Get your Communications Medicine paper right the first time: a ready-made structure with the right abstract and citations, so editors see your science, not formatting slips.
4.6
Authored by Sumalatha Gangadhar | Published on 7 August, 2026
Submitting to Communications Medicine goes smoothly when your draft already matches the journal's own rules. Editors screen new manuscripts against the Communications Medicine guide for authors before peer review, so formatting, structure, and required statements should be right on the first draft rather than repaired during upload. This template sets that structure up for you.
It is a manuscript shell aligned to Communications Medicine. It covers front matter, the abstract the journal expects, a body organized to the journal's article types, and a reference list in the journal's required style. Confirm current scope and article types on the Communications Medicine journal page before you draft.
Prepare the title, authors, affiliations, and ORCID iDs. Write the abstract to the journal's rule and word limit, organize the body to the article type, and apply the required reference style from the first citation. Complete every declaration (ethics, competing interests, funding, data availability) the Communications Medicine guide for authors lists, and cite figures and tables in order.
The common failure modes are formatting or reference style that does not match the guide for authors, missing required statements, and an incomplete portal checklist. Clear all three against the Communications Medicine guide for authors before you submit.
The shell mirrors what editorial staff check first: article-type fit, the abstract rules, required declarations, and the journal's reference style. For more detail see the author resources. When your draft is ready, upload it through the journal's submission system.
| Element | Communications Med requirement |
|---|---|
| Abstract | For Articles: Structured abstract required with four subsections (Background, Methods, Results, Conclusions), ≤250 words. The Background should provide context and rationale; Methods should briefly describe how the study was performed including statistics; Results should start with 'Here we show' or equivalent and briefly describe main findings; Conclusions should provide a brief summary and discuss potential implications. Must not contain references and should be accessible to non-specialists. For Reviews and Perspectives: A preface of <100 words (not a structured abstract). For Comments: No abstract required |
| Main text | For Articles: Recommended limit of ~5,000 words. Must include sections titled Introduction, Results (or Results and Discussion), and Methods. Introduction must begin with 'Introduction' heading and final paragraph should summarize aims and conclusions. For Reviews: Recommended ~6,000 words organized into Introduction, review of topic, and forward-looking outlook. For Comments: 1-4 pages, up to 1,500 words. Registered Reports follow Article format. Formatting requirements apply only at acceptance, not at initial submission |
| Declarations | Ethics approval/consent as applicable; competing interests; funding; data availability |
| Figures/tables | Publication-ready; cited in order |
| Supplemental | Upload separately when used |
| Keywords | Not requested. The official formatting guides do not specify a keywords section. Authors are advised to include protein and gene names in the title and/or abstract to ensure optimal retrieval in database searches, but no formal keyword list is required |
| References | Nature referencing style. References must be listed by number in order of appearance in the text, then tables, figures, and finally boxes. Citations must include journal title, article title, volume number, start and end page or article number or DOI, and year of publication. For papers with more than five authors, include only the first author's name followed by 'et al.' No publication can be listed more than once. No footnotes permitted. Only published/accepted articles, recognized preprints, books, monographs, or curated websites are permitted as references |
| Peer review | Single-blind peer review by default (reviewers remain anonymous to authors). may opt for double-anonymized (double-blind) peer review at submission by preparing the manuscript to conceal author identities and selecting this option in the submission system. Additionally, authors must opt in or opt out of transparent peer review (publication of reviewer reports alongside the article) in their cover letter when submitting the final version for publication |
| Submission | mts-commsmed.nature.com/cgi-bin/main.plex |
Read the Communications Medicine guide for authors once before drafting and once before upload. Draft the abstract after results are stable. Set the reference style before adding citations. Keep a cover letter that states your contribution and fit to Communications Medicine in under a page.
Skim two or three recent Communications Med papers to calibrate depth and figure style. Make the novelty clear in the first two pages. Deposit data and code when the policy on the Communications Medicine journal page requires it. Disclose any preprint or conference version with identifiers in the cover letter.
Do one focused pass against the Communications Medicine guide for authors: scope, length, reference style, required declarations, and figure quality. Then submit through the journal's submission system.