SECTIONS 1. About MJIRI 2. Before You Submit 3. Article Types 4. Manuscript Preparation 5. Reporting by Study Design 6. Ethics and Research Integrity 7. Data, Code, and Reproducibility 8. Submission and Peer Review 9. After Acceptance 10. Checklists and Templates 11. Reference Examples

 (Revised edition: June 2026)
  1.1 Aim and scope
The Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran (MJIRI) is an editorially independent, continuously published medical journal owned by Iran University of Medical Sciences (Publisher link). MJIRI publishes rigorous and ethically conducted work that advances understanding of medicine, public health, health systems, health professions, and related biomedical and clinical sciences.
The journal welcomes research of regional, national, and international relevance. Studies conducted in under-represented populations or settings are encouraged when the research question, methods, and interpretation are relevant beyond a single institution. Manuscripts should be written for a broad health-science readership and should explain specialist terminology when it is first used.
MJIRI publishes original research, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, narrative reviews, study protocols, brief reports, debate or point-of-view articles, In Brief articles, case reports or case series, and letters to the editor. Other formats may be considered at the editors' discretion.

1.2 Editorial principles and publication criteria

Editorial decisions are based on the quality, validity, transparency, ethical conduct, and relevance of the work. Novelty and likely impact may be considered, but a methodologically sound study should not be rejected solely because the results are negative, confirmatory, or do not support the authors' hypothesis.

• The research question is clear and appropriate for the journal's scope.
• The design, methods, analyses, and reporting are sufficiently rigorous and reproducible.
• The data support the conclusions and do not overstate causality or clinical importance.
• Applicable ethical approvals, consent, registration, and reporting standards have been met.
• Data, code, protocols, and materials are available to the extent permitted by ethical, legal, and contractual constraints.
• Authorship, funding, competing interests, and use of AI-assisted tools are transparently declared.
• The manuscript is understandable, internally consistent, and written in clear English.

Editorial focus MJIRI values clinically and scientifically useful work, including well-designed replication studies, studies with null findings, and research that improves the quality or equity of health care. Authors should avoid exaggerated claims of novelty or impact.

 

1.3 Language, accessibility, and respectful reporting

All articles are published in English. Authors are responsible for submitting a manuscript that is clear enough for scientific review. Language-editing services may be used, but their use does not guarantee acceptance. Editorial decisions will not be based on the author's country, institution, first language, seniority, or ability to pay.
Use person-first or identity-first language in accordance with the preferences of the community being described. Avoid stigmatizing, discriminatory, or unnecessarily judgmental terms. Describe race, ethnicity, nationality, sex, gender, disability, and other social categories only when scientifically relevant, and explain how categories were defined and assigned.

1.4 Open access and permanent record

MJIRI is an open-access journal. The license that applies to a published article will be stated on the article and the journal website. Authors must ensure that they have permission to publish all included material under the applicable license. Published articles form part of the permanent scholarly record and may be corrected, retracted, or accompanied by an expression of concern when necessary. Back to Quick Navigation

2.1 Originality, exclusive submission, and related work

A manuscript submitted to MJIRI must be original, must not have been published in substantially the same form, and must not be under consideration by another journal. Authors must disclose closely related manuscripts, conference papers, reports, dissertations, preprints, or datasets so that editors can assess overlap and appropriate citation.
Posting a manuscript on a recognized preprint server is not normally considered prior publication. The preprint DOI or persistent link should be disclosed at submission. Authors must update the preprint record after publication and should not use language that implies peer review before the article is accepted.
Secondary publication, translated publication, or republication may be considered only when it meets ICMJE conditions, has the approval of both journals, clearly identifies the primary publication, and respects copyright and licensing requirements.

2.2 Authorship and accountability

MJIRI follows the ICMJE authorship criteria. Every author must satisfy all four conditions: substantial contribution to the work; drafting or critical revision; final approval; and accountability for the integrity of the work. Acquisition of funding, general supervision, administrative support, data collection alone, or provision of routine clinical care does not by itself justify authorship.
At least one author should act as guarantor and accept responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole. The corresponding author ensures that all authors approve the manuscript, that required declarations are complete, and that communications from the journal are shared with all coauthors.
Contributions must be described using the CRediT taxonomy. Each author must have at least one substantive role. Contributors who do not qualify for authorship may be named in the Acknowledgments, with their permission and a description of their contribution.

