Articles types

Original Research Articles present primary, unpublished research that makes a substantive contribution to knowledge in the health sciences. Submissions may address topics including, but not limited to, aetiology, pathogenesis, pathology, diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and control of diseases and health conditions. Studies conducted in animal, environmental, or One Health contexts are also welcomed where findings have clear relevance to human health, healthcare delivery, or public health.  Original Research may include confirmatory studies, negative or disconfirming findings, and investigations that report non-reproducibility of previously published results, provided the study design and analyses are scientifically rigorous and clearly described.
         Length and Limits
              •    Maximum length: 4,000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
              •    Abstract: up to 300 words
              •    Tables and figures: maximum of eight combined
              •    References: maximum of thirty
         Manuscript Structure
         Original Research Articles should be organised as follows:
               •    Abstract
               •    Introduction
               •    Materials and Methods
               •    Results
               •    Discussion
               •    Declarations
               •    References

Brief Research Reports are intended for the concise communication of scientifically sound studies whose scope, scale, or depth does not warrant a full Original Research Article. This article type is appropriate for pilot or feasibility studies, preliminary or exploratory analyses, focused methodological evaluations, replication attempts, and narrowly defined research questions. 
In contrast to Original Research Articles, Brief Research Reports typically involve smaller datasets, fewer variables, limited analytical complexity, or a more targeted research objective, and therefore require less extensive methodological description and interpretation. However, the scientific standards for study design, analysis, and ethical compliance are equivalent to those required for full-length articles. Consistent with the HSI Journal’s commitment to research transparency, Brief Research Reports may also present negative findings, null results, or evidence of non-reproducibility of previously published studies, where such findings are methodologically robust and contribute meaningfully to the literature.
         Length and Limits
              •    Maximum length: 2000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
              •    Abstract: up to 200 words
              •    Tables and figures: maximum of four combined
              •    References: maximum of fifteen 
      Manuscript Structure
      Brief Research Reports should be organised as follows:
             •    Abstract
             •    Introduction
             •    Materials and Methods
             •    Results
             •    Discussion
             •    Declarations
             •    References

The HSI Journal accepts three specific types of review articles, each serving a unique role in the health sciences literature. Authors must select the category that best matches their manuscript's scope and methodology. Use the table below to determine the best fit for your manuscript:

a. Systematic Review

Systematic Review Articles present a methodologically robust synthesis of existing research addressing a clearly articulated research question. These reviews employ explicit, transparent, and reproducible methods to identify relevant literature, apply predefined eligibility criteria, critically appraise included studies, and synthesise findings in a structured manner. Where appropriate, statistical techniques such as meta-analysis may be used to summarise results; however, quantitative pooling is not a requirement for this article type.

This article category encompasses systematic reviews, systematic reviews with meta-analysis, scoping and mapping reviews, and meta-syntheses, provided that the objectives, methods, and reporting approach are clearly defined and scientifically justified.  Systematic Review Articles must be based exclusively on published or publicly available data. The inclusion of unpublished material, original data, personal communications, or manuscripts under consideration elsewhere is not permitted. Submissions that do not comply with these requirements may be rejected or reclassified during peer review, which may lead to delays in editorial processing.

 Reporting Requirements

• Clearly state the review question, framed where appropriate using PICOS (population, intervention/exposure, comparator, outcomes, and study design)
• Describe and justify the review methodology, including protocol development and eligibility criteria
• Adhere to recognised reporting standards (e.g. PRISMA, Cochrane, or Campbell guidelines), as appropriate to the review type
• Include a study selection flow diagram where applicable nclude the PRISMA flow diagram http://prisma-statement.org/prismastatement/flowdiagram.aspx (if applicable)
• Declare all sources of funding, or explicitly state if no specific funding was received

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 16000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Abstract: up to 300 words
• Tables and figures: maximum of fifteen combined
• References: No limits

Manuscript Structure

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Methods ( including study design, participants; interventions; comparators; systematic review protocol; search strategy; data sources; study sections and data extraction; data analysis)
• Results (including a flow diagram of the studies retrieved for the review; study selection and characteristics; synthesized findings; assessment of risk of bias)
• Discussion (including summary of main findings; limitations; conclusions)

• Declarations
• References

b. Regular/Narrative Review Articles

Review Articles provide a detailed, critical, and interpretive overview of topics that have undergone substantial development in recent years. Unlike purely descriptive literature summaries, Review Articles are expected to offer conceptual synthesis, expert interpretation, and balanced discussion of the current state of the field. Review Articles are written for a broad readership, including non-specialists, and should therefore include a clear synopsis that situates the topic within the wider health sciences. Review Articles must be based exclusively on published or publicly available sources. The inclusion of unpublished data, personal communications, or manuscripts under consideration elsewhere is not permitted. Submissions that do not comply with this requirement may be rejected or reclassified during peer review, potentially delaying editorial decisions.

