the Submit manuscript link. Using this system, authors can upload manuscript files (text, figures, videos) directly to our office and check on the status of their manuscripts during the review process. In addition, Reviewers can access the manuscript online, which speeds up the review process. Revised manuscripts should be uploaded via the link provided in the Editor's decision letter. Please do not submit revisions as new manuscripts.

Before a manuscript is submitted, please review our Editorial policies, and ensure that the submission complies with our policy requirements.

Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, do not currently satisfy our authorship criteria. Notably an attribution of authorship carries with it accountability for the work, which cannot be effectively applied to LLMs. Use of an LLM should be properly documented in the Methods section (and if a Methods section is not available, in a suitable alternative part) of the manuscript. In response to emerging information, advice, guidance and policy around artificial intelligence (AI), we have created a dedicated AI section in our Editorial Policy page. Please familiarize yourself with this content and comply with relevant policies.

ORCID

ORCID for corresponding authors

As part of our efforts to improve transparency in authorship, we ask all corresponding authors of accepted papers to provide their Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier (ORCID) ID, before submitting the final version of the manuscript.

To do this, the corresponding author will need to:

If you don’t have an ORCID account, you can create one at this stage.

Non-corresponding authors do not have to link their ORCID but are encouraged to do so.

Linking ORCID and Springer Nature accounts can be done at any time prior to acceptance.

Please note that it is not possible to add/modify ORCID details at proof stage.For more information please visit

ORCID at Springer Nature. If you experience technical issues please contact the

Platform Support Helpdesk.

Submission policies

Submission to * npj Digital Medicine* is taken to imply that there is no significant overlap between the submitted manuscript and any other papers from the same authors under consideration or in press elsewhere. (Abstracts or unrefereed web preprints do not compromise novelty). The authors must include copies of all related manuscripts with any overlap in authorship that are under consideration or in press elsewhere. If a related manuscript is submitted elsewhere while the manuscript is under consideration at

, a copy of the related manuscript must be sent to the Editor.

npj Digital MedicineThe primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done. If an author has subsequently moved, the current address may also be stated.

If the manuscript includes personal communications, please provide a written statement of permission from any person who is quoted. E-mail permission messages are acceptable.

Follow

this linkfor further information on the review process and how Editors make decisions.

After acceptance, changes to the manuscript may be made so that papers conform to our style. The corresponding author is sent proofs and is welcome to discuss changes with the Editors, but

npj Digital Medicinereserves the right to make the final decision about matters of style and the size of figures.

The Editors also reserve the right to reject a paper even after it has been accepted if it becomes apparent that there are serious problems with the scientific content or with violations of our publishing policies.

General information for preparing manuscripts

This guide outlines key points for preparing primary research manuscripts for submission to * npj Digital Medicine*.

The corresponding author should be familiar with the journal’s

Editorial policiesand is solely responsible for communicating with the journal and managing communication between coauthors. Before submission, the corresponding author ensures that all authors are included in the author list and agree with its order, and that they are aware the manuscript is to be submitted.

Reporting summary and editorial policy checklist

Research articles in Life Sciences, Health Sciences, Earth and Environmental Sciences, and Social and Behavioural Sciences must include relevant details about several elements of experimental and analytical design. These requirements aim to improve the transparency of reporting and the reproducibility of published results. They focus on elements of methodological information that are frequently poorly reported (see more details on these elements here). You will be asked to complete and submit the Nature Portfolio Reporting Summary together with the revised version of your manuscript after peer-review. Please see our editorial policies page for details and to download the Reporting Summary document.

The reporting summary will be published with all accepted manuscripts. All authors must also complete an editorial policy checklist to ensure compliance with Nature Portfolio editorial policies.

Other checklists

If your manuscript is sent for peer-review, you will also be asked to complete the Nature Portfolio Editorial Policy Checklist. This checklist is not sent to the Reviewers but must be received by the Editors before the paper can be sent for peer-review. A copy of the checklist can also be downloaded on our policies page.

Authors are encouraged to include both completed forms at the time of submission.

The Reporting Summary will be published as a Supplementary File alongside all primary research articles in Life Sciences, Health Sciences, Physical Sciences, Applied Sciences, or Society & the environment accepted from January 2019.

Cover letter

Authors should provide a cover letter that includes the affiliation and contact information for the corresponding author. The cover letter is an excellent opportunity to briefly discuss the context and importance of the submitted work and why it is appropriate for the journal. Please avoid repeating information that is already present in the abstract and introduction. The cover letter is not shared with the referees, and should be used to provide confidential information, such as conflicts of interest, and to declare any related work that is in press or submitted elsewhere. It is also appropriate to include suggested or excluded referees in the cover letter. We strive to ensure that the diversity of our Reviewers reflects that of the broad scientific community, in terms of gender, ethnicity/race, geographic location and career stage. We ask that you keep this in mind when suggesting potential Reviewers.

Format of manuscripts

Manuscripts submitted to * npj Digital Medicine* do not need to adhere to our formatting requirements at the point of initial submission; formatting requirements only apply at the time of acceptance.

We encourage authors to incorporate the manuscript text and figures into a single PDF or Microsoft Word file. Suitably high resolution figures may be inserted within the text at appropriate positions or grouped at the end. Each figure legend should be presented on the same page as its figure. We can accept LaTeX files at the acceptance stage, but before then please supply compiled PDFs.

Manuscripts published in the npj Series journals are not subject to in-depth copy editing or display item redrawing as part of the production process. Authors are encouraged to seek copy editing or language editing services for their manuscripts, either before submission or at the revision stage, should they feel it would benefit their manuscript. Such services include those provided by

Springer Nature Author Servicesand

American Journal Experts. Please note that the use of any editing service is at the author's own expense and in no way implies that the article will be selected for peer review or accepted for publication.

Methods

Authors must ensure that their Methods section includes adequate experimental and characterization data necessary for others in the field to reproduce their work. Please refer to our editorial policies for more information. Descriptions of standard protocols and experimental procedures should be given. Commercial suppliers of reagents or instrumentation should be identified. Sources for kits should be identified. Experimental protocols that describe the synthesis of compounds should be included. Authors should describe the experimental protocol in detail, referring to amounts of reagents in parentheses, when possible (e.g. 1.03 g, 0.100 mmol). Standard abbreviations for reagents and solvents are encouraged. Safety hazards posed by reagents or protocols should be identified clearly. Isolated mass and percent yields should be reported at the end of each protocol. The Methods section should be subdivided by short bold headings referring to methods used and we encourage the inclusion of specific subsections for statistics, reagents and animal models.

