The Rapid Report manuscript category is reserved for short papers presenting important new findings which could potentially have a major impact on the field. The manuscript does not need to tell a complete story, but must be compelling, innovative and novel. The manuscript may contain 4000 words including references and a total of 4 figures and/or tables. Peer reviewers will be asked to complete a review of a Rapid Report within 10 days. If encouraged to revise, authors will be asked to submit first revisions 14 days after first decision. A final decision on first revisions will be rendered by the editors within 5 days of resubmission. Authors will be encouraged to fully comply with reviewer comments and submit only one revision. All Rapid Reports accepted for publication will be highlighted in the online journal as “featured papers” and have the option for a podcast at the author’s and editors’ discretion.
Note: Only video files are permitted as supplemental data for Rapid Reports. Other types of supplemental files (e.g., figures, tables, appendices, data sets) are not permitted.
Research articles present important new research results including the entire contents of a research project. Research articles include an abstract, an introduction, methods and results sections, a discussion, and relevant citations. Large data sets are welcome for inclusion in the online publication. Articles are peer-reviewed.
This category of article serves as a forum in which to disseminate new and original lines of thinking in physiology. These short articles go beyond the scope of invited reviews and should present original ideas that can be derived from our current knowledge base. Some Perspectives articles may challenge current dogma and will be considered for publication based on the scientific merit of the argument presented. These Perspective articles will be subject to peer review. Some articles will be invited, but unsolicited articles are welcome. Perspectives must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed. Perspectives should not include original, unpublished data. In all cases, determining whether a proposed Perspective is within scope and acceptable for publication is a matter committed to the discretion of the editors. These articles should be about 1,500 words long, excluding references, and may include two figures..
Research in physiology depends crucially on the development of new methods of data collection and analysis. Manuscripts submitted under this category should describe new methods for the recording, collection, and/or analysis of data relevant to understanding how the physiological system works. Manuscripts will be reviewed taking into consideration the following criteria:
- The novelty of the new method. Papers should not be minor incremental improvements of old methods, but have a real new component.
- The manuscript must describe the method in sufficient detail to enable others to implement or replicate the method or procedure.
- The manuscript should carefully describe the advantages and disadvantages of the new method, with its limitations and strengths laid out clearly for the reader.
- The manuscript must illustrate the use of the method to demonstrate that it actually works. It is not necessary to use the method in an extensive study of a biological problem, but a "proof of principle" demonstration is required. Where possible, the method should be applied to real physiological data.
- Manuscripts should be of the length required to meet these criteria. Extensive technical details, mathematical derivations, etc. can be placed into an Appendix if they will interrupt the flow of the manuscript but may be additionally helpful to others wishing to implement the technique.
Review articles provide synthesis of state-of-the-art knowledge in a defined area highlighting new questions and pointing to future research directions. They encompass examination of biological processes, systems, and models, and technologies for their study. The primary purpose is to educate readers by providing a comprehensive view of completed works presented in a concise, unified format; however, appropriate inclusion of unpublished data is permissible. Utilization of figures is encouraged. Typically, reviews are invited and all are peer-reviewed. Review articles must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed.
Please note that prior to review, all review articles will be examined for originality using CrossCheck screening software to compare the submitted text to all available literature, including previous publications from the same author(s).
Editorials provide commentary by the Editor, Associate Editors, and other scientists and experts on issues related to the Journal's mission as well as of general interest to our readers. Unsolicited editorials will be considered for publication. Acceptance will reside with the editors. Editorials must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed.
Editorial Focus articles are commentaries on papers of unusual interest published in the journal that were chosen by the Editor to be highlighted by a brief Editorial Focus commentary. They should describe the most important conclusions of the paper; place the paper into context with the current state-of-the-art; highlight controversial issues; when relevant, denote strengths and weaknesses of the paper; and review questions that remain to be addressed. Editorial Focus articles must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed.
