Manuscript Checklist Before Submitting to an Engineering Journal

Before submitting to an engineering journal, check three files, seven format rules, six content items and four things reviewers ask for most. Working through this list takes about an hour and prevents the rejections that never reach a reviewer — the ones that cost months and teach you nothing.

Most engineering journal desk rejections are not judgements on the science. They are the consequence of something on this page being missed.

Part 1: The three files

Send all three together. This is the most common incomplete-submission failure and the easiest to avoid: a manuscript arriving alone does not start a review, and nobody chases you for the missing files.

Part 2: Format — seven rules

Each of these takes under a minute to verify and each one, missed, can send the manuscript back before review. Two that catch people repeatedly:

• Figure resolution. A figure pasted from a slide deck is typically 72 dpi. It looks correct on screen and cannot be printed. Export from the original software at the required width.
• Reference order. Vancouver numbers references in the order they first appear in the text, not alphabetically. Reference managers set to the wrong style produce a list that looks tidy and is wrong.

Part 3: Content — what must be in the manuscript

The first page carries the title, all authors, affiliations, all author e-mails, and the corresponding author’s full address with phone number. After that:

1. Abstract — under 300 words, no abbreviations, no references. See our guide on writing an abstract.
2. Keywords — 3 to 6, none repeating the title. See choosing keywords.
3. Introduction — the problem, the relevant literature, and what gap you fill, with references.
4. Materials and Methods — protocols, instruments, software and conditions, with references.
5. Results — clear and concise, past tense, no references.
6. Discussion — significance set against earlier work.
7. Conclusion — the important outcomes.
8. Acknowledgments — funding, institutional support, and a conflict of interest declaration.

Part 4: The four things reviewers ask for most

These are not engineering journal format rules. They are the sentences whose absence generates most of the comments on a first-round report:

All four are single sentences describing work you have already done. They are the cheapest points in the entire process and the ones most often lost.

Part 5: The last read before you send

• Have a colleague who did not do the work read your Methods and describe the experiment back to you. Every difference is a sentence to rewrite.
• Read the Results section alone. If it argues or interprets anywhere, move that to the Discussion.
• Check every reference resolves. Paste each DOI after https://doi.org/ and confirm it opens the paper you meant.
• Search your own text for anything reused from an earlier paper of yours. Cite it instead of repeating it — self-plagiarism registers the same as any other overlap.
• Open the file properties. Word stores the author name in metadata, which defeats double-blind review before a reviewer opens page one.

Choosing the right article type before you check anything else

The checklist changes depending on what you are submitting. This engineering journal takes four categories, and picking the wrong one means reformatting at the worst moment:

Decide this before you write, not after. Writing 6,000 words and then discovering your category caps you lower is a painful way to learn it.

Two checks that are not on most checklists

Does every figure survive being printed?

Print the manuscript on ordinary paper at actual size and look at the figures. Axis labels that were readable on a 27-inch monitor frequently vanish at 75 mm width. This takes two minutes and catches something no on-screen check will.

Does the paper make sense to someone in an adjacent field?

Reviewers are chosen from your field but not always your exact sub-field. If a colleague two doors down cannot follow your introduction, a reviewer may not either — and confusion resolves against the author.

What happens after you press submit

Knowing the sequence helps you judge whether silence means anything:

1. Acknowledgement with a reference number. Keep it — every later enquiry is faster if you quote it.
2. Editorial check against policy and a minimum quality level.
3. Two reviewers, double-blind.
4. Comments come back anonymised.
5. One week to return the revision.
6. Second review, then the Subject Editor decides.
7. Proof in ready-to-print format — read it properly, because no changes are made after publication.

The charge falls at the end, not the beginning: no submission fee, then 1,500 INR (Indian authors) or 55 USD (international) after acceptance.

The one-hour version

If you only have an hour before submitting to an engineering journal, do these six in this order — they catch the largest share of what actually stops papers:

1. Confirm scope fit against the two most recent issues
2. Count the abstract
3. Check figure resolution
4. Confirm reference numbering is by citation order
5. Add the replication count and significance levels
6. Assemble all three files before you open the submission page

Printing the checklist

Some people work better ticking boxes on paper than scrolling. The whole list condenses to twenty items:

1. Scope checked against two recent issues
2. Article type chosen and its limit confirmed
3. Cover letter written and saved as MS Word
4. Authorship responsibility form signed
5. Manuscript in .doc or .docx
6. Under 15 pages
7. Title page complete with all e-mails and corresponding author address
8. Abstract under 300 words
9. No abbreviations or references in the abstract
10. 3 to 6 keywords, none repeating the title
11. Results in past tense with no citations
12. Replication count stated
13. Design named
14. Significance levels given
15. Conditions and material identity stated
16. References numbered in citation order, Vancouver style
17. Every reference DOI tested
18. Figures at 300 dpi and 75 or 155 mm
19. Tables after the references with headings
20. Word file properties cleared of author name

Twenty items, about an hour. Set against a desk rejection that costs weeks and tells you nothing, it is the best-value hour in the process.

Frequently asked questions

What do I need to submit besides the manuscript?

A cover letter in MS Word and a signed authorship responsibility form. All three go together — a submission missing any one of them cannot start, and the file simply sits.

What should the cover letter say?

That the work is original, has not been published before, and is not under consideration elsewhere. You may optionally name two potential reviewers with their affiliations and contact details.

What file format does the manuscript have to be in?

MS Word, .doc or .docx, in English. Not PDF, and not LaTeX source unless the journal asks for it separately.

Do figures go in the Word file or separately?

In the Word file at this journal, each with a heading, at 75 mm or 155 mm width and 300 dpi. Tables go after the references with headings or legends.

How do I check my references are in Vancouver style?

Numbered in the order they are cited in the text, not alphabetically. Up to six authors are all listed; with seven or more, list six and then et al. The Instructions to Author page gives worked examples for every source type.

What is the single most missed item?

The replication count. Reviewers ask for it constantly, and it is one sentence in Materials and Methods.

Related Guides

The individual sections, explained:

• How to Write the Methods Section of an Engineering Paper
• Referencing Styles for Engineering Papers: Vancouver Explained
• Cover Letter for an Engineering Journal Submission (With Template)