We encourage authors to deposit the step-by-step protocols used in their study in www.protocols.io, Springer Nature's open repository of scientific protocols. Protocols deposited by the authors will be linked to the online Methods section upon publication.

References

References are numbered sequentially as they appear in the text, methods, tables, figure legends. Only one publication is given for each number.

Only papers that have been published or accepted by a named publication or recognized preprint server should be in the numbered list. Meeting abstracts that are not published and papers in preparation should be mentioned in the text with a list of authors (or initials if any of the authors are co-authors of the present contribution). Published conference abstracts, numbered patents and research datasets may be included in the reference list. When referencing a dataset, a DOI or accession code should be included in the citation where available. URLs for web sites should be cited parenthetically in the text, not in the reference list; articles in formal, peer-reviewed online journals should be included in the reference list. Grant details and acknowledgments are not permitted as numbered references. Footnotes are not used.

The npj Series journals use standard Nature referencing style. All authors should be included in reference lists unless there are more than five, in which case only the first author should be given, followed by 'et al.'. Authors should be listed last name first, followed by a comma and initials (followed by full stops) of given names. Article titles should be in Roman text, the first word of the title should be capitalized and the title written exactly as it appears in the work cited, ending with a full stop. Book titles should be given in italics and all words in the title should have initial capitals. Journal names are italicized and abbreviated (with full stops) according to common usage. Volume numbers and the subsequent comma appear in bold.

Published papers:

Printed journals:

Schott, D. H., Collins, R. N. & Bretscher, A. Secretory vesicle transport velocity in living cells depends on the myosin V lever arm length. J. Cell Biol. 156, 35-39 (2002).

Online only:

Bellin, D. L. et al. Electrochemical camera chip for simultaneous imaging of multiple metabolites in biofilms. Nat. Commun. 7, 10535; 10.1038/ncomms10535 (2016).

For papers with more than five authors include only the first author’s name followed by ‘et al.’.

Books:

Smith, J. Syntax of referencing in How to reference books (ed. Smith, S.) 180-181 (Macmillan, 2013).

Online material:

Manaster, J. Sloth squeak. Scientific American Blog Network http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/psi-vid/2014/04/09/sloth-squeak (2014).

Hao, Z., AghaKouchak, A., Nakhjiri, N. & Farahmand, A. Global integrated drought monitoring and prediction system (GIDMaPS) data sets. figshare http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.853801 (2014).

Author contributions

The npj Series journals require an Author Contribution Statement that specifies the individual contributions of each co-author.

Please use initials to refer to each author's contribution in this section, for example: "FC analyzed and interpreted the patient data regarding the hematological disease and the transplant. RH performed the histological examination of the kidney, and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements should be brief, and should not include thanks to anonymous Reviewers and Editors, or effusive comments. Relevant grant or contribution numbers should be included.

Funding information should be placed in the Acknowledgement section. When acknowledging funding, our recommended best practice is that authors should acknowledge funders and grants on publications when the activities that contributed to that publication are within scope of the acknowledged grant and arise directly from a specific grant. The role of the funding body in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript should also be declared. If the funder has played no role in the research, this should be stated.

Declaring funding in the Acknowledgments can take one of the following forms:

This study was funded by [funder name] [grant number where applicable]. The funder played no role in study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data, or the writing of this manuscript. This study received no funding.

Competing interests

A competing interests statement is required for all accepted papers published in the npj Series journals. If there is no competing interest, a statement declaring this is still required.

Competing interests may take one of the following forms (or a combination of more than one):

All authors declare no financial or non-financial competing interests. Author IJ holds shares in [company name A] but and declares no non-financial competing interests. Author KL has previously acted as a paid consultant for [company name B] but declares no non-financial competing interests. All other authors declare no financial or non-financia competing interests. Authors AB, EF, GH declare no financial or non-financial competing interests. Author CD serves as [Editor role title] of this journal and had no role in the peer-review or decision to publish this manuscript. Author CD declares no financial competing interests.

Data availability

requires a Data Availability Statement to be included in the submitted manuscript (see the section on

npj Digital Medicineavailability of materials and data in our editorial policies pagefor more information).

Data availability statements should provide a statement about the availability of the minimal dataset that would be necessary to interpret, replicate and build upon the methods or findings reported in the article. Data availability statements should be provided as a separate section after the Methods section before the References, under the heading "Data Availability".

Data availability statements can take one of the following forms (or a combination of more than one if required for multiple datasets):

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [insert name of repository] repository, [insert persistent URL to datasets]. All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files]. The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to [INSERT REASON WHY DATA ARE NOT PUBLIC] but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study. The data that support the findings of this study are available from [third party name] but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under licence for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of [third party name].

Code availability

Any previously unreported custom computer code or scripts used to generate results reported in the manuscript that are central to the main claims must be made available to Editors and referees upon request. Any practical issues preventing code sharing will be evaluated by the Editors who reserve the right to decline the manuscript if important code is unavailable. At publication, Nature Portfolio journals consider it best practice to release custom computer code in a way that allows readers to repeat the published results.

For all studies using custom code that is deemed central to the conclusions, a statement must be included in the Methods section, under the heading "Code availability", indicating whether and how the code can be accessed, including any restrictions.

Code availability statements can take one of the following forms (or a combination of more than one if required):

The underlying code [and training/validation datasets] for this study is available in [repository name] and can be accessed via this link [insert persistent URL to code]. The underlying code for this study [and training/validation datasets] is not publicly available for proprietary reasons. The underlying code for this study [and training/validation datasets] is not publicly available but may be made available to qualified researchers on reasonable request from the corresponding author.

Supplementary information

Any Supplementary Information should be submitted with the manuscript and will be sent to referees during peer review. It is published online with accepted manuscripts. We request that authors avoid "data not shown" statements and instead make their data available via deposition in a public repository (see 'Reporting standards and availability of data, materials, code and protocols' for more information). Any data necessary to evaluate the claims of the paper that are not available via a public depository should be provided as Supplementary Information.

All supplementary information cited in the manuscript should be provided in a separate, single merged PDF. The journal does not edit Supplementary Information files; they will be uploaded with the published article as they are submitted with the final version of your manuscript, any tracked changes should be removed from the file. The journal does not permit Supplementary Methods, all Methods should be reported in the main manuscript file.

If supplementary tables are too large (or excel files) to be included in the Supplementary PDF file, you should provide them separately as Supplementary Data and ensure that they are labelled in "Supplementary Data XX" format and not as ‘Supplementary Table’. Provide corresponding Title and Legend in the Supplementary PDF file. Ensure to cite them consistently as they are labelled.