2.3 ORCID and author identification

The corresponding author should provide an ORCID iD at submission. ORCID iDs are strongly encouraged for all authors. Names and affiliations must be entered consistently in the manuscript and submission system because they will be published as supplied.

2.4 Changes in authorship

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be exceptional. The corresponding author must explain the reason and provide written agreement from all listed authors and from any author being added or removed. The editor may contact institutions or suspend review while an authorship dispute is investigated. Authorship changes after acceptance are rarely permitted.

2.5 Funding, role of the funder, and competing interests

All financial and in-kind support must be declared, including grant numbers where available. Authors must state the funder's role in study design; data collection, management, analysis, and interpretation; manuscript preparation; and the decision to submit. If the funder had no role, state this explicitly.
All authors must disclose financial and non-financial relationships or activities that could reasonably be perceived to influence the work. Examples include employment, consultancies, honoraria, expert testimony, stock ownership, patents, travel support, advisory roles, personal relationships, academic rivalry, and strongly held intellectual positions. When no competing interests exist, include the statement: “The authors declare no competing interests.”

2.6 Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies

Artificial intelligence tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the work, approve the final version, or disclose conflicts of interest. Human authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, citations, confidentiality, and integrity of all submitted content.

• Use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools for language or readability must be declared in a separate statement before the references, naming the tool and explaining how it was used.
• Use of AI as part of the research process - for example, image analysis, coding, prediction, screening, or data generation - must be described in sufficient detail in the Methods, including software/version, prompts or parameters when relevant, validation, and human oversight.
• Authors must verify every factual statement and reference. Fabricated citations, undisclosed generated text, or misleading AI-produced content constitute misconduct.
• Confidential manuscripts, peer-review material, identifiable patient information, and restricted data must not be uploaded to public AI systems without authorization and appropriate safeguards.
• AI-generated or AI-modified scientific images are not permitted unless generation or modification is itself part of the reported research and is transparently described. Routine image enhancement must comply with the image-integrity policy.

2.7 Reporting guideline and checklist

Before writing the manuscript, identify the reporting guideline appropriate to the study design using the EQUATOR Network. Submit the completed checklist and, when applicable, the flow diagram as supplementary files. Page numbers in the checklist should point to the location of each item in the manuscript. Failure to provide a required checklist may delay editorial assessment.

2.8 Registration, protocols, and analysis plans

Clinical trials must be registered prospectively in a WHO-recognized or ICMJE-accepted public registry before enrolment of the first participant. The registry name, registration number, and registration date must appear in the abstract and in the Methods section. Late registration must be explained and may lead to rejection.
Systematic reviews should be prospectively registered when an appropriate registry is available. Study protocols and statistical analysis plans should be made available through a registry, repository, supplementary file, or protocol publication. Deviations from the registered protocol or analysis plan must be clearly identified and justified. Back to Quick Navigation
The limits below are designed to promote concise and complete reporting. Word counts exclude the title page, abstract, references, tables, figure legends, and supplementary material unless stated otherwise. Editors may permit justified exceptions, particularly for complex multicentre studies, qualitative research, or research requiring detailed methods.
 

Article type	Abstract	Main text	References	Tables/Figures	Core requirements
Original Research	Structured, up to 300 words	Usually 3,500 words; up to 4,500 for complex trials	40	Up to 6	IMRaD; Research in Context/KT; reporting checklist
Systematic Review / Meta-analysis	Structured, up to 300	Up to 4,000	60	Up to 6	PRISMA checklist and flow diagram; protocol/registration
Narrative Review	Unstructured, up to 250	Up to 4,000	60	Up to 6	Usually invited or by prior inquiry; transparent search approach
Study Protocol	Structured, up to 300	Up to 3,000	40	Up to 4	SPIRIT or PRISMA-P; registration; ethics approval
Brief Report	Structured, up to 200	Up to 1,800	20	Up to 2	Concise original research; methods must remain reproducible
Debate / Point of View	Précis, 100-150	Up to 2,500	20	Up to 3	Evidence-based argument; clear position and counterarguments
In Brief	Not required	Up to 1,800	15	1	Important development, policy, practice, or method
Case Report / Case Series	Up to 200	Up to 1,500	15	Up to 3	CARE checklist; patient consent for publication
Letter to the Editor	Not required	Up to 800	10	1	Usually comments on recently published work or a concise observation
Editorial / Commentary	Not usually required	Up to 1,500	15	Up to 2	Normally commissioned; concise and accessible

