Topics to Avoid

When choosing a topic, try to be as specific as possible and avoid suggesting topics we've already covered. For example, we have had many articles covering the topic of Alzheimer's Disease, but each one has been about a specific treatment or new discovery about the disease, with little overlap between articles aside from their introductions. To find out which topics we've already covered, you may see our chart here.

Outline

In the outline itself, we look for the following:

• Level of detail: The outline should be bullet pointed in format, but should effectively summarize all of the information you plan to include in your article. Make clear what the main ideas of each section and paragraph are going to be. It should be easy to see what your main discussion is and how the parts of your article tie into it.
• Organization: Even at the planning stage, the different sections of your article should flow logically into each other and be well-ordered. They should also be different enough that they aren't intermixing information, and each should be discussing their own area of your article's topic.
• Content: We take scientific accuracy very seriously; the primary goal of our journal is to communicate science to the public in an accurate way that doesn't sensationalize it the way the mainstream does. Be careful about making blanket statements or overgeneralizing beyond what your sources say. Additionally, cite reputable scientific sources. If your proposal is accepted, the article content will eventually be overviewed by our Graduate Student Review Board, which aims to correct potential inaccuracies.

Red Flags

• The article claims to cure a disease.
• The article claims that preceding scientific dogma was incorrect.
• There are not many peer-reviewed articles on your topic.
• The source is a doctor or researcher’s personal blog.
• The paper has a retraction notice on the journal website.

Yellow Flags

• The article is a “pop-science” article. Rather, read the original cited publication and interpret it in your own words than relying on someone else’s secondhand interpretation.
• The article is written by a doctor not currently in practice. If they are older, retired, or in an administrative capacity, this is probably fine! However, if their own blog, website, or publicity talks about non-mainstream science, then that’s not a good sign.
• The source is a letter to the editor or an opinion piece in a major journal. If it includes a number of peer-reviewed sources, use it to inform your argument but focus mainly on the cited scientific sources.

Green Flags

• The article is from a peer-reviewed journal with a high impact factor.
• The article contextualizes the small step it provides to its larger field.
• The article is cited by other articles about the topic that were published later in reputable journals.

Where to Source From

We recommend sources and databases like PubMed, Google Scholar, Nature Neuroscience, Cell, Neuron, and other large journals!