Journal of Ophthalmic Science · Author manual
Instructions for Authors
Prepare a submission that lets editors and reviewers assess the ophthalmic question, methods, ethics, images, data and clinical interpretation without avoidable ambiguity.
ISSN 2470-0436Single-blind peer reviewCC BY 4.0DOI prefix 10.14302
Submission docket
- Confirm that the primary question fits ophthalmic or vision science.
- Select the article category that matches the design and evidence.
- Prepare complete ethics, consent, funding, conflict and data statements.
- Upload readable manuscript, figure and supplementary files through one approved route.
Choose the article type from the submission system
The category should describe the manuscript that has actually been prepared. It does not change the level of ethical, methodological or reporting scrutiny.
- Research Article
- Select Research in ManuscriptZone for original clinical, diagnostic, surgical, epidemiological, translational or validation research.
- Review Article
- Select Review for a systematic, evidence-based or critical synthesis with an ophthalmic conclusion.
- Case Report
- Select Case Report for a clinically instructive presentation, diagnostic course, response or adverse event reported with the CARE checklist and appropriate consent.
- Short Communication
- Select Short Communication for a concise but complete and interpretable finding. Some earlier JOS archive records use the label In Brief.
- Clinical Case Images
- Select Clinical Case Images for a focused image-led report with diagnostic context, consent, image-integrity disclosure and a clear teaching point.
A surgical technique is submitted under the category that matches its evidence, such as Research or Case Report. It is not a separate ManuscriptZone category.
Build a manuscript that can be evaluated
Use clear ophthalmic terminology, define abbreviations at first use and distinguish measured findings from interpretation. Claims should remain proportionate to the design and sample.
Title page
Provide the article title, each author’s full name and affiliation, the corresponding author’s contact details, and ORCID iDs where available.
Abstract and keywords
Summarize the question, methods, principal findings and conclusion. Research articles should use a structure appropriate to their design. Choose specific ophthalmic keywords.
Introduction
Define the ophthalmic problem, the evidence gap and the study objective without overstating novelty or patient benefit.
Methods
Describe design, setting, participants or specimens, eligibility, interventions, comparators, outcomes, imaging methods, statistical analysis and ethics.
Results
Report participant flow, baseline information, primary and secondary outcomes, estimates with uncertainty, missing data, harms and protocol deviations where relevant.
Discussion and conclusion
Interpret the findings against the evidence, explain ophthalmic relevance and limitations, and avoid conclusions that exceed the data.
| Article type | Main-text limit | Abstract | References | Figures and tables |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Research Article | 5,000 words; Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion and Conclusions | Structured, up to 300 words; 3–8 keywords | Up to 50 | Up to 8 combined |
| Review Article | 6,000 words; include methods or search strategy and a structured synthesis | Up to 300 words; 3–8 keywords | Up to 100 | Up to 10 combined |
| Case Report | 2,500 words; Introduction, Case Presentation, Discussion and Conclusion | Unstructured, up to 200 words; 3–6 keywords | Up to 25 | Up to 6 combined |
| Short Communication | 2,000 words; concise IMRaD structure | Up to 200 words; 3–6 keywords | Up to 25 | Up to 4 combined |
| Clinical Case Images | 1,000 words; Case Summary, Image Findings, Diagnosis, Discussion and Learning Point | Up to 150 words; 3–5 keywords | Up to 10 | Up to 4 figures and 1 table |
Main-text limits exclude the abstract, references, tables, figure legends and supplementary material. Editors may request a shorter or longer presentation when the study design requires it.