  3.1 Original Research
Original Research reports a complete observational, experimental, clinical, epidemiological, health-services, qualitative, mixed-methods, laboratory, or methodological study. Use the Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion structure. A separate Conclusion may be included when it adds clarity but should not repeat the abstract or discussion.
Randomized trials must include the trial registration number, the approved protocol, the statistical analysis plan, when available, the CONSORT checklist, and the participant flow diagram. Reports should present absolute effects and harms as well as relative effects.

3.2 Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses

The review question, eligibility criteria, information sources, full search strategy, selection process, risk-of-bias methods, certainty-of-evidence approach, and synthesis methods must be explicit and reproducible. A narrative review should not be presented as a systematic review. The protocol and registration record should be cited, and deviations should be explained.

3.3 Narrative Reviews

Narrative reviews should be authoritative, balanced, and useful to a broad readership. Authors should explain how literature was identified and selected, distinguish evidence from opinion, discuss uncertainty and controversy, and avoid relying disproportionately on the authors' own work. Unsolicited reviews may be submitted, but prior inquiry is encouraged.

3.4 Study Protocols

Study protocols are considered when the research question is important, the design is methodologically sound, ethics approval has been obtained where required, and recruitment is not complete. Protocols should describe the rationale, objectives, design, participants, interventions or exposures, outcomes, sample-size justification, analysis plan, data management, monitoring, dissemination, and registration. Protocol publication does not guarantee acceptance of the final results paper.

3.5 Brief Reports and In Brief articles

Brief Reports present a focused research question with complete but concise methods and results. In Brief articles describe important developments in health practice, policy, education, technology, or service delivery without claiming to be a comprehensive research report or review. Both formats must meet the same ethical and integrity standards as full articles.

3.6 Debate / Point of View

Debate and Point-of-View articles should address a timely, complex issue in medicine, public health, ethics, or health policy. The title should be concise and informative. Begin with a 100-150 word précis, followed by a brief introduction that defines the issue and its significance. Use subheadings, make the evidentiary basis of major claims explicit, acknowledge credible alternative positions, and end with a focused conclusion or recommendations.

3.7 Case Reports and Case Series

Case reports should offer a clear educational message, unusual diagnostic or therapeutic insight, a novel adverse event, or a meaningful contribution to clinical reasoning. Follow the CARE guideline. Written consent for publication is mandatory whenever an individual could be identified, even if names and obvious identifiers are removed.

3.8 Letters to the Editor

Letters should be concise, constructive, and evidence-based. Letters commenting on a published MJIRI article should normally be submitted soon after publication and should identify the article in the first paragraph. The editors may invite the original authors to respond. Personal attacks, unsupported allegations, and promotional content will not be considered. Back to Quick Navigation

4.1 Initial-submission format

MJIRI uses a streamlined initial-submission approach: scientific completeness and transparent reporting take priority over cosmetic formatting. Submit an editable DOCX file that is not password-protected. Tables may be embedded in the manuscript. Figures may be embedded for review, but separate high-quality files will be required when requested. Use continuous line numbering and page numbers if the submission system does not add them automatically.

• Use a common, readable font at 10-12 point and 1.5 or double line spacing.
• Place each table and figure near its first citation or at the end of the manuscript; use one approach consistently.
• Do not use manual spaces or tabs to align columns. Use Word tables or paragraph settings.
• Do not lock the file, flatten text into images, or submit scanned pages as the main manuscript.
• Name files clearly, include a version date, and upload only the current version.