Reviews should:

• Explore different schools of thought, debates, and unresolved controversies
• Clarify core concepts, theoretical frameworks, and key challenges
• Identify important research gaps and methodological limitations
• Discuss emerging trends and future directions in research, policy, or practice

Review Articles should differ fundamentally from Systematic Review Articles in purpose and methodology.

• Review Articles provide a narrative, critical, and interpretive synthesis of the literature, drawing on the authors’ subject-matter expertise. They do not require a predefined protocol, exhaustive search strategy, or formal study-selection process, and are not expected to follow PRISMA or similar reporting guidelines.
• Systematic Review Articles, by contrast, address a specific, narrowly defined research question using pre-specified, transparent, and reproducible methods for literature searching, study selection, quality appraisal, and evidence synthesis.

Authors should submit their manuscript as a Systematic Review if the work is driven by a structured research question and employs formal, protocol-based methods. Manuscripts that aim to provide contextual insight, conceptual integration, or expert perspective should be submitted as Review Articles.

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 12000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Abstract: up to 300 words
• Tables and figures: maximum of ten combined
• References: : No limits

Manuscript Structure

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Subsections relevant to the review subject
• Discussion
• Declarations
• References

c. Mini Review

Mini Review Articles provide a focused, concise overview of a narrowly defined topic within an active area of investigation. They are intended to highlight recent advances, emerging concepts, or rapidly evolving evidence, allowing readers to quickly familiarise themselves with key developments without the breadth or depth required of a full Review Article.

Mini Reviews should:

• Summarise current understanding and recent progress in the selected topic area
• Discuss contrasting viewpoints or ongoing debates, where relevant
• Identify key research gaps and unresolved questions
• Outline potential future directions for research or application

Unlike full-length reviews, Mini Reviews should specifically address:

• Controversies: Diverse schools of thought or conflicting theories in the field.
• Research Gaps: Current limitations in existing literature.
• Future Directions: Potential developments and upcoming shifts in the field.

Mini Review Articles must be based exclusively on published or publicly available sources. The inclusion of unpublished or original data, personal communications, or manuscripts under consideration elsewhere is not permitted. Manuscripts that do not comply with these requirements may be rejected or reclassified during peer review, potentially leading to delays in editorial processing.

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 3000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Abstract: up to 200 words
• Tables and figures: maximum of four combined
• References: :maximum of twenty

Manuscript Structure

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Subsections relevant to the review subject
• Discussion

• Declarations
• References

Clinical Trial Articles report findings from interventional studies involving human participants that evaluate the effects of health-related interventions. This article type includes, but is not limited to, pilot and feasibility studies, safety and efficacy trials, proof-of-concept investigations, and studies using surrogate endpoints, provided the intervention and outcomes are clearly defined.

 Trial Registration and Reporting Standards:

• All clinical trials must be registered in a publicly accessible clinical trials registry prior to enrolment of participants.
• The registry name and registration number must be reported in the abstract.
• Manuscripts must adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), and authors are expected to submit a completed CONSORT checklist where applicable.

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 4000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Abstract: up to 300 words
• Tables and figures: maximum of eight combined
• References: :maximum of thirty

Manuscript Structure

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Methids (including flow diagram when applicable, for example the CONSORT FLOW DIAGRAM- http://www.consort-statement.org/consort-statement/flow-diagram)
• Discussion
• Declarations
• References

.

Case Reports submitted to HIS Journal must describe unusual, novel, or clinically informative cases involving human or animal patients that present with atypical diagnoses, unexpected clinical courses, distinctive management approaches, or uncommon treatment outcomes. Only cases that are original and provide clear educational or scientific value will be considered for publication. The HSI Journal publishes Case Reports of sufficient scientific merit and potential importance. Manuscripts that do not demonstrate clear novelty, relevance, or learning value may be declined or reclassified during editorial review.