Use the reporting framework that matches the study
A completed checklist does not replace clear methods. Include the relevant checklist and flow diagram or protocol information where the study design calls for them.
| Study design | Expected framework | Ophthalmic emphasis |
|---|---|---|
| Randomized trial | CONSORT and prospective public registration | Intervention detail, prespecified outcomes, harms and visual-function measures |
| Observational study | STROBE | Selection, confounding, follow-up, missing data and outcome definitions |
| Diagnostic accuracy | STARD | Index test, reference standard, masking, thresholds and estimates with confidence intervals |
| Systematic review | PRISMA | Protocol or registration, reproducible search, selection flow and risk-of-bias assessment |
| Case report | CARE | Timeline, diagnostic reasoning, consent and a bounded clinical learning point |
Use Vancouver-style numbered references consistently. Journal article example: Smith AB, Jones CD. Article title. Journal Title. 2026;3(3):1–10. doi:10.xxxx/xxxxx. Book example: Brown EF. Book Title. 2nd ed. Publisher; 2025. Verify author names, titles, years, volume, pages and DOI links.
Define the analysis population, sample-size basis, primary and secondary outcomes, missing-data handling and multiplicity. Report exact P values where appropriate, effect estimates with 95% confidence intervals, and the statistical software and version. Distinguish prespecified from exploratory analyses.
Protect participants, patients and the clinical record
Human-participant research should comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and identify institutional ethics approval or a documented exemption where applicable.
- State the approving institution, committee and reference identifier where available.
- Describe informed-consent procedures or the basis for a waiver.
- Register interventional clinical trials in an accepted public registry at or before the first participant provides consent for enrollment; report the registry name, registration number and date.
- Obtain appropriate written publication consent for identifiable periocular or facial images.
- Do not treat cropping, masking or placing a bar over the eyes as a substitute for consent.
- Disclose funding, device, pharmaceutical and other relevant competing interests.
Image acquisition
Identify the device or modality, acquisition settings, grading or adjudication method, calibration and quality-control process needed to interpret the image.
Image processing
Describe enhancement, segmentation, compositing or other processing. Adjustments must not obscure, create or misrepresent a clinical finding. Remove patient identifiers from images, filenames and DICOM headers before upload.
AI-assisted work
Identify AI-assisted writing, analysis, enhancement or segmentation and explain the tool’s role. Authors remain responsible for accuracy; an AI tool cannot be an author.
Data availability
Include a statement explaining where data can be accessed or why legal, ethical or privacy restrictions prevent public sharing.
Prepare a complete submission packet
Files should be readable, consistently labeled and free of information that conflicts with the declarations entered in the submission system.
Main manuscript
Submit DOC, DOCX or RTF. LaTeX submissions should include source files and a matching PDF. Include title-page information, abstract, text, references, table and figure citations, and all declarations.
Figures and tables
Upload figures as TIFF, JPEG, PNG or EPS: at least 300 dpi for color or grayscale images and 600 dpi for line art. Tables must be editable text, not images, with titles, units and notes.
Supplementary material
Use widely readable formats for datasets, protocols, analysis plans, videos or additional imaging. Cite every file in the manuscript and include a brief README for specialized formats.
Cover letter
State the manuscript’s fit with JOS, identify related submissions or preprints, disclose prior contact with the journal and flag clinically sensitive material.
Declarations required where applicable
- Author contributions using clear contributor roles
- Funding sources and grant identifiers
- Financial and non-financial competing interests
- Ethics approval, informed consent and publication consent
- Clinical-trial registration
- Data and materials availability
- AI-tool use and image-processing disclosure
- Permissions for reused copyrighted material
Submission, revision and publication
Use one approved route: ManuscriptZone (primary), the simple manuscript submission form (alternative), or info@openaccesspub.org for assisted submission. Do not create duplicate records.
Upload files and declarations and complete author, affiliation and correspondence details.
The journal screens scope, completeness, ethics and integrity before appropriate manuscripts enter review.
When revision is invited, upload a clean manuscript and a point-by-point response with page or line references.
After acceptance, verify names, data, images, legends, links and supplementary files in the production proof.
Manuscripts that proceed to external peer review are normally evaluated by at least two independent ophthalmology specialists. Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript and remain independent of charges, memberships and optional services.
Questions about scope, files or an active manuscript may be sent to info@openaccesspub.org. Include the manuscript identifier when one has been assigned.
Ready to prepare the submission record?
Use the JOS submission page for the final readiness checklist and the verified ManuscriptZone destination.
Review the submission page