EIKI MANUSCRIPT GUIDE · CHOOSE THE RIGHT FORMAT
The right format.
A clearer contribution.
Compare article types, understand the publisher guidance and prepare work that fits your selected journal.
Begin with the purpose of your work
A manuscript type tells readers and reviewers what kind of contribution to expect. Choose it according to what the paper actually does: reports original findings, synthesises evidence, examines a case, evaluates a book or advances a reasoned perspective.
The formats below reflect EIKI’s publisher guidance. Acceptance of an article type, precise limits, abstract structure and file requirements depend on the selected journal. Its current instructions take precedence where they differ.
AT A GLANCE
Question → Contribution → Format
-
01
Question
What does the paper help readers understand?
-
02
Contribution
Is the main contribution new evidence, synthesis, analysis or commentary?
-
03
Format
Select the journal-supported article type that fits that contribution.
Manuscript length and presentation guidance
Use these ranges when planning, then check the journal instructions. Check how the journal counts manuscript words, including the abstract, captions and references. Original research has a suggested range rather than a universal fixed limit.
| Type | Words | Abstract | Figures/tables | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original research | 3,000–10,000 | 200–300 words | Typically 5–6 | Up to 100 |
| Review | 2,000–5,000 | 200–300 words | Up to 6 | Up to 70 |
| Case study | Up to 4,500 | 200–300 words | Up to 5 | Up to 20 |
| Book review | 500–2,000 | Check journal | Check journal | Check journal |
| Letters / short reports / communications | Usually 500–1,500 | Check journal | Check journal | Check journal |
| Viewpoint / opinion | Up to 2,000 | Check journal | Up to 3 | Up to 10 |
| Editorial | Up to 1,500 | Check journal | Up to 1 | Up to 10 |
Plan with this guidance. Follow your journal’s instructions.
A journal may require a shorter abstract, a particular structure or a different count. If your contribution needs an exception, discuss it with the editorial office before submission.
Original research: report what you investigated
Original research articles present new findings with enough detail for readers to understand how they were obtained and what they mean. Typical sections are Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion and Conclusions, with future recommendations where useful.
- Introduction: establish the question, relevant context and objectives.
- Methods: describe design, materials or participants, procedures and analysis.
- Results: present the findings accurately, with relevant tables and figures.
- Discussion: interpret the evidence in relation to prior work and limitations.
- Conclusions: state the contribution without extending beyond the findings.
Non-empirical work may require a different structure appropriate to its discipline. Describe the analytical approach and evidence base clearly rather than forcing a conceptual paper into an unsuitable experimental format.
Reviews: make the synthesis transparent
Reviews bring existing research together around a topic or question. They can offer new insights through synthesis, but should not be described as reporting newly collected primary observations unless that is genuinely part of the work.
NARRATIVE / LITERATURE REVIEW
Explain the scholarly landscape
Organise relevant literature, compare perspectives and identify gaps. Explain the review’s scope and how sources were selected rather than presenting an unexplained collection of citations.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Answer a defined question
Use explicit search, eligibility and synthesis methods. Report enough detail for readers to assess the completeness and limitations of the process.
SCOPING REVIEW
Map the available evidence
Examine the extent, characteristics and gaps of a body of literature. Match methods to the mapping objective and report the selection process transparently.
CRITICAL REVIEW
Develop a reasoned interpretation
Evaluate important arguments or evidence and develop a supported conceptual perspective, hypothesis or model. Make the basis for selection and critique clear.
Meta-analysis is an analytical approach
A meta-analysis statistically combines suitable study results. It is often part of a systematic review, rather than a label for any review with numbers. Explain the rationale for pooling, analytical choices and limitations; combining studies does not automatically remove bias or make unlike studies comparable.
PRISMA guidance supports transparent systematic-review reporting. Choose relevant extensions where appropriate, such as for scoping reviews.
Other ways to contribute
Case studies
A case study offers a descriptive, exploratory or explanatory examination of a case or problem. Explain its context, evidence, analytical approach, findings and implications. Distinguish observations from interpretation and connect the discussion to relevant literature.
For clinical case reports, protect privacy and provide appropriate consent for publication. CARE reporting guidance can help with completeness.
Book reviews
Identify the book and assess its argument, evidence, quality and usefulness to the journal’s readership. A review should go beyond a chapter summary to discuss strengths, limitations and significance.
Letters, research letters and short reports
Use these for a concise finding or focused contribution. Preserve essential methodological and ethical information even when space is limited. A letter responding to a published article should identify the work and explain its specific point.
Viewpoints and opinions
Present a clear perspective on an issue or development, supported by relevant literature and reasoned argument. Distinguish opinion from established evidence and acknowledge important counterarguments.
Editorials
Editorials offer concise commentary on issues relevant to the journal or its published articles and are commonly written by editors. Contact the editorial office about suitability or invitation requirements before preparing one.
Match reporting guidance to the research design
Health-science reporting guidance helps identify information readers need to evaluate a study. It does not replace ethical conduct, appropriate methods or the journal template.
- CONSORT 2025 / SPIRIT 2025: randomised trials and trial protocols.
- STROBE: observational studies.
- PRISMA: systematic reviews and relevant extensions.
- CARE: clinical case reports.
- ARRIVE: animal research.
Use the EQUATOR library to find a guideline suited to your design. Humanities and other disciplines should use the relevant scholarly conventions and journal requirements.
Before you upload the manuscript
- The journal supports the chosen article type.
- The length, abstract and layout follow its current instructions.
- Keywords, figures, tables and acknowledgments are complete.
- Visuals remain understandable when printed or viewed without colour.
- Required supplementary files and reporting checklists are supplied.
- Spelling, grammar and technical terminology have been checked.
- In-text citations and the reference list match in both directions.
- Permissions, interests, funding, consent and ethics declarations are included as applicable.
- Meaningful AI assistance is disclosed under EIKI policy.
- Any optional reviewer suggestions follow journal rules and identify genuine, independent experts.
Download the manuscript template → · Read the author guide →
