Avoiding Desk Rejection of a Manuscript

Abstract

Next on my list is the abstract. There isn't really a great deal to say about the abstract but three things are essential. First, is must convey the essence of the article, concisely and precisely. If the abstract doesn't tell me what the article is about, I may not read any further. Second, the abstract must be in the format requested by the journal. Third, the abstract should also be the length specified for the journal. These three things are very easy for an editor to check at the time of submission. So, for example, if an abstract is formatted with subheadings, and those headings are ordered: Aims, Background, Design, Methods, Results, Conclusions, then the abstract should be ordered precisely like that. If what is requested begins with Background, then Aims, and the design is included in the Methods section and doesn't have a separate heading, then that's what you need to write. I am referring here to my journals; all journals have their own specifications. Some journals only want a narrative abstract, without headings. Whatever the case, if the abstract isn't written precisely according to the guidelines, then it is very likely to be rejected immediately. You may think this is very unfair or rather harsh; however it's a clear indication to the editor or editor-in-chief that you haven't read the guidelines for the journal. If you had read the guidelines or looked at a specific example of the type of paper you want to publish then you would have seen how the abstract should be formatted. I am afraid that I have very little patience for this and usually reject the article at source. It would have to be an exceptionally desirable article for me to ask you to make adjustments to the abstract and re-submit.