Supplementary Information is not edited, typeset or proofed, so authors should ensure that it is clearly and succinctly presented at initial submission, and that the style and terminology conform to the rest of the paper. Please note that modification of Supplementary Information after the paper is published requires a formal correction, so authors are encouraged to check their Supplementary Information carefully before submitting the final version.

Further queries about submission and preparation of Supplementary Information should be directed to the editorial team. Please visit our contact page.

General figure guidelines

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to publish any figures or illustrations that are protected by copyright, including figures published elsewhere and pictures taken by professional photographers. The journal cannot publish images downloaded from the internet without appropriate permission.

Unnecessary figures should be avoided: data presented in small tables or histograms, for instance, can generally be stated briefly in the text instead. Figures should not contain more than one panel unless the parts are logically connected; each panel of a multipart figure should be sized so that the whole figure can be reduced by the same amount and reproduced at the smallest size at which essential details are visible.

Should your manuscript be accepted, you will receive more extensive instructions for final submission of display items. However, some guidelines for final figure preparation are included below if you wish to minimize later revisions and possible delays.

Figures should be numbered separately with Arabic numerals in the order of occurrence in the text of the manuscript. When appropriate, figures should include error bars. A description of the statistical treatment of error analysis should be included in the figure legend. Please note that schemes are not used; sequences of chemical reactions or experimental procedures should be submitted as figures, with appropriate captions. A limited number of uncaptioned graphics depicting chemical structures—each labeled with their name, by a defined abbreviation, or by the bold Arabic numeral—may be included in a manuscript.

Figure lettering should be in a clear, sans-serif typeface (for example, Helvetica); the same typeface in the same font size should be used for all figures in a paper. Use 'symbols' font for Greek letters. All display items should be on a white background, and should avoid excessive boxing, unnecessary colour, spurious decorative effects (such as three-dimensional 'skyscraper' histograms) and highly pixelated computer drawings. The vertical axis of histograms should not be truncated to exaggerate small differences. Labeling must be of sufficient size and contrast to be readable, even after appropriate reduction. The thinnest lines in the final figure should be no smaller than one point wide. Authors will see a proof that will include figures.

Figures divided into parts should be labeled with a lower-case bold a, b, and so on, in the same type size as used elsewhere in the figure. Lettering in figures should be in lower-case type, with only the first letter of each label capitalized. Units should have a single space between the number and the unit, and follow SI nomenclature (for example, ms rather than msec) or the nomenclature common to a particular field. Thousands should be separated by commas (1,000). Unusual units or abbreviations should be spelled out in full or defined in the legend. Scale bars should be used rather than magnification factors, with the length of the bar defined. In legends, please use verbal explanations such as "open red triangles" rather than visual queues.

Authors are encouraged to consider the needs of colourblind readers (a substantial minority of the male population) when choosing colours for figures. Many colourblind readers cannot interpret visuals that rely on discrimination of green and red, for example. Thus, we ask authors to recolor green-and-red heatmaps, graphs and schematics for which colours are chosen arbitrarily. Recoloring primary data, such as fluorescence or rainbow pseudo-coloured images, to colour-safe combinations such as green and magenta, turquoise and red, yellow and blue or other accessible colour palettes is strongly encouraged.

Provide figure files individually (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3...etc.). Figure panels should be included in single file (Figures 1a-d should be included in Figure 1 file). Supply better quality main figure images only, (at least 300 dpi resolution) and that are readable and are in a widely openable file format (e.g. .ai, .eps, .pdf, .ps, .psd, .jpeg, .tiff, .png, .gif, .ppt, .pptx, .cdx.).

Figure legends

Figure legends begin with a brief title for the whole figure and continue with a short description of each panel and the symbols used, focusing on describing what is shown in the figure and de-emphasizing methodological details. The meaning of all error bars and how they were calculated should be described.

Figures should be cited in the text in the order in which they appear. Each figure should be accompanied by a brief title that summarizes the whole figure and does not refer to specific panels. This should be followed by the figure legend 'body' that includes more in-depth details about the figure, limited to 350 words.

It is important that you define any new abbreviations, symbols or colors present in your figures in the associated legends. Do not use symbols in your legend, instead please write out the symbols in words (blue circles, red dashed line, etc.). Multi-panel figures should be presented on a single page and labeled using an a), b), c) convention and each panel should be described in the legend individually. Please note that this guidance also applies to any supplementary figures. Add the legends in the main manuscript file after references.

Tables

Please submit tables at the end of your text document (in Word or TeX/LaTeX, as appropriate). Tables that include statistical analysis of data should describe their standards of error analysis and ranges in a table legend.## Figures for peer review

At the initial submission stage authors should incorporate figures into the main article file, ensuring that any inserted figures are of sufficient quality to be clearly legible. If this is not possible in a combined manuscript file, authors should either submit separate high resolution figure files or deposit image data in a suitable repository (e.g. figshare) and use their option to provide a private sharing link for the referees to access it.

When submitting a final manuscript for publication, all figures must be uploaded as separate figure files ensuring that the image quality and formatting conforms to the specifications below.

Figures for publication

Each complete figure must be supplied as a separate file upload. Multi-part/panel figures must be prepared and arranged as a single image file (including all sub-parts; a, b, c, etc.). Please do not upload each panel individually.

Please read the digital images integrity and standards section of our editorial policies. When possible, we prefer to use original digital figures to ensure the highest-quality reproduction in the journal. For optimal results, prepare figures to fit A4 page-width. Figures that do not meet these standards will not reproduce well and publication may be delayed until we receive high-resolution images. We cannot offer to provide corrected reprints with higher image quality if only poor quality images were supplied at accept stage. The npj Series journal Editors reserve the right to make the final decision about matters of style and the size of figures.

When creating and submitting digital files, please follow the guidelines below. Failure to do so, or to adhere to the following guidelines, can significantly delay publication of your work.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

If you would like to submit a suggestion for the featured image on our homepage with the final version of your manuscript, please also include the Image Licence to Publish form.

Submitting video files as figures

here.

Statistical guidelines

Comprehensive information on the statistical analyses used must be included in the paper. The Methods must include a statistics and reproducibility section with the following information.

Every article that contains statistical testing should state the name of the statistical test, the n value for each statistical analysis, the comparisons of interest, a justification for the use of that test (including, for example, a discussion of the normality of the data when the test is appropriate only for normal data), the alpha level for all tests, whether the tests were one-tailed or two-tailed, and the actual P value for each test (not merely "significant" or "P < 0.05"). It should be clear what statistical test was used to generate every P value. Use of the word "significant" should always be accompanied by a P value; otherwise, use "substantial," "considerable," etc.