Authors must obtain written informed consent from the patient(s) or their legal representative(s) prior to submission. Manuscripts must comply with the CARE (CAse REport) reporting guidelines, and a completed CARE checklist must be submitted as a supplementary file (available at: https://www.care-statement.org). Case reports should be organized as follows.

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 2500 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Abstract: up to 200 words
• Tables and figures: maximum of five combined
• References: :maximum of twenty

Manuscript Structure

• Title: All submissions must include the phrase “A Case Report:” after the area of focus in the title.
• Abstract
• Introduction (including what is unique about the case and medical literature references)
• Case description (including de-identified patient information, relevant physical examination and other clinical findings, relevant past interventions and their outcomes)
• Diagnostic assessment, details on the therapeutic intervention, follow-up and outcomes, as specified in the CARE guidelines
• Discussion (strengths and limitations of the approach to the case, discussion of the relevant medical literature (similar and contrasting cases), take-away lessons from the case)
• Patient perspective
• Declarations
• References

Medical Images should present high-quality, educationally valuable images that illustrate distinctive clinical, diagnostic, pathological, radiological, or procedural findings in human or animal health. Submissions should highlight images that convey a clear learning point and add value beyond what is already well established in the literature.

Written informed consent must be obtained from the patient(s) or their legal representative(s), unless images are fully anonymised and consent is waived by an ethics committee. Images must be fully de-identified and of high resolution. Any image manipulation must be limited to adjustments that do not alter the scientific or clinical meaning.

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 1000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Figures: maximum of 3 combined
• References: :maximum of fifteen

Manuscript Structure

• Abstracts
• Introduction with brief clinical context
• Image Description and Interpretation
• Key Learning Points
• References (if applicable)
• Declarations
• References

• Study Protocol articles document the design of prospective research and it is intended to facilitate dissemination of ongoing studies and promote transparency.  The primary purpose of this article type is to enhance transparency, improve methodological rigour, and facilitate early dissemination of ongoing studies

  Study Protocol Articles are considered only if:

• The study is prospective and ongoing at the time of submission
• No results or outcome data from the study are reported
• No other articles based on the study have been published or are under review
• The protocol does not describe pilot or feasibility studies

• For clinical studies, registration in a publicly accessible clinical trial registry is mandatory prior to manuscript submission. The registry name and registration number must be stated in the abstract. Authors are strongly encouraged to follow the SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) guidelines ( (http://www.spirit-statement.org/) and to submit a completed SPIRIT checklist as supplementary material.

  Manuscripts that report study results, preliminary findings, pilot data, or feasibility outcomes will not be considered as Study Protocol Articles and may be rejected or reclassified during editorial assessment.

  Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 4000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Abstract: up to 300 words
• Tables and figures: maximum of eight combined
• References: :maximum of thirty 

• Manuscript Structure

• Abstract (Including the clinical trial registry name and registration number (where applicable)
• Introduction
• Methods  
• Study design and setting
• Participant selection and eligibility criteria
• Interventions or exposures
• Outcomes and measurements
• Sample size considerations
• Data management and statistical analysis
• Anticipated Results
• Discussion
• Declarations
• References.

Methods Articles should describe new, adapted, or well-established experimental, analytical, or operational procedures that are of clear relevance and utility to the field. This article type is intended to enable replication, adoption, or adaptation of a method or technique, and therefore places strong emphasis on technical detail, validation, and practical implementation.

Distinction from Study Protocol Articles. Methods Articles are fundamentally different from Study Protocol Articles in scope and purpose:

• Methods Articles focus on the development, optimisation, validation, or application of a specific method, protocol, or technique, often illustrated using examples or anticipated results. Their primary goal is to allow accurate replication and routine use by other researchers.
• Study Protocol Articles, by contrast, describe the planned design of an entire prospective study prior to data collection, without reporting results or method validation, and are intended to promote transparency rather than methodological innovation.

