Short Communications

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. Deciding whether the work suits the format

   A short communication suits a single, well-defined finding, a preliminary but robust result, a new observation or a brief extension of published work. It is a poor fit for work that needs extensive methods or multiple lines of evidence. We help authors assess fit honestly, which saves time and avoids rejection for mismatch.

2. Reducing scope without losing the argument

   The core claim and its evidence define the paper. Secondary results, extended background and tangential analyses are cut or moved to supplementary material. We help authors identify what the claim cannot do without and rework the introduction so that it reaches the gap in a few sentences.

3. Concise but sufficient methods

   Methods must still allow reproduction. Standard procedures are cited, novel steps are described and detailed parameters go to a supplement. We review the methods for the minimum information a competent reader needs and suggest where to place the rest.

4. Selecting figures and tables

   With space for perhaps two to four display items, each must carry significant evidence. Multi-panel figures can combine related results. We help authors choose items, design panels and write informative captions, so that the figures tell the story even for a reader who skims.

5. Writing a tight discussion

   The discussion should state what the result means, how it relates to the closest prior work and what its limits are, within a few paragraphs. Speculation is brief and labelled. We help authors avoid both overclaiming and excessive hedging.

6. Word counts, references and format

   Journals set limits on words, references, figures and abstract length. We prepare the manuscript to the journal template, trim wording, select essential references and check that numbers agree between text and figures. Where journals differ on whether short communications are peer reviewed in the same way, we advise authors to check the policy.

7. Using supplementary material wisely

   Supplementary files can hold extended methods, additional data and derivations. They should support, not replace, the main text, which must stand alone. We help authors organise supplements with clear referencing from the main paper.

8. Timeliness and follow-up

   A short communication can establish priority and invite feedback, with a full paper to follow. Authors should avoid duplicating text between the two and should cite the short communication in the later work. We help authors plan this sequence.

9. Checking the argument line by line

   Before submission, test the paper by writing its argument as five sentences: the problem, the gap, what was done, what was found and why it matters. Each sentence should correspond to a paragraph or figure in the paper. If a paragraph does not serve one of these sentences, it is a candidate for deletion. We perform this check with authors and list sentences that need evidence, so that the shortened paper remains complete and persuasive.

Common pitfalls this service helps avoid

• Too much content for the format. Crowding makes the key claim unclear.
• Cutting essential methods. Brevity cannot undermine reproducibility.
• Unsupported novelty claims. Short papers still need comparison with prior work.
• Salami slicing. Splitting one study into many short papers is a publication-ethics concern.

What good reporting looks like

Support for a short communication is documented with a claim-and-evidence map, a list of items moved to supplements and a format-compliance checklist. The authors approve the final text. We do not add or alter data, and we do not promise acceptance or speed of publication.

An illustrative scenario

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

Suppose a researcher has a 7,000-word draft about a new sensor coating. The key result is a sensitivity improvement shown in one experiment. The short communication keeps that result, one comparison with an existing coating, a summary of fabrication and a brief discussion, moving the stability tests and extended characterisation to a later full paper. The title and abstract are rewritten to match the single claim.

Questions to settle before you begin

• What is the single claim of my paper?
• Which evidence is essential?
• Can a competent reader reproduce my methods from the text and supplement?
• Does the journal publish and review this format?
• What will go into a later full paper?

Key terms

Short communication

A brief article reporting a focused finding.

Supplementary material

Additional material outside the main text.

Salami slicing

Dividing one study into several minimal publications.

Priority

Establishing that a result was reported first.

Multi-panel figure

A figure with several related sub-figures.

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.

• Brief Reports

  Support for brief reports presenting concise studies or findings in a condensed IMRaD structure.

• Research Letters

  Support for research letters, which communicate significant findings quickly to a specialist readership in a highly condensed format.

• Technical Notes

  Support for technical notes that describe a technique, correction, improvement or practical finding too brief or narrow for a full article.

• Submission Readiness Assessment

  A structured pre-submission review of a manuscript covering scope fit, structure, evidence, reporting, ethics statements and formatting, with a prioritised list of what to fix.