Data sets should be summarized with descriptive statistics, which should include the n value for each data set, a clearly labeled measure of centre (such as the mean or the median), and a clearly labeled measure of variability (such as standard deviation or range). Ranges are more appropriate than standard deviations or standard errors for small data sets. Graphs should include clearly labeled error bars. Authors must state whether a number that follows the ± sign is a standard error (s.e.m.) or a standard deviation (s.d.).

When plotting data, we require authors to use a format that clearly shows the full data distribution. If using a bar chart, please note that either individual data points must be overlaid on the bars or the chart must be converted to a dot-plot or box-and-whisker-plot format.

Authors must justify the use of a particular test and explain whether their data conform to the assumptions of the tests. Three errors are particularly common:

Multiple comparisons: When making multiple statistical comparisons on a single data set, authors should explain how they adjusted the alpha level to avoid an inflated Type I error rate, or they should select statistical tests appropriate for multiple groups (such as ANOVA rather than a series of t-tests).

Normal distribution: Many statistical tests require that the data be approximately normally distributed; when using these tests, authors should explain how they tested their data for normality. If the data do not meet the assumptions of the test, then a non-parametric alternative should be used instead.

Small sample size: When the sample size is small (less than about 10), authors should use tests appropriate to small samples or justify their use of large-sample tests.

Gene nomenclature

Authors should use approved nomenclature for gene symbols, and use symbols rather than italicized full names (for example Ttn, not titin). Please consult the appropriate nomenclature databases for correct gene names and symbols. A useful resource is Entrez Gene, available from NCBI.

Approved human gene symbols are provided by HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC), e-mail: hgnc@genenames.org; see also www.genenames.org. Approved mouse symbols are provided by The Jackson Laboratory, e-mail: nomen@informatics.jax.org; see also www.informatics.jax.org/mgihome/nomen.

For proposed gene names that are not already approved, please submit the gene symbols to the appropriate nomenclature committees as soon as possible, as these must be deposited and approved before publication of an article.

Avoid listing multiple names of genes (or proteins) separated by a slash, as in 'Oct4/Pou5f1', as this is ambiguous (it could mean a ratio, a complex, alternative names or different subunits). Use one name throughout and include any others at first mention: 'Oct4 (also known as Pou5f1)'.

For information about referencing human single-nucleotide variants, see this editorial from Nature Genetics.

Characterisation of chemical and biomolecular materials

The npj Series journals are committed to publishing the highest-quality research. Manuscripts submitted to the journal will be held to rigorous standards with respect to experimental methods and characterization of compounds. Authors must provide adequate data to support their assignment of identity, purity and homogeneity for compounds and materials described in the manuscript. Editors and Reviewers will be responsible for assessing the completeness of the characterization. Authors should provide a statement confirming the source, identity and purity of known compounds and biomolecules that are central to the scientific study, even if they are purchased or resynthesised using published methods.

Chemical nomenclature and abbreviations

Molecular structures are identified by bold, Arabic numerals assigned in order of presentation in the text. Once identified in the main text or a figure, compounds may be referred to by their name preferably using systematic IUPAC nomenclature, by a defined standard abbreviation, or by the bold Arabic numeral (as long as the compound is referred to consistently as one of these three). Unconventional or specialist abbreviations should be defined at their first occurrence in the text.### Methods section

The Methods section should be written as concisely as possible but should contain all elements necessary to allow interpretation and replication of the results. We encourage the inclusion of specific sections for statistics, reagents and animal models. Experimental protocols that describe the synthesis of compounds must be included. Authors must describe the experimental protocol in detail, referring to amounts of each reagent in parentheses (e.g. 1.03 g, 0.100 mmol). The source for commercial compounds must be provided. Standard abbreviations for reagents and solvents are encouraged. Safety hazards posed by reagents or protocols must be identified clearly. Isolated mass and percent yields should be reported at the end of each protocol. Isomeric ratios of compounds obtained as an inseparable mixture must be quantified where possible. Authors are encouraged to share their step-by-step experimental protocols on a protocol sharing platform of their choice. protocols.io is a free-to-use and open resource for protocols. Protocols deposited in protocols.io are citable and can be linked from the published article. More details can be found atwww.protocols.io

Chemical identity

Chemical identity for organic and organometallic compounds should be established through spectroscopic analysis. Detailed spectral data for compounds should be provided in list form (see below). Figures containing spectra generally will not be published as a manuscript figure unless the data are directly relevant to the central conclusions of the paper. Example format for compound characterization data:mp: 100–102 °C (lit.ref 99–101 °C); [α]D = -21.5 (0.1 M in n-hexane); 1H NMR (400 MHz, CDCl3): δ 9.30 (s, 1H), 7.55–7.41 (m, 6H), 5.61 (d, J = 5.5 Hz, 1H), 5.40 (d, J = 5.5 Hz, 1H), 4.93 (m, 1H), 4.20 (q, J = 8.5 Hz, 2H), 2.11 (s, 3H), 1.25 (t, J = 8.5 Hz, 3H); 13C NMR (125 MHz, CDCl3): δ 165.4, 165.0, 140.5, 138.7, 131.5, 129.2, 118.6, 84.2, 75.8, 66.7, 37.9, 20.1; IR (Nujol): 1765 cm-1; UV/Vis: λmax 267 nm; HRMS (m/z): [M]+ calcd. for C20H15Cl2NO5, 420.0406; found, 420.0412; analysis (calcd., found for C20H15Cl2NO5): C (57.16, 57.22), H (3.60, 3.61), Cl (16.87, 16.88), N (3.33, 3.33), O (19.04, 19.09).