Authors should submit a Methods Article when the central contribution is a technical or procedural advance, rather than the design of a specific study

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 4000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Abstract: up to 300 words
• Tables and figures: maximum of eight combined
• References: maximum of thirty

Manuscript Structure

• Abstract
• Introduction (outlining the protocol and its possible applications)
• Materials and Equipment (including a list of reagents/ materials and/or equipment required; formulation of any solutions where applicable)
• Methods (including objectives and validation of the method; step-by-step procedures; timing of each step or related series of steps; pause points; example(s) of application and effectiveness; details of precision/ accuracy and limits of detection or quantification, where applicable)
• (Anticipated) Results (describing and illustrating with figures, where possible, the expected outcome of the protocol; advantages, limitations, possible pitfalls and artifacts and any troubleshooting measures to counteract them)
• Discussion
• Declarations
• References.

You may refer below to distinction Between General Commentary and Perspective / Opinion Articles.

1. General Commentary Articles

General Commentary Articles provide scholarly critique, clarification, or contextual interpretation of a specific article previously published in the Health Sciences Investigations (HSI) Journal. Their primary purpose is to advance academic dialogue by offering alternative interpretations, highlighting implications, or constructively addressing limitations of the original work.

General Commentaries must be directly linked to an HSI-published article. Submissions commenting on articles published elsewhere should be submitted as Perspective/Opinion Articles. General Commentary Articles may be submitted in response to any article previously published in the Health Sciences Investigations (HSI) Journal. Commentaries are considered post-publication contributions and are not restricted to the same issue or edition as the original article. We encourages submission of General Commentaries within 12 months of the publication of the original article.  General Commentary Articles:

• Must be based exclusively on published materials in the HSI Journal
• Must not include unpublished or original data
• Must maintain a professional, evidence-based, and constructive tone
•  Must include the full citation of the original articles  

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 1000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Abstract: No
• Tables and figures:  Optional. Must not present new data. For illustrative or clarifying purposes only. Derived from published material only and fully referenced.
• References: maximum of fifteen

Manuscript Structure

• Title: (Mandatory Format "Commentary: Title of the Manuscript being submitted")
• Introduction (In the Introduction, please provide the complete citation of the article(s) being commented on)
• Subsections relevant for the subject
• Discussion
• Declarations
• References

2. Perspective / Opinion

These Articles present evidence-informed viewpoints and interpretive analyses on developments, concepts, methods, as well as weaknesses and strengths of scientific hypotheses in any reseaerhc area in health sciences.

This article type allows authors to articulate reasoned positions, explore implications of emerging evidence, and propose future directions, without necessarily presenting primary research data. These articles are analytical rather than polemical and must clearly distinguish author interpretation from established evidence. This Article type  is written by experts to stimulate discussion or influence policy. All arguments should be supported by appropriate citations and presented in a balanced, scholarly manner. The purpose of the Perspective/Opinion Articles could be to identify new research avenues, challenge existing ideas, propose solutions, or interpret policy relevance. The manuscript structure presents a problem/topic, offers a solution/view, and supports it with evidence or logical reasoning, often ending with a call to action or future outlook. Perspective / Opinion Articles:

• Discuss current advances and future directions
• Clear presentation of the authors' perspective
• Accurate presentation and citations of other authors' work
• May include original data as well as personal insights and opinions
• Must be based on published evidence or established knowledge
• Should encourage constructive scientific discussion
• Should avoid emotive or adversarial language

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 2000 words (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends)
• Abstract: Yes
• Tables and figures: Optional.  Maximum 4 combined.
• References: maximum of fifteen

Manuscript Structure

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Subsections relevant for the subject
• Discussion
• Declarations
• References.

Editorials in the  HSI Journal are invited contributions written by the Editor(s) for a thematic issue, special collection, or Research Topic. Editorials provide readers with an overview of the aims, scope, and scientific significance of the collection and place the contributed articles within a broader disciplinary, policy, or public-health context.

The Editrial Article must articulate provides a narrative that connects the individual studies to the broader landscape of clinical practice, biomedical research, or public health.

An Editorial should introduce and synthesise the contributions to the thematic issue, highlighting conceptual linkages, methodological diversity, and collective insights, rather than serving as a simple listing of articles. Editorial Articles are typically submitted after all contributions to the thematic issue have been accepted and published, and they constitute the final article in the collection. Editorials must not include unpublished or original data. References are strongly encouraged where appropriate to support contextual discussion.

