Protocol Papers

Highly specialised requests are first checked for feasibility from this information. Please do not send confidential data through the public form; describe it first and agree secure transfer afterwards.

1. 01Enquiry and requirement assessment
2. 02Technical scoping and proposal
3. 03Execution
4. 04Quality review and delivery, with an agreed round of revisions

Read the full project workflow.

In depth: how the work is done

1. Rationale and objectives

   The protocol states the problem, why the study is needed and precise objectives or questions. Hypotheses are stated where relevant. We help authors express objectives that are testable and bounded.

2. Design and procedures

   The design is described in sufficient detail to be followed: participants or materials, sampling, interventions or conditions, measurements, timelines and quality control. Diagrams and tables help. We review for gaps and ambiguity.

3. Pre-specified outcomes and analysis

   Primary and secondary outcomes are defined, along with how they will be measured and analysed, including statistical methods, handling of missing data and criteria for stopping or exclusions. Pre-specification limits flexibility that can inflate false findings. Exploratory analyses are labelled as such.

4. Sample size and power

   Where applicable, justification of sample size based on expected effects and variability is provided. If no formal calculation is feasible, the protocol explains the basis for the chosen size. We help authors present assumptions transparently.

5. Registration and reporting guidelines

   Registries exist for different types of studies, and reporting guidelines such as SPIRIT and PRISMA-P provide checklists. The protocol paper states where the study is registered and follows relevant guidelines. We help authors identify suitable options; the registration itself is performed by the authors.

6. Amendments and deviations

   Plans change. The protocol should state how amendments will be recorded and reported, so that final reports can explain deviations. Keeping an amendment log from the start is practical.

7. Ethics and data management

   Studies involving people, animals or sensitive data require ethical approval and data management plans. The protocol states approvals, consent procedures and data handling. We help word these accurately based on the authors' documents.

8. Dissemination plans

   Protocol papers state how results will be shared, including publication regardless of outcome and data availability. This signals commitment to transparency.

9. Choosing the level of detail

   Protocol readers need enough detail to judge and repeat the plan, but too much makes the document unwieldy. A useful guide is that another team should be able to carry out the study from the protocol alone. Essential details go in the main text, with forms, search strings and instruments in appendices. We help authors strike this balance and use tables for clarity.

10. Linking the protocol to the final report

    When results are eventually published, readers should be able to compare the final report with the protocol. Using the same headings, cross-referencing outcomes and listing deviations in a dedicated section makes comparison easy. We encourage authors to design the protocol with this later comparison in mind, so that following the plan demonstrates integrity and not merely compliance.

11. Sample protocol sections to avoid common gaps

    Protocols often omit practical details: who will do each task, how disagreements will be resolved, what software will be used and how data will be stored. Adding a short table of roles, tools and data management steps removes ambiguity. These details also reassure reviewers that the team has thought through execution. We provide a checklist of such items and help authors integrate them concisely.

12. Open science practices in protocols

    Sharing instruments, coding manuals, analysis scripts and data management plans with the protocol increases transparency. Authors can place these in a repository and cite them. Where materials are confidential, authors can describe them in enough detail to evaluate the design. We help authors decide what to share and how to describe it, within their ethical and contractual constraints.

Common pitfalls this service helps avoid

• Vague outcomes and analysis. These allow flexible interpretation later.
• No amendment plan. Unexplained changes damage credibility.
• Protocol written after results are known. Defeats the purpose and is misleading.
• Missing approvals. Ethical and regulatory requirements must be met.

What good reporting looks like

Support for a protocol paper is documented with a checklist mapping to the relevant guideline, a pre-specification table, an amendment log template and a registration note. Authors approve the manuscript. We do not write protocols after the fact to hide analyses, and we do not guarantee publication or favourable outcomes.

An illustrative scenario

Hypothetical example written for explanation. It is not a client case, a result or a testimonial.

Imagine a team planning a systematic review of machine-learning methods for predictive maintenance. The protocol paper specifies the question, databases, search strings, eligibility criteria, screening process, data extraction items, appraisal tool and synthesis approach. It also commits to reporting deviations. The team registers the protocol before screening begins and cites the registration in the paper.

Questions to settle before you begin

• Is my protocol finalised before data collection or screening?
• Are my outcomes and analyses precise?
• How will I record amendments?
• Where will I register?
• What approvals are needed?

Key terms

Protocol

A detailed plan of a study.

Pre-specification

Defining outcomes and analysis in advance.

Registration

Recording the plan in a public registry.

Amendment

A change to the protocol after it is finalised.

SPIRIT

A guideline for protocols of trials.

Working together on Specialised Scholarly Article Formats projects

Specialised article engagements begin by confirming which format suits your material, since short communications, methods, data, software, protocol and replication papers each have conventions and length limits. We ask for the results, code or datasets that the article describes, the target journal's guidelines and your deadline. Drafting follows the format's structure, and reporting checklists are applied where they exist. Statements about data and code availability reflect what you can actually share. We do not fabricate results, and we do not promise acceptance.

Few projects need a single service in isolation. These are the services most often combined with this one.

• Registered Reports

  Support for registered-report formats in which hypotheses and methods are peer-reviewed before data collection.

• Methods Papers

  Support for methods papers that present a new or improved method, with clear algorithm or protocol description, validation and comparison to existing methods.

• Systematic Review Manuscripts

  Manuscript preparation for systematic reviews that have been conducted with a defined protocol: reporting the search, selection, appraisal and synthesis in line with PRISMA 2020 reporting principles.