Yield and sample purity

Yield and evidence of sample purity is required for each isolated compound. Methods for purity analysis depend on the compound class. For most organic and organometallic compounds, purity may be demonstrated by high-field 1H NMR and 13C NMR data, although elemental analysis (±0.4%) is encouraged. Quantitative analytical methods including chromatographic (GC, HPLC, etc.) or electrophoretic analyses may be used to demonstrate purity for small molecules and polymeric materials. Melting points for crystalline compounds should be reported. In cases where isolation of pure samples is not possible (intermediates, mixtures, unstable species) or where the obtained quantities are not sufficient to perform a full characterization, a statement must be given, indicating that the species were not isolated or fully characterized.### Spectroscopy

Standard peak listings (see formatting guidelines above) for 1H NMR and proton-decoupled 13C NMR should be provided for organic compounds. Other NMR data should be reported (31P NMR, 19F NMR, etc.) when appropriate. Authors are encouraged to include high-quality images of spectra that cover the full range of chemical shifts scanned. Specific NMR assignments should be listed after integration values. Multidimensional NMR or decoupling experiments are encouraged when possible. UV or IR spectral data may be reported for the identification of characteristic functional groups, when appropriate.### Characterization of chiral compounds

The enantiomeric composition of chiral compounds should be characterized using appropriate techniques, including polarimetry, NMR, single crystal XRD, or by correlation of HPLC or GC. The specific rotation should be reported. Composition may be reported as enantiomeric excess or ratio.### Mass spectrometry

Authors should also provide mass spectral data to support molecular weight identity. High-resolution mass spectral (HRMS) data are preferred, and when m/z < 1,000, the calculated and found values should be within 0.003. When m/z > 1000, we expect an experimental value within 1 ppm of the calculated value.### Single-crystal X-ray diffraction

Crystalline solids may be characterized by single crystal XRD. Crystallography should be combined with other techniques as required to establish identity and purity. Manuscripts reporting new structures from crystallographic analysis should be accompanied by a standard crystallographic information file (.cif) and a structural figure with probability ellipsoids should be included in the main supplementary information file. The structure factors for each structure should also be submitted, preferably embedded in the main .cif file, although they may be provided as a separate .hkl and/or .fcf file. Use of the latest version of the program SHELXL, which embeds the structure factors information in the main .cif file, is encouraged. The structure factors and structural output must be checked using IUCr's CheckCIF routine and a PDF copy of the output included with the submission, explaining any A- or B-level alerts. Additionally, an explanation for all A- and B-level alerts must be given in the supplementary information. Crystallographic data for small molecules should be submitted to the Cambridge Structural Database and the deposition number referenced in the manuscript. Full access must be provided on publication.### Solid state compounds

The homogeneity and purity of solid state compounds may be characterized by solid state NMR, powder X-ray diffraction data and where possible compared to calculated diffraction patterns.

Combinatorial compound libraries

Authors describing the preparation of combinatorial libraries should include standard characterization data for a diverse panel of library components.

Biomolecular identity

For new biopolymeric materials (oligosaccharides, peptides, nucleic acids, etc.), direct structural analysis by NMR spectroscopic methods may not be possible. In these cases, authors must provide evidence of identity based on sequence (when appropriate) and mass spectral characterization.

Biological constructs

Authors should provide sequencing or functional data that validates the identity of their biological constructs (plasmids, fusion proteins, site-directed mutants, etc.) either in the manuscript text, supplementary information, or the Methods section, as appropriate.

Chemical probe data

Manuscripts that report the identification and validation of new chemical probes are encouraged to submit their probes to theChemical Probe Portal.

Small-molecule high-throughput screening data

Manuscripts reporting high-throughput screens of small-molecule libraries should include a supplementary table summarising the assay, library, screen and post-screen analysis. A template and instructions for preparing the high-throughput screening table are available.### Macromolecular structural data

Manuscripts reporting macromolecular structures should contain a table summarising structural and refinement statistics. Templates for such tables describing cryo-EM, NMR and X-ray crystallography data are available. To facilitate assessment of the quality of the structural data, a stereo image of a portion of the electron density map (for crystallography papers) or of the superimposed lowest energy structures (>10; for NMR papers) should be provided with the submitted manuscript. If the reported structure represents a novel overall fold, a stereo image of the entire structure (as a backbone trace) should also be provided. For cryo-EM structures, a representative micrograph showing individual particles should be provided in the submission. Crystallographic data for macromolecules must be submitted to the Worldwide Protein Data Bank (wwPDB), NMR data must be submitted to the Biological Magnetic Resonance Data Bank (BMRB) and cryo-EM data must be submitted to the Electron Microscopy Data Bank (EMDB). Deposition numbers must be referenced in the data availability statement in the manuscript. Full access must be provided on publication.### Microscopy

Microscopy images should be representative of the wider sample and labeled with scale bars. Full details for the reporting of microscopy experiments can be found on our policy page.### Computational results

When electronic structure calculations are reported in the manuscript, the atomic coordinates of the optimised computational models should be provided. Codes and software should be available and properly referenced in the article and/or supplementary information. Input parameters, basis sets and coordinates of the input and output structures must be reported. If relative energies are reported, absolute energies should be provided in the supplementary information. For molecular dynamics trajectories, at least the initial and final configurations should be supplied. We encourage you to make them available by uploading the structures in any of the existing data repositories (see e.g. https://www.nature.com/sdata/policies/repositories). Alternatively, they can be supplied as a separate supplementary data file (ideally as a plain, unformatted text file).

For authors

Submit manuscript

Submissions can be made using the 'submit manuscript' link above which will take you to our online submissions system. The sections below provide essential information for authors and we recommend that you take the time to read them before submitting content to the npj Series. These instructions refer to Articles. Separate guidelines are available for other content types, Collections and Special Issues, and Matters Arising.

Your initial submission does not need to be specially formatted, as long as the study is described in a way that is suitable for editorial assessment and peer review (Reviewers generally prefer figures inserted within the text at appropriate positions).We accept initial submissions in PDF and Word formats, and we can accept TeX/LaTeX files at the acceptance stage; if you are using TeX/LaTeX, please submit compiled PDFs.

Editorial policies

The Nature Portfolio journals' editorial policies for primary scientific research can be found on the pages listed below. The Nature Portfolio includes all journals with Nature in their name, the Communications journals, the npj series, Scientific Reports and Scientific Data. A list of these journals and a description of the relationship between them can be found here. In August 2015, the Nature Portfolio journals became members of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We will be guided by COPE guidelines, however the Nature Portfolio journals will continue to make independent decisions based on our existing policies and principles.

For details on the editorial policies of other any non-Nature-Portfolio journal on nature.com, please visit their website.

Communicate with respect

Only through relationships based upon mutual respect can we build trust and deliver quality publishing products and services to the communities we serve.

Authorship

The Nature Portfolio journals' authorship policy (including Authorship: inclusion & ethics in global research).

Competing interests

Nature Portfolio journals' competing interests policies.

Ethics and Biosecurity

Nature Portfolio journals' editorial policies on publishing primary research reporting experiments on living organisms; and on biosecurity and bioethics.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Nature Portfolio journals' policies on the use of artificial intelligence.

Reporting standards and availability of data, materials, code and protocols

Nature Portfolio journals' policy on availability of materials and data, and reporting requirements for life sciences research articles.