Editorial Articles are by invitation only and reflect the collective vision of the Editor(s). They are not intended to present new findings but to frame, integrate, and contextualise the body of work within the thematic issue.

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 1000 words for 5-10 articles (excluding abstract, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends). The word limit may be increased proportionally for larger collections.
• Abstract: Not required
• Tables and figures: Optional. A maximum of one figure may be included, where it adds conceptual or illustrative value
• References: As appropriate to support contextual discussion; the number of references should be commensurate with the size and scope of the collection.

Manuscript Structure

• Title: must follow the format —Editorial: [Title of Research Topic].
• Introduction
• Discussion on thematic groupings of the contributed articles. Aim for a synthesized narrative. 
• Declarations
• References

Correspondence Articles are short communications addressed to the Editor-in-Chief that contribute to scholarly discussion within the scope of the HSI Journal. HSI recognises two distinct types of Correspondence:

1. Comment Letter to the Editor: Comment Letters are used by readers or researchers to provide brief, evidence-based feedback on a recently published article. They may question interpretations, clarify methods, discuss implications, or raise issues of scientific or clinical relevance. Comment Letters are reviewed by the editor responsible for the original article. Where publication is deemed appropriate, the corresponding author of the original article may be invited to submit a reply, which may be published alongside the Comment Letter in the next issue.

Comment Letters should address articles published in the current issue of the HSI Journal. This window ensures that post-publication peer review occurs while the data remains contemporary and the original authors are available to provide a timely rebuttal. Key Requirements for Comment Letters include

• Must relate to a specific HSI-published article
• No unpublished or original data permitted
• Constructive, evidence-based tone required
• Related to articles pubished in a current issue

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 1000 words.
• Abstract: Not permitted
• Tables and figures: Not permitted
• References: maximum of fifteen

Manuscript Structure: Narratve (not sectional)

• Title: must follow the format — Comment Letter to the Editor on the Article [Title of Original Article] by [First Author et al.,]
• Salutation: Should start with “To the Editor”
• Narrative presentation that comprise

- The Lead Paragraph: Clearly identify the article being discussed. Provide full citation (Reference 1 must be the target article)

- The Body: Present your specific points (praise, criticism, or new data). Back every claim with evidence or existing literature.  

- Conclusions: Brief statement explaining the relevance or implications for the field

• Author Details (List all authors, their highest degrees (e.g., MD, PhD), and institutional affiliations)
• Declarations
• References

1. New-Data Letter to the Editor: New-Data Letters are short scientific communications that report preliminary time-sensitive findings that are too limited in scope or scale to justify publication as an Original Research Article or Brief Research Report, but are nevertheless of clear relevance or immediate interest to the field. This format is intended to enable rapid dissemination of new observations or datasets without the depth, methodological expansion, or comprehensive analysis expected of full research articles. New-Data Letters must meet the same standards of scientific integrity, ethical approval, and transparency as other data-containing submissions. Any original data presented must be novel, ethically approved where applicable, and must not duplicate material that has been published or is under review elsewhere.

 Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 1000 words.
• Abstract: Not permitted
• Tables and figures: Optional; maximum one (1), only if essential
• References: maximum of fifteen

Manuscript Structure: Narratve (not sectional)

• Title
• Salutation: Should start with “To the Editor”
• Narrative presentation comprising

- Context and Rationale 

- Description of New Data

- Interpreatation and Implications

- Conclusions

• Author Details (List all authors, their highest degrees (e.g., MD, PhD), and institutional affiliations)
• Declarations
• References

The HSI Journal is committed to maintaining the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. When errors or omissions are identified after publication, authors or the editorial office may initiate a formal correction. Corrections are published as separate, citable items and are permanently linked to the original article. Corrections do not replace the original article; they amend it.