4.2 Order of manuscript elements

1. Title page
2. Abstract and keywords
3. Research in Context and Knowledge Translation panel when required
4. Main text
5. Acknowledgments and mandatory declarations
6. References
7. Tables with titles and footnotes (if applicable)
8. Figure legends
9. Supplementary-material list

4.3 Title page

The title page should contain all information needed to identify the article and its authors. Use sentence case, not title case.

• Full title: specific, descriptive, concise, and understandable outside the immediate specialty. Include the study design in the title for randomized trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, diagnostic-accuracy studies, and other designs when relevant.
• Short running title: no more than 50 characters, including spaces.
• Full name of each author in the preferred publication form, with one highest relevant academic degree if journal style requires it.
• Numbered affiliations: department, institution, city, and country. Add a current address when different from the affiliation during the work.
• Corresponding author: full postal address and email address. Telephone numbers should be provided in the submission system rather than published unless required.
• ORCID iD for the corresponding author and, preferably, for all authors.
• Word count for the main text, number of references, and number of tables and figures.
• Trial or review registration number where applicable.
• Any previous presentation of the work and any related preprint or manuscript.

4.4 Abstract and keywords

Original research and systematic reviews should use a structured abstract with the headings Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusion. Randomized trials may use Background, Methods, Findings, Interpretation, Funding, and Registration when this improves clarity. Abstracts must contain the main numerical results, including effect estimates and uncertainty, and must not contain citations.

• Describe the objective and study design clearly.
• Identify the setting, participants, main intervention or exposure, primary outcome, and analysis population.
• Report sample size, major results, effect estimates, confidence intervals, and important harms when relevant.
• Avoid undefined abbreviations and promotional conclusions.
• Provide 3-10 keywords, preferably selected from Medical Subject Headings (MeSH).

4.5 Knowledge Translation panel

For Original Research, Systematic Reviews, and other clinically or policy-relevant articles, include a concise panel after the abstract. This panel builds on MJIRI's Knowledge Translation section and the contextual approach used by leading general medical journals.
 

Panel component	Required content
↑What is “already known” in this topic:	Briefly state how existing evidence was assessed before the study. For major clinical research, identify databases, search dates, key terms, and relevant restrictions. Explain the uncertainty or gap that justified the work.
→What this article adds:	State what the study contributes beyond existing evidence. Explain how the new findings, considered with prior evidence, may affect research, clinical practice, health policy, education, or implementation. Clearly identify uncertainty and avoid recommendations that exceed the evidence.

 

Recommended length About 50-60 words in total. The panel should not duplicate the abstract and ordinarily should not contain references; supporting citations belong in the main text.

 

4.6 Introduction

The Introduction should provide only the background needed to understand the question. Define the problem, summarize key evidence and uncertainty, explain why the study was needed, and end with a clear objective or hypothesis. Do not present results or an extensive literature review.

4.7 Methods

The Methods must contain enough detail for a knowledgeable reader to understand, evaluate, and, where feasible, reproduce the work. Describe what was planned before the results were known and distinguish prespecified analyses from exploratory analyses.

• Study design, setting, dates, sites, and relevant context.
• Eligibility criteria, recruitment, sampling, and participant flow.
• Interventions, exposures, comparators, outcomes, measurement methods, and follow-up.
• Sample-size calculation or justification, including assumptions.
• Randomization, allocation concealment, masking, and protocol deviations where applicable.
• Data collection, quality assurance, missing-data handling, and statistical methods.
• Names and versions of software, packages, devices, assays, and key materials; include manufacturers and locations when relevant.
• Ethics approval, consent, trial or review registration, protocol availability, and data-management safeguards.
• Patient and public involvement, when applicable, including how contributors were involved in design, conduct, interpretation, or dissemination.

4.8 Statistical reporting

Statistical methods should be described with enough detail to permit verification by a qualified reader with access to the data. Analysis choices must follow the study design and should be prespecified whenever possible.