Image integrity and standards

Nature Portfolio journals' policies and guidelines on digital images and their manipulation.

Plagiarism and duplicate publication

The Nature Portfolio journals' policies on plagiarism and on providing due credit for published and unpublished data.

Corrections, Retractions and Matters Arising

Nature Portfolio journals' policy on corrections, retractions and other amendments to published material.

Peer Review

Nature Portfolio journals' advice for peer-reviewers, and policies relevant to the peer-review process.

Confidentiality

The Nature Portfolio journals' policies on confidentiality.

Acknowledgements 

The Nature Portfolio journals’ acknowledgements policies.

Appeals & Complaints 

The Nature Portfolio journals’ appeals and complaints policies.

Preprints & Conference Proceedings

Nature Portfolio journals' policy on preprints and conference proceedings.

Press and embargo policies

Nature Portfolio journals' policy on authors' communication with the media and at scientific meetings.

Self archiving and license to publish

Nature Portfolio license to publish policy, and conditions of re-use, for authors.

Collections and Special Issues

Clinical Research

Nature Portfolio journals' policy on clinical research.

Act with integrity

Nature portfolio journals' policy on Act with integrity.

Guide to Authors

This section will help you when preparing your manuscript for initial submission and resubmission to one of the npj Series journals. Please ensure that you familiarise yourself with our Editorial and Publishing policies and our Submission Guidelines before submitting your work.

Manuscript submissions and relations to other Nature Portfolio journals

The npj Series journals are open access Nature Portfolio journals published by Springer Nature. For information on the journal aims and scope, as well as our content types, please refer to the about the journal section.

Please see our submission guidelines for key information on submitting primary research for publication in the npj Series journals. Authors are encouraged to include completed reporting summaries and editorial policy checklists at the time of submission. To submit your manuscript, please use our online submission system.

Each npj Series journal is editorially independent. The Editors make their own decisions, independently of the other Nature Portfolio journals. If a paper is rejected from one Nature Portfolio journal, the authors can use our manuscript transfer service to submit the paper to another journal.

For more information, please consult the following:

Details of the manuscript transfer service

Listing of all Nature Portfolio journals

A general explanation of the relationship between the Nature Portfolio journals

Editorial and Publishing policies

As part of the Nature Portfolio, all npj Series journals are guided by the Nature Portfolio editorial policies. Submission of a manuscript to npj Digital Medicine implies that all authors have read and approved their content and that the manuscript conforms to our editorial policies.

Authorship provides credit for a researcher's contributions to a study and carries accountability. Guidance and criteria for authorship can be found in our editorial policies. The individual contributions of authors to the manuscript should be specified in this section, as well as any equal contributions or shared supervision.  Please use initials to refer to each author's contribution in this section.

In the interest of transparency and to help readers form their own judgements of potential bias, Nature Portfolio journals require authors to declare any competing financial and/or non-financial interests in relation to the work described. The corresponding author is responsible for submitting a mandatory, signed, competing interests statement on behalf of all authors of the paper upon submission. Competing interests are defined as financial and non-financial interests that could directly undermine, or be perceived to undermine the objectivity, integrity and value of a publication, through a potential influence on the judgements and actions of authors with regard to objective data presentation, analysis and interpretation. Please read the full policy for guidance, which gives more information on how competing interests are defined and how it applies to authors, Peer-Reviewers, Editors, external Editors and editorial board members. All such interests have to be declared and if no such interest exists, this must also be declared upon submission.

Nature Portfolio journals' editorial policies on publishing primary research reporting experiments on living organisms, and on dual use research of concern.

An inherent principle of publication is that others should be able to replicate and build upon the authors' published claims. Please note that all published manuscripts reporting original research in Nature Portfolio journals must include a data availability statement. The data availability statement must make the conditions of access to the “minimum dataset” that are necessary to interpret, verify and extend the research in the article, transparent to readers. This statement must be submitted with your manuscript. Please see the full policy for more information. Authors who need help understanding our data sharing policies, help finding a suitable data repository, or help organizing and sharing research data can access Springer Nature’s Author Support portal for additional guidance.

The npj Series journals advocate for the complete and transparent reporting of research. Please see our policies here and here for further information regarding our reporting requirements. For health and life sciences, the following checklists must be completed and submitted with your manuscript before peer review, and made available to the Editors and Reviewers.

We strongly recommend that authors refer to the minimum reporting guidelines for health research hosted by the EQUATOR Network when preparing their manuscript, where applicable. We strongly encourage the use of the following checklists and reporting guidelines:

In addition, journals may mandate that other reporting guidelines are followed and the exact requirements may vary depending on the journal; please contact the journal for any questions.

The Nature Portfolio journals' policies and guidelines on digital images and their manipulation.

The Nature Portfolio journals' policy on corrections, retractions and other amendments to published material.

The Nature Portfolio journals' advice for Reviewers, and policies relevant to the peer-review process.

Acknowledgements

The Nature Portfolio journals' policy on preprints and conference proceedings.

The Nature Portfolio journals' policy on authors' communication with the media and at scientific meetings.

Self archiving and licence to publish

The Nature Portfolio licence to publish policy, and conditions of re-use, for authors.

Please note that any additional or different policy requirements are stated in our Submission Guidelines, so it is important to read and follow these instructions carefully before submitting your work. We reserve the right to decline publication of a paper even after it has been accepted if it becomes apparent that there are serious problems with the scientific content or violations of our editorial and publishing policies.

When you submit a manuscript to * npj Digital Medicine*, its content must not significantly overlap with any other papers from you or your co-authors’ that are under consideration or in press at other journals, with the exception of conference abstracts. If you submit a related manuscript to any other journal while the submission to

is under consideration, you must send us a copy of the related manuscript and details of its progress towards publication. We encourage the posting of the pre-review version of the manuscript on preprint servers and this is not viewed as compromising the novelty of the submitted work.

npj Digital Medicine## Open Access

open accesspage.

Guide for Reviewers

General policies

A general peer-review policy for all Nature Portfolio journals is available.

Online manuscript review

We ask reviewers to submit their comments via our online submission system using the link provided in the editor's email. If you need assistance, please contact the journal's editorial office.

Criteria for publication

To be published in npj Digital Medicine, a paper should meet several general criteria:

The review process

All submitted manuscripts are read in full by the editors. As peer review requires substantial investment of time and effort, we send only those papers that seem most likely to meet our criteria for publication to formal review. Those papers judged by the editors to be of insufficient interest to the specific field, or otherwise inappropriate, are rejected promptly without external review. This initial selection also saves authors time by allowing them to pursue publication in a more suitable venue more quickly.