Letters to the Editor
In all cases, determining whether a proposed Letter to the Editor is acceptable for publication is a matter committed to the discretion of the editors. Letters, including an informative title, should be short, approximately one journal column (500 words). Letters are reviewed by the appropriate editor and are subject to editing and possible abridgment. Letters to the Editor must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed. Letters to the Editor should not include original, unpublished data. If a proposed Letter is found acceptable, a copy will be sent to the author of the original article if applicable; that author will have an opportunity to provide a rebuttal with new material that will be considered for publication with the Letter. Letters to the Editor may also simply address matters of general interest to the readership.
Physiology in Medicine
Manuscripts submitted for the Physiology in Medicine series should discuss a relatively narrow aspect of basic physiology as it relates to the pathophysiology or treatment of a specific disease (or group of diseases). The disease in question should be one that the specialist in internal medicine commonly encounters in his/her practice. By emphasizing a strong connection between laboratory research and clinical medicine, we hope to stimulate interest in translational research among clinicians and to encourage medical students and young physicians to follow a scientific pathway in their careers. However, authors should be aware that the PIM articles will be designed to appeal primarily to clinicians who may not be specifically trained in current laboratory methods so that descriptions of laboratory methods and physiological processes must be accessible to an intelligent, medically trained nonexpert.
The main point of the article should be to describe how important scientific discoveries or principles have affected our understanding of a disease, with implications for diagnosis or treatment. We intend for these articles to be highly focused, usually making only a few teaching points, but doing so in a way that makes the knowledge stick in the readers’ memory. In addition to describing important aspects of laboratory research that have elucidated physiological mechanisms, the manuscripts should also detail the ways in which this knowledge has had an impact on our understanding of the way diseases develop, are diagnosed, or are treated in everyday practice.
Manuscripts for this series must be evidence based (with appropriate citations) rather than being based on expert opinion, although an expert interpretation of diverging points of view is often illuminating. We encourage the use of glossaries for explanation of terms that might be unfamiliar to the clinician. Liberal use of figures (in color if scientifically necessary) is also encouraged. We think that manuscripts in this series are often enhanced by collaboration between a bench researcher and a clinician, and for this reason we encourage joint authorship.
Manuscript length should not exceed 2,500 words plus tables and figures, with no more than 70 references. Graphics should be used liberally and should avoid excessive complexity. Because the articles are meant to be informative and to engage the clinician, they should be focused but not definitive, archival reviews. Each manuscript should conclude with a paragraph that summarizes the importance of the discussion for the clinician in easily understandable language.
References should be listed and cited in the style of the journals of the American Physiological Society. Authors should refer to the Instructions for Authors appropriate for the specific APS journal to which the PIM article will be submitted.
Various article types can be published under the following Categories, or headings:
Calls for Papers
Calls for Papers will have headings that change depending on the topic. Manuscripts of any type may be submitted in response to an announced Call for Papers. These manuscripts are peer reviewed, and are published together under the topic heading.
Manuscripts on the history of physiology may be submitted to the Editor.
Cores of Reproducibility in Physiology (CORP) – Invited review article
Experts will be invited to write a detailed, instructional paper that represents best practice in physiology for a particular method or equipment that is in broad, common use. This series of articles is available across all APS journals and is developed in response to the challenge to improve transparency and reproducibility in published research results. To build on the value of the collective “best practices the title of the paper should start with "Cores of Reproducibility in Physiology: ............." where the specific device or method would appear after the semicolon.
The following key elements, must be included:
- A description of the method/device and its purported use(s)
- Details regarding proper use, including calibration, validation, range, sensitivity, specificity, reproducibility (addressing variance of the method itself, within-subject variance and between-subject variance)
- Particular details of practical importance that may not be widely appreciated – especially where things can go wrong.
- A critical discussion of what the method/device can do if used properly
- A critical discussion of limitations of the method/device (what it cannot do or is not intended to do)
These invited articles will be peer reviewed with standard rigor and in light of meeting the above-listed criteria, and so will be accepted at the Editors’ discretion.