When most people hear the word “article” in the context of a scientific or medical journal, they are thinking about original research articles—that is, articles that report on experiments resulting in both novel and scientifically relevant information.
But this is far from the whole story. Other types of articles can be at least as important to a periodical, if not even more so.
Article types that are not original research can be divided into three other categories. The first is articles that report on existing literature, such as reviews and perspectives. The second category is shorter articles that do not require a full-length research piece—namely brief reports, communications, and case studies. And finally, there are informal, conversational article types that provide opinions and/or introductions; editorials, comments/replies, and commentaries are among the most prevalent in this group.
Existing Literature Breakdown and Analysis
When an author decides to write a scientific or medical article, there is likely to be a vast body of literature already in existence about the topic at hand. And sometimes, it makes less sense to pursue conducting new experiments that pertain to that topic and instead present an analysis of the experiments that have already been written about over the years. In the latter case, there are two main article types that could be the way to go:
Reviews. In some ways, reviews can be thought of as the polar opposite of research articles. For research articles, the entire purpose is to present novel findings—but with reviews, oftentimes, the guidelines specifically state that new data should not be included. That’s because the idea is to analyze existing data and experimental studies within the field, through a comprehensive analysis of all types of the field’s literature. The critique should include a wide range of all types of developments within the field: past, present, and looking toward the future.
Perspectives. Perspectives might be considered a “cousin” of reviews, since they both exist primarily to discuss prior literature. There are, however, some key distinctions. First, while reviews can be unsolicited, perspectives are most often written by authors who have been specifically invited to contribute. In addition, reviews usually look at all aspects of existing literature, whereas perspectives tend to most heavily focus on future directions of a particular field. This is largely because perspectives usually just cover a narrow scope of recent developments within a field, instead of looking at all literature—both older and newer—the way reviews usually do. Perspectives also generally have a more opinion-oriented tone, as opposed to reviews, which are designed to be much more objective.
Short and Sweet
In some instances, an author might decide that original research is the best way to go—but the studies/experiments aren’t lengthy or comprehensive enough to go the route of a full research article. Fortunately, there are several options for these types of scenarios when less is more:
Brief Reports. As the name implies, brief reports are short and to the point; they concisely summarize a study protocol and results with minimal (if any) graphics. In terms of structure, they closely resemble a miniature version of a research article. This makes them an ideal option for an author who wants to publish original research results but does not have enough content to fill up the word and/or graphic requirement for a full-blown research piece.
Communications. It might be helpful to think of the difference between communications and brief reports as analogous to the difference between reviews and perspectives—they are cousins but not twins. Both types of articles are relatively short, but with communications, timeliness is key; these submissions highlight groundbreaking information that should be disseminated to a public audience quickly. This means finding seasoned experts for peer review is critical, and the peer review process must be completed in an expedited manner. In addition, brief reports can focus on both preliminary and completed studies. But with communications, because they are centered around timeliness, they will usually deal with only preliminary experimental results.
Case Studies. These mainly apply to medical literature, dealing with the summary and analysis of one specific medical case involving a specific patient. Since they only pertain to one particular case and person, brevity is once again key (although keep in mind that in complex cases, there could be some exceptions to this rule).
Opinions and Introductions
For the previously mentioned article categories, a formal voice and tone are typically the norm. This generally means, for instance, that first-person pronouns are off limits, and contractions are used sparingly, if at all. And the general language shouldn’t sound like a conversation, but instead it should sound like written prose.
But in this final category of articles, those kinds of rules can—and often should—be broken or bent. They are less about presenting formal research to subject matter experts and more about engaging with a journal’s audience in a human capacity.
Commentaries. A commentary is usually written in response to a specific article or articles that have already been published. It provides in-depth analysis of the information or opinions expressed in the prior article. The analysis may or may not agree with the points and conclusions from the original submission—or maybe some of both. Either way, though, peer review is often necessary, since these articles are typically long and detailed enough to merit author revision and response.
Comments. This type of article has a similar name to aforementioned commentaries—but it’s often a totally different kind of submission and should be treated as such. Comments are designed to note a specific disagreement with a previously published article, as opposed to comments, which provide a much more comprehensive deep dive. Moreover, because comments are usually on the shorter side, they may or may not require peer review.
Editorials. Although these are almost always part of scholarly journals, their use isn’t limited to only academic publishing. That’s because their main purpose is to introduce and summarize the periodical, as opposed to presenting or analyzing anything scientific or medical. If, for example, the periodical is a special issue, an editorial might give a synopsis of what that special issue is about. Or, even for a regular issue, it could summarize the theme or direction of what the associate editors (and/or guest editors, if there are any) wanted to communicate through the articles’ topics. While it’s not unheard of for these types of submissions to require peer review, they usually don’t, and they’re typically written by those at the top of the editorial board, such as the EIC and/or managing editor.
Why It’s Important
Before submitting a scholarly medical or scientific article, choosing the correct article type is crucial. If a critique of an existing body of literature is submitted as a research article—and includes numerous figures or schemes that have been taken from that already published literature body—it will likely be immediately rejected for lack of novelty and/or plagiarism. But if that same critique is instead submitted as a review or a perspective, it’s much more likely to make it through the peer review process (assuming, of course, the proper permissions and credit lines are given for any reused graphics).
Or maybe an author submits a brief article that refutes the position given in one already published piece, calling it a “commentary.” This type of submission, however, is more appropriate for the “comment” designation. While both types of submissions are similar in some ways (e.g., both often invite a reply from the author of the original article), it’s important to choose wisely between the two, in order to minimize the chances of immediate rejection due to an article type that doesn’t quite fit.
It’s also important to check each individual journal’s specific policies about article types before submitting, since different journals might have slightly different nomenclature for types of submission. Comments, for instance, are sometimes called “letters to the editor” instead. Or, for some publications, comments and commentaries might all fit under one single article type without a distinction. The same might be true for reviews and perspectives, or brief reports vs communications; although certain differences and nuances do exist, many journals use only one or the other as an official submission type.
The Bottom Line
An argument could, for sure, be made that picking the correct article designation is one of the most challenging—if not the most challenging—aspects of the process of attempting to get an article accepted and published. But all it takes is a little logic, and possibly a little research, to take that first step in the right direction!
By Anne Brenner