Reviewed manuscripts are sent to at least two, and typically three, reviewers. The editors consider the reviewers' advice when making a decision on the paper. Papers may be rejected after review, or the authors could be invited to revise their work and resubmit. Once all issues raised in review and by the editors have been resolved and the paper meets all standards for publication in the journal, a paper can be accepted.

Reviewers are welcome to recommend a particular course of action, but they should bear in mind that the editors are responsible for making the decision on the paper. Further, other reviewers may have different views, and the editors may have to make a decision after weighing conflicting advice. We ask that reviewers provide us with the information on which a decision should be based. Setting out the arguments for and against publication is often as helpful as a direct recommendation. Our primary responsibility is to serve our readers and the scientific community at large, and as such, we must evaluate the merits of each paper in the context of the others also under consideration. Editorial decisions are not a matter of counting votes or numerical rank assessments, and we do not always follow the majority recommendation. We evaluate the strength of the arguments raised by each reviewer and by the authors, and we may also consider other information not available to either party.

We take reviewers' criticisms very seriously, and in particular, we are very reluctant to disregard technical concerns. We may go back to reviewers for further advice, particularly in cases where there are disagreements, or where the authors believe they have been misunderstood on points of fact. We therefore ask that you are willing to provide follow-up advice as requested. We are very aware, however, that it is not reasonable for you to be drawn into prolonged disputes, so we try to keep consultation to the minimum we judge necessary to provide a fair hearing for the authors. We may also occasionally bring in additional reviewers to resolve disputes, but we prefer to avoid doing so unless there is a specific issue on which we absolutely must have further advice.

We routinely inform reviewers of our decisions and send copies of the other referees' reports by email. Reviewers who are overruled should realize that this does not imply any lack of confidence in their judgment; it is not uncommon for experts to disagree, and in the absence of a consensus, the editors must still reach a decision.

When you agree to review a paper, we consider this a commitment to review subsequent revisions as well. However, we assess revised papers carefully, and will not send them to re-review if it seems that the authors have not made a serious attempt to address the criticisms raised in the previous assessment.

Selecting reviewers

Reviewer selection is critical to the review process, and we base our choice on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations and our own previous experience of a reviewer's performance. For instance, we seek reviewers who are timely, careful and critical but fair.

Confidentiality

We ask reviewers to treat the review process as strictly confidential, and not to discuss the manuscript with anyone not directly involved in the review. It is acceptable to consult with laboratory colleagues, but please identify them to the editors when you submit your review. Consulting with experts from outside your own laboratory may be acceptable, but please check with the editors before doing so, to avoid involving anyone who may have been excluded by the authors.

Anonymity

We do not release reviewer identities to authors or to other reviewers, except when you intentionally sign your comments to authors. Signing of reviewer reports is entirely voluntary. Reviewer comments to the authors, whether signed or not, are subsequently shared with the other reviewers.

Authors should not make any attempts to determine the identities of anonymous reviewers or confront reviewers. For those reviewers that do prefer to remain anonymous, our own policy is to neither confirm nor deny any speculation about their identity.

Editing reviewers' reports

As a matter of policy, we do not suppress reviewer comments to the authors; any comments that were intended for the authors are transmitted, regardless of what we may think of the content. On rare occasions, we may edit a report to remove offensive language or comments that reveal confidential information about other matters. We seek to ensure a constructive review process, and therefore ask reviewers to avoid saying anything that may cause needless offence; conversely, authors should recognize that criticisms are not necessarily unfair simply because they are expressed in robust language.

We avoid reviewers whom the authors have excluded, for whatever reason, within our guidelines. We also avoid reviewers who have had recent or ongoing collaborations with the authors, who have commented on drafts of the manuscript, who are in direct competition to publish the same finding, who we know to have a history of dispute with the authors or who have a financial interest in the outcome. It is not possible for the editors to know of all possible biases so we ask reviewers to draw our attention to anything that might affect their review, and to decline to review in cases where you cannot be objective or where you could ultimately be perceived to be biased.

We recognize, however, that competing interests are not always clear-cut, and the above circumstances need not automatically undermine the validity of a report. Indeed, the people best-qualified to evaluate a paper are often those closest to the field, and a sceptical attitude towards a particular claim does not mean that a reviewer cannot be persuaded by new evidence.

Reviewers who have reviewed a paper for another journal might feel that it is unfair to the authors for them to re-review it for npj Digital Medicine. We disagree; the fact that two journals have independently identified a particular person as well-qualified to review a paper does not, in our view, decrease the validity of his or her opinion.

Other resources

For anyone relatively new to peer review or wishing to refresh their skills, we recommend the free online Masterclasses course on Peer Review.

Journal Information

Abstracting & Indexing

Aims and Scope

Find out about the journal's aims and scope.

Supporting the Sustainable Developmental Goals

We are proud to acknowledge that over 50% of the articles published in npj Digital Medicine in 2025 were related to one or more of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Springer Nature supports the SDGs through a dedicated SDG Programme and is a signatory of the SDG Publishers Compact.

Content types

Please see the detailed outline of the content types that * npj Digital Medicine* considers.

About the Editors

international

Editorsspan the breadth of the research areas covered by the journal.

Open Access

npj Digital Medicine is a fully open access journal. More on Creative Commons Attribution licenses and the benefits of publishing open access can be found in this section.

Article Processing Charges

To allow immediate global open access to all articles, * npj Digital Medicine* levies an

article processing charge(APC). Current APCs and waiver information are available in this section.

Journal Impact

Find out about journal metrics for * npj Digital Medicine*.

About the Partner

partnershipwith Seoul National University Bundang Hospital.

About Nature Partner Journals

The npj Series are online-only, open access journals that drive high-impact open science.

Authorship

On this page

Authorship

Authorship provides credit for a researcher's contributions to a study and carries accountability. Authors are expected to fulfil the criteria below (adapted from McNutt et al., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Feb 2018, 201715374; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1715374115; licensed under CC BY 4.0):

Each author is expected to have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the creation of new software used in the work; or have drafted the work or substantively revised it

AND to have approved the submitted version (and any substantially modified version that involves the author's contribution to the study);

AND to have agreed both 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, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature.

Nature Portfolio journals encourage collaboration with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted, and expect their inclusion as co-authors when they fulfil all authorship criteria described above. Contributors who do not meet all criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgements section.

Nature Portfolio journals reserve the right not to consider non-primary research manuscripts that have been authored by medical writers. Writing assistance should be acknowledged in all article types.

Nature Portfolio journals do not require all authors of a research paper to sign the letter of submission, nor do they impose an order on the list of authors. Submission to a Nature Portfolio journal is taken by the journal to mean that all the listed authors have agreed all of the contents, including the author list and author contribution statements. The corresponding author is responsible for having ensured that this agreement has been reached that all authors have agreed to be so listed, and have approved the manuscript submission to the journal, and for managing all communication between the journal and all co-authors, before and after publication. The corresponding author is also responsible for submitting a competing interests' statement on behalf of all authors of the paper; please refer to our competing interests' policy for more information.

It is expected that the corresponding author (and on multi-group collaborations, at least one member of each collaborating group, usually the most senior member of each submitting group or team, who accepts responsibility for the contributions to the manuscript from that team) will be responsible for the following with respect to data, code and materials: (adapted from McNutt et al., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Feb 2018, 201715374; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1715374115; licensed under CC BY 4.0):

At submission, the corresponding author must include written permission from the authors of the work concerned for mention of any unpublished material cited in the manuscript (for example others' data, in press manuscripts, personal communications or work in preparation). The corresponding author also must clearly identify at submission any material within the manuscript (such as figures) that has been published previously elsewhere and provide written permission from authors of the prior work and/or publishers, as appropriate, for the re-use of such material.

After acceptance, the corresponding author is responsible for the accuracy of all content in the proof, including the names of co-authors, addresses and affiliations.

After publication, the corresponding author is the point of contact for queries about the published paper. It is their responsibility to inform all co-authors of any matters arising in relation to the published paper and to ensure such matters are dealt with promptly. Authors of published material have a responsibility to inform the journal immediately if they become aware of any aspects that requires correction.

Any changes to the author list after submission, such as a change in the order of the authors or the deletion or addition of authors, must be approved by every author. Changes of authorship by adding or deleting authors, and/or changes in Corresponding Author, and/or changes in the sequence of authors are not permitted after acceptance of a manuscript. Nature Portfolio journal editors are not in a position to investigate or adjudicate authorship disputes before or after publication. Such disagreements, if they cannot be resolved amongst authors, should be directed to the relevant institutional authority.

The primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done. If an author has subsequently moved, the current address may also be stated. Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Author names are listed in Roman alphabet characters as standard. Nature Portfolio journals can support presentation of author names using non-Roman characters in parentheses after the Roman-character spelling; for example, ‘Mina Razzak (مينا رزاق)’. Currently supported scripts are: Arabic, Chinese, Cyrillic, Devanagari, Greek, Hebrew, Hangul, Japanese and Persian. This will appear in the online HTML version of the manuscript only.

Authorship: inclusion & ethics in global research

Nature Portfolio journals encourage collaboration with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted, and expect their inclusion as co-authors when they fulfill all authorship criteria described above. Contributors who do not meet all criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgements section. We urge researchers to carefully consider researcher contributions and authorship criteria when involved in multi-region collaborations involving local researchers so as to promote greater equity in research collaborations.

We encourage researchers to follow the recommendations set out in the Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings when designing, executing and reporting their research and to provide a disclosure statement in their manuscript that covers the aspects listed below (drawn from the Global Code of Conduct)  Editors may at their discretion ask authors to provide a disclosure statement taking these questions into account; the disclosure can be requested during peer review, shared with reviewers and published in the final paper as an “Ethics & Inclusion statement” in the Methods section. Our general policies on Research ethics and Reporting standards can be found here and here.

Has the research included local researchers throughout the research process – study design, study implementation, data ownership, intellectual property and authorship of publications? Is the research locally relevant and has this been determined in collaboration with local partners? Please describe whether roles and responsibilities were agreed amongst collaborators ahead of the research and whether any capacity-building plans for local researchers were discussed. Would this research have been severely restricted or prohibited in the setting of the researchers? If yes, please provide details on specific exceptions granted for this research in agreement with local stakeholders. Where appropriate, has the study been approved by a local ethics review committee? If not, please explain the reasons. Where animal welfare regulations, environmental protection and biorisk-related regulations in the local research setting were insufficient compared to the setting of the researchers, please describe if research was undertaken to the higher standards. Does the research result in stigmatization, incrimination, discrimination or otherwise personal risk to participants? If yes, describe provisions to ensure safety and well- being of participants. If research involves health, safety, security or other risk to researchers, describe any risk management plans undertaken. Have any benefit sharing measures been discussed in case biological materials, cultural artefacts or associated traditional knowledge has been transferred out of the country? Please indicate if you have taken local and regional research relevant to your study into account in citations.

Consortia authorship

A collective of authors can be listed as a consortium. If necessary, individual authors can be listed in both the main author list and as a member of a consortium. All authors within a consortium must be listed at the end of the paper. If it is necessary to include a list of consortium members that did not directly contribute to the paper, this list can be placed in the Supplementary Information. To facilitate submission of manuscripts with large author lists, please consult the journal editor before submission.

Author contribution statements

Nature Portfolio journals encourage transparency by publishing author contribution statements. Authors are required to include a statement of responsibility in the manuscript, including review-type articles, that specifies the contribution of every author. The level of detail varies; some disciplines produce manuscripts that comprise discrete efforts readily articulated in detail, whereas other fields operate as group efforts at all stages. Author contribution statements are included in the published paper. This Nature Editorial describes the policy in more detail.

Nature Portfolio journals also allow one set of co-authors to be specified as having contributed equally to the work and one set of co-authors to be specified as having jointly supervised the work. Other equal contributions are best described in author contribution statements. Corresponding authors have specific responsibilities (described above).

Author identification

As part of our efforts to improve transparency and unambiguous attribution of scholarly contributions, corresponding authors of published papers must provide their Open Researcher and Contributor Identifier (ORCID) iD; co-authors are encouraged to provide ORCiD iDs. More information about Springer Nature’s support for ORCiD iDs and journals participating in the ORCiD mandate can be found here.

Author name change

An author who has changed their name for reasons such as gender transition or religious conversion may request for their name, pronouns and other relevant biographical information to be corrected on papers published prior to the change. The author can choose for this correction to happen silently, in which case there will be no note flagging the change on either the pdf or the html of the paper, or alternatively they may do so by a formal public Author Correction.

For authors who’ve changed their name and wish to correct it on their published works, please see SNCS Contact Form: Inclusive Name Change Policy : Springer Nature Support.

Nature Portfolio journals' editorials:

Nature is encouraging authors of papers to say who did what. Nature. Author contributions, 3 June 1999.