Types of Corrections

1. Corrigendum: A Corrigendum is issued when authors identify an error originating from the authors themselves that affects the accuracy, clarity, or interpretation of the published work, but does not invalidate the main findings or conclusions. Examples include:

• Errors in data values, tables, or figure labels
• Incorrect author affiliations
• Errors in text that may mislead readers

2. Erratum

An Erratum is issued to correct errors introduced during the editorial or production process, for which the journal bears responsibility. Examples include:

• Typesetting or formatting errors
• Misplaced figures or tables
• Publisher-introduced textual errors

3. Addendum

An Addendum is published to provide additional information or clarification that enhances the understanding of the original article but does not correct an error. Addenda must not introduce new primary data that would warrant a separate publication. Examples include:

• Additional methodological clarification
• Supplementary explanation requested post-publication
• Updates that do not alter the original results or conclusions

All authors of the original article must formally agree to the submission of a Correction. Depending on the scope and potential impact of the changes, the Editorial Board may determine that the Correction requires editorial assessment and/or peer review prior to publication. Requests that involve substantive changes beyond correction or clarification (such as the addition of new data, reinterpretation of results, or major methodological revisions) may not be accepted and could require submission as a separate manuscript. The HSI Journal reserves the right to determine the appropriate format and handling of all post-publication corrections in order to safeguard the integrity of the published record.

Length and Limits

• Maximum length: 1000 words.
• Abstract: Not permitted
• Tables and figures: Optional; maximum of one, only where essential to clarify the correction
• References: maximum of 10. Only if additional references are required to supportthe corrections

Manuscript Structure

• Title: Mandatory format

Select either Corrigendum, Addendum, or Erratum: [Full title of the original article]

• Citation of original article [Full citation of the article being corrected, including DOI]
• Description of the correction

- Clear explanation of:

- What was incorrect or incomplete

- Where the error occurred (e.g. section, paragraph, figure, table)

- Why the correction is necessary

• Corrected content

- Only the revised text, figure, or table should be presented

- Do not repeat the full original manuscript

• Impact statement

- Explicit statement indicating whether the correction does or does not affect:

- Study results

- Interpretation

- Conclusions

• Author agreement statement

Confirmation that all authors of the original article have reviewed and approved the correction

The HSI Journal may publish Conference Abstract Books associated with scientific meetings, conferences, or workshops of relevance to the journal’s scope. These publications serve as a permanent scholarly record of presented work and are typically published as supplementary issues or special collections. Abstract Supplements are clearly labelled as “Conference Abstracts”. Abstracts are not considered full journal articles. Publication of a Conference Abstract does not preclude subsequent submission of the full study as an Original Research Article, provided standard journal requirements are met. Publication of Abstract Books is subject to a separate agreement between the conference organisers and the journal. Publication fees for Book of Abstracts may apply.

Eligibility and Responsibility

• Abstract Books must be formally linked to a recognised scientific event.
• The conference organisers or scientific committee bear responsibility for abstract selection and review.
• HSI Journal does not conduct full peer review of individual abstracts unless explicitly stated.

The Abstract Books should include:

• Title page (conference name, date, location, organisers)
• Foreword or editorial note from organisers or Guest Editors
• Abstracts presented in a standardised format (as defined by the conference)
• Author names and affiliations per abstract.

The HSI Journal publishes Case reports that are of adequate quality and potential importance. Reports should have no more than three figures or illustrations, abstract of no more than 150 words, the main text of 1500 words and a maximum of 20 references. All photographs should be labelled as Plates. It should comprise an Abstract, Introduction, Case presentations, Consent, Discussions, Acknowledgements, Funding, Transparency declarations and References. Illustrations submitted for case reports must comply with the Journals policy on uploaded Figures. Please refer to guidelines on Figures and Figure legends

Commentaries are invited communications concerning topics relevant to the readership of HSI Journal and are intended to engender discussion. Commentaries are subject to review. The length may not exceed 1500 words, and the format is like that of a review but without an abstract.

Two forms of letters to the Editor are accepted. A Comment Letter is intended for comments on published articles in the journal. A Comment Letter should cite published references to support the writer's argument. The second type (New-Data Letter) reports new, concise findings that are not appropriate for publication as full-length papers or Short-Form papers. Letters to the Editor do not have abstracts. Both types of Letter must have a title, which must appear in the manuscript. Figures and tables for New-Data Letter should be kept to a minimum. A Comment Letter will be sent to the Editor who handled the article in question. If the editor believes that publication is warranted, he/she will solicit a reply from the corresponding author of the article and approve publication. New-Data Letters are assigned to editors according to the subject matter for review. Correspondence on topics of concern or interest in the field of biomedical sciences, public health or allied health especially arising from papers or letters already published in the Journal. These must not exceed 800 words, one table or illustration, and 10 references, and must be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief.