Guideline For Basic Research Articles

BASIC RESEARCH ARTICLES (Fewer than 3000 words)

Articles using laboratory methods to explore the mechanisms involved in the exploring the effects of treatment.

  • Must follow the GUIDELINES to prepare “Basic Research Articles”
  • Must organize as a QUESTION-DRIVEN Authors should pose two to four specific questions (or purposes or hypotheses) in the Introduction and then have two to four corresponding paragraphs in Results and Discussion.  (Hypotheses are best reserved for experiments exploring alternative mechanisms.)  Questions or purposes must be posed in terms of study variables to be addressable.  Perhaps the best questions are those that can be unequivocally answered, “yes” or “no” by the study design.  These are meant to focus the reader on the messages you think are most important.   Purposes or questions such as “what are the results…” are vague, are not posed in terms of the study variables, and do not define which findings you think are most important. Rather ask: does technique x alter outcome y, does factor x improve expression of y…, etc. While all data relevant to the questions should appear in tables or figures, not all data need be repeated in the text.
  • Must use text TEMPLATE for guide: (see below).

Authorship (Navigate below)

We believe it important to document the adequate participation of all authors in at least three major elements of a study and report; the number of authors will generally relate to the scope of the project.  While we have no strict limits, Basic Research Articles generally require not more than 5 authors.  Exceptions may include authorship for certain multidisciplinary studies, multi-institutional studies, and Levels I-II studies (prospective studies that involve more planning, organization, and rigor).  In all cases, however, multiple contributions of each author must be documented in our required form addressing copyright transfer, authorship, and conflicts of interest.  Authors are encouraged to read “Thoughts on Authorship”

Conflict of Interest statement (Navigate below)

Authors of all manuscripts published in CORR must clarify any and all potential conflicts of interest.  On the Title Page please note any funding or financial support or potential sources of conflict of interest:

  • Consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.
  • If any author has directly received research funding and/or has potential conflicts of interest, State “One or more of the authors () has received funding from” and note the source and the initials of those authors who received funding in the parentheses.
  • If your institution received any sort of support state, “The institution of the authors has received funding from” and note the source.
  • If you received no financial support please note, “Each author certifies that he or she has no commercial associations (eg. consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.”
  • If you or any author have received or may receive any personal payment or in-kind benefit or other professional benefits from a commercial entity (eg, serve as a consultant), please note, “Each author certifies that he or she has or may receive payments or benefits from a commercial entity related to this work.”

Ethical Review Committee Statement (Navigate below)

Manuscripts involving humans or human data or animals must be accompanied by a copy of the letter from your ethical committee approving your study.




This page must include the following:

  • Title (containing fewer than 80 characters including spaces)
  • Running title (containing fewer than 40 characters including spaces)
  • Author name(s) and final degree (s) (must follow authorship guidelines)
  • The affiliation(s), and address (es), and e-mail addresses of all author(s)
  • Conflict of interest statement
  • Ethical review committee statement
  • A statement of the location where the work was performed (only if authors from multiple institutions)
  • Word Count (Introduction through Discussion): Generally limit manuscripts to fewer than 3000 words.
  • The Corresponding Author name and e-mail address (must be same as Corresponding Author in Editorial Manager).

  1. Abstract   Your Abstract must be structured with the following five sections and contain fewer than 250 words.
  2. Background
  3. Questions/purposes  (logically follows Background)
  4. Methods  (includes study design and methods)
  5. Results  (answers to questions/purposes)
  6. Conclusions (synthesis of literature and findings)
  7. Clinical Relevance
  8. Introduction (maximum of 500 words)
  • All manuscripts must contain an Introduction, typically three to four paragraphs.
  • We require a question/purpose format: generally formulate two to four questions or purposes.
  • We suggest one paragraph of background (citing relevant literature), one or two of rationale, and a final paragraph only stating the questions or purposes of the study.
  • The first question or purpose should be the primary (most important) question or that used to determine statistical power when appropriate. These questions/purposes are listed in the last paragraph of the Introduction, answered sequentially in the Results, and each should be sufficiently important that their answers would also appear in the Abstract.

  1. Materials and Methods
  • Study design
  • Power analysis (if more than one group)
  • Description of experimental manipulations or surgery if any
  • Description of outcome measures
  • Statistical analysis if any; the description of a statistical analysis must reflect the questions and study design.

  1. Results (maximum of 500 words)
  • Begin with any paragraph needed to persuade the reader of the validity of your methods if using a new or invalidated method.
  • Next provide one paragraph for each explicit question.  Ensure a one-to-one correspondence to the questions raised in the Introduction (one paragraph for each question).
  • You may end with a paragraph or two of unanticipated results.

  1. Discussion (maximum of 1000 words)
  • Begin with a restatement of background and rationale.
  • In the second paragraph briefly explore and justify each major study limitation, listing in order of importance.
  • Then write one paragraph discussing each question or purpose.  Compare and/or contrast your results with observations or data from the literature.  When comparing substantial amounts of data from the literature, provide a table or tables of comparative data.
  • End with a synthesis of your results and those in the literature rather than only conclusions from your own data.


  • Ensure your references are complete and in alphabetical order and proper format (modified AMA style – please see our published instructions on our Website).
  • In-text citations should appear before commas and periods and located in a sentence immediately after the point they are documenting.


  • Provide brief legends to include the major point.
  • Figure legends should be written in complete sentences.
  • Illustrations with multiple figures (eg, 1A, 1B, 1C) must be labeled “A,” “B,” and “C” in the lower left hand corner. Each illustration requires a separate legend.
  • Figures should be uploaded and separately labeled in Editorial Manager.
  • Color illustrations should be used for anatomical photographs, photomicrographs, complex graphics; black and white should be used for other illustrations including most histograms.
  • Acknowledgments
  • Note any non-financial acknowledgments. Begin with, “We thank…” and note the nature of the contribution.