• Identify primary and secondary outcomes and the analysis population.
• Report effect sizes with confidence intervals, not just p-values. Distinguish clinical importance from statistical significance.
• Give exact p values to an appropriate number of digits; report p<0.001 rather than p=0.000.
• Report numerators and denominators with percentages. For continuous variables, use the mean and standard deviation, or the median and interquartile range, as appropriate.
• Explain handling of missing data, losses to follow-up, clustering, repeated measures, multiplicity, non-independence, and model assumptions.
• Label subgroup and sensitivity analyses as prespecified or exploratory. Avoid interpreting interaction from separate within-group p values.
• Provide model-building procedures, variable selection, validation, calibration, and diagnostic checks when applicable.
• Name statistical software and version. Share analysis code when possible.

4.9 Sex, gender, equity, and population descriptors

Follow the SAGER principles. Use “sex” for biological attributes and “gender” for socially constructed roles or identities unless a different definition is justified. Explain how sex and gender were determined, report the distribution of participants, analyze and report results by sex or gender when scientifically appropriate, and justify exclusion of any group. Consider relevant dimensions of equity and avoid treating socially constructed categories as fixed biological traits.

4.10 Results

Present findings in a logical sequence that follows the objectives and prespecified outcomes. Begin with participant flow and baseline characteristics when relevant. Report results without interpretation, and do not repeat all values from tables or figures in the text. Include adverse events, missing data, and unplanned analyses. Do not suppress null, negative, or inconvenient findings.

4.11 Discussion and conclusion

Begin with a concise statement of the principal findings. Interpret the results in relation to the research question and prior evidence; explain plausible mechanisms; discuss clinical, policy, or scientific relevance; and address alternative explanations. Include a candid limitations section that considers bias, imprecision, generalizability, missing data, multiplicity, and other uncertainties.
The conclusion should directly answer the study objective and remain proportionate to the design and results. Avoid claiming causation from observational data, claiming safety from inadequate samples, or making economic recommendations without economic analyses. New hypotheses should be clearly labeled as hypotheses.

4.12 Tables

• Number tables in the order cited and give each a concise, self-explanatory title.
• Use editable Word tables, not screenshots or photographs.
• Use short column headings; place explanations, definitions, and statistical details in footnotes.
• Define all non-standard abbreviations and identify measures of variation.
• Provide counts as well as percentages and indicate the denominator when it varies.
• Do not duplicate information already shown in a figure or described fully in the text.
• Obtain permission and cite the source for adapted or reproduced tables.

4.13 Figures, images, and legends

Figures should communicate information accurately and without visual distortion. At final submission, provide separate files in an accepted format such as TIFF, EPS, PDF, JPEG, or PNG. Photographic images should normally be at least 300 dpi at publication size; line art may require higher resolution. Editable vector files are preferred for graphs and diagrams.

• Number figures in order of citation and provide a complete legend for each.
• Label axes, units, groups, and error bars. Avoid unnecessary 3-dimensional effects and decorative backgrounds.
• Use color combinations that remain distinguishable for readers with color-vision deficiency and in grayscale.
• Include scale bars in microscopy and imaging. Explain stains, arrows, symbols, and image processing.
• Apply adjustments to the whole image. Selective enhancement, deletion, movement, or addition of features is prohibited.
• Preserve and provide original uncropped images, blots, gels, and microscopy files on request. Splices must be clearly indicated and justified.
• Obtain written consent for identifiable individuals and permission for copyrighted material.

4.14 Supplementary material

Supplementary files should support, not replace, essential reporting in the main article. Examples include protocols, statistical analysis plans, reporting checklists, additional methods, extended tables, datasets, code, questionnaires, and multimedia. Each file must be cited in the manuscript and named in order (for example, Supplementary Appendix 1 or Table S1). The journal may publish supplementary material as supplied without extensive editing.

4.15 Abbreviations, units, drugs, genes, and nomenclature

• Use abbreviations sparingly and define each at first use. Avoid abbreviations in the title and minimize them in the abstract.
• Use SI units. Report temperature in degrees Celsius and blood pressure in mm Hg.
• Use generic drug names; give dose, route, schedule, and duration. A brand name may be added once when necessary.
• Use internationally accepted gene, protein, organism, and disease nomenclature. Italicize gene symbols where convention requires it.
• Provide database identifiers, accession numbers, catalog numbers, and resource identifiers when available.

4.16 Mandatory end-of-manuscript statements

Use the following order and include a heading even when the statement is “not applicable” or “none,” where relevant:

10. Ethics approval and consent to participate
11. Consent for publication
12. Trial or review registration
13. Data Availability
14. Code or software availability
15. Authors' contributions (CRediT)
16. Funding
17. Role of the funding source
18. Competing interests
19. Acknowledgments
20. Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies
21. Provenance and peer review, if requested by the journal

Back to Quick Navigation
Authors must use the latest applicable reporting guideline and any relevant extension. The following table lists common requirements; it is not exhaustive. When more than one guideline applies, use all relevant checklists.

Study type	Guideline	Additional MJIRI expectations
Randomized controlled trial	CONSORT; relevant extensions; TIDieR for interventions	Prospective registration, protocol, statistical analysis plan, flow diagram, harms, data-sharing statement
Trial protocol	SPIRIT; SPIRIT-AI when applicable	Registration, ethics approval, schedule of enrolment/interventions/assessments
Observational study	STROBE; STROBE-MR for Mendelian randomization	Design in title/abstract, participant selection, bias, missing data, sensitivity analyses
Diagnostic or prognostic accuracy	STARD; TRIPOD/TRIPOD+AI for prediction models	Reference standard, thresholds, participant flow, calibration, discrimination, validation
Systematic review/meta-analysis	PRISMA 2020; PRISMA-NMA, PRISMA-ScR, or other extension	Protocol/registration, full search strategy, flow diagram, risk of bias, certainty of evidence
Systematic-review protocol	PRISMA-P	Registration, planned synthesis and risk-of-bias methods
Qualitative research	COREQ or SRQR	Researcher reflexivity, sampling, setting, analytic approach, supporting quotations
Mixed-methods research	Relevant quantitative guideline plus appropriate mixed-methods framework	Integration rationale, timing, priority, and interpretation across components
Case report/case series	CARE	Timeline, diagnostic reasoning, intervention, outcomes, patient perspective where possible, consent
Animal research	ARRIVE 2.0	Ethics, 3Rs, randomization, masking, sample-size justification, humane endpoints
Health economic evaluation	CHEERS	Perspective, time horizon, comparators, resource use, uncertainty, model access
Quality improvement	SQUIRE	Context, intervention rationale, measures, iterative changes, unintended consequences
Implementation study	StaRI	Implementation strategy, context, fidelity, outcomes, sustainability
Epidemiological outbreak report	STROBE plus outbreak-specific guidance	Case definition, surveillance, setting, transmission and response methods
Machine learning / AI in health	TRIPOD+AI, CONSORT-AI, SPIRIT-AI, DECIDE-AI or other relevant guidance	Dataset provenance, preprocessing, leakage prevention, external validation, fairness, calibration, model/code access
Research using routinely collected health data	RECORD	Data source, linkage, coding, validation, access, and reproducibility

 

5.1 Clinical trials

MJIRI considers a clinical trial to be any prospective assignment of human participants to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate effects on health outcomes. Trials must be prospectively registered. Authors must submit the approved protocol and, when available, the statistical analysis plan. The manuscript must explain any changes to outcomes, sample size, eligibility criteria, analyses, or stopping rules after trial commencement.
Report participant flow, baseline characteristics, intervention fidelity, primary and secondary outcomes, effect estimates with confidence intervals, protocol deviations, and harms. Identify who was included in each analysis. Use absolute event counts and absolute effects alongside relative measures. Data-monitoring arrangements and stopping decisions should be described when applicable.

5.2 Observational and routinely collected data studies

Clearly distinguish cohort, case-control, cross-sectional, ecological, and other designs. Define exposures, outcomes, confounders, and effect modifiers before reporting analyses. Explain participant selection, data quality, linkage, coding, missingness, and attempts to address bias and confounding. Avoid causal language unless the design and analysis justify causal inference.

5.3 Systematic reviews

Searches should be sufficiently comprehensive for the question and should include the complete strategy for at least one database. State the final search date and explain language, date, publication-status, and database restrictions. Duplicate screening and extraction are recommended. Report the risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence using recognized methods. Discuss heterogeneity and small-study or publication bias where relevant.

5.4 Qualitative and mixed-methods research

State the qualitative approach and epistemological position when relevant; explain researcher-participant relationships, sampling, saturation or information power, data collection, coding, reflexivity, and analytic procedures. Provide sufficient quotations or examples to support interpretations while protecting identity. Mixed-methods reports should explain why integration was needed and how components informed one another.

5.5 Artificial intelligence, prediction models, and digital health

Describe dataset sources, eligibility, labeling, preprocessing, train/validation/test splits, missing data, class imbalance, hyperparameters, model selection, and measures taken to prevent leakage. Report discrimination, calibration, clinical utility, uncertainty, and subgroup performance. External validation is strongly encouraged. Provide code, model weights, and documentation when legally and ethically possible. Claims of clinical readiness require prospective evaluation and comparison with relevant standards of care. Back to Quick Navigation

6.1 Human participants, data, and biological materials

Research involving living or deceased individuals, identifiable data, records, images, tissues, or other human materials must comply with the latest Declaration of Helsinki, relevant national law, and institutional requirements. The Methods must name the approving ethics committee, provide the approval or exemption number and date when available, and state how informed consent was obtained or waived.
If formal review was not required, authors must explain why and identify the policy or authority supporting that determination. Ethics approval obtained after the research began is not normally acceptable. The journal may request approval letters, consent forms, protocols, or institutional confirmation.

6.2 Informed consent and privacy

Participants must be informed about participation in accordance with applicable ethical and legal requirements. State whether consent was written or oral and how it was documented. A waiver or alteration of consent must have ethics approval and must be justified in the manuscript.
Identifying information should be included only when essential and when written consent for publication has been obtained. Removing names or masking the eyes does not guarantee anonymity. Do not alter clinical facts to disguise identity. For children or adults lacking capacity, obtain permission from the legally authorized representative and assent when appropriate.

6.3 Vulnerable populations and community-based research

Research involving refugees, prisoners, displaced people, indigenous communities, economically disadvantaged groups, or other populations at increased risk of coercion or harm requires particular justification and safeguards. Describe community engagement, benefit sharing, local partnership, and governance where relevant. Avoid extractive research practices and inappropriate generalization.

6.4 Animal research

Animal studies must have prior approval from an institutional animal-care and use committee or equivalent body and comply with applicable legislation and accepted welfare standards. Report species, strain, sex, age, source, housing, husbandry, anesthesia, analgesia, euthanasia, humane endpoints, exclusions, randomization, masking, and sample-size justification. Apply the principles of replacement, reduction, and refinement.

6.5 Biosafety, dual use, and hazards

Manuscripts must identify unusual hazards and describe relevant biosafety, biosecurity, radiation, chemical, or occupational approvals. Research with potential dual-use implications may undergo additional editorial review. Authors should provide enough information for scientific evaluation without enabling unreasonable harm; editors may seek specialist advice or request modifications.

6.6 Plagiarism, text recycling, and duplicate publication

MJIRI screens submissions for textual overlap and may use similarity-detection software. Similarity scores are interpreted in context; a percentage alone does not establish misconduct. Copying without attribution, excessive paraphrase of another source, unattributed translation, and presenting another person's ideas or data as one's own are unacceptable.
Limited reuse of standard method descriptions may be acceptable with citation and transparent wording, but substantial recycling of text, data, tables, or figures must be disclosed. “Salami slicing” a coherent dataset into minimally different papers is discouraged. Authors must cite and provide related manuscripts when requested.

6.7 Data fabrication, falsification, and image manipulation

Fabrication, falsification, selective omission, inappropriate alteration of images, and misleading statistical manipulation are serious misconduct. The journal may request raw data, laboratory records, original images, analysis code, ethics documents, and authorship records. Failure to provide adequate documentation may result in rejection, notification of institutions or funders, correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

6.8 Citation and peer-review integrity

• Cite sources because they are relevant, not to satisfy coercive requests or inflate citation counts.
• Do not use fabricated reviewer identities, false email addresses, or third-party services that manipulate peer review.
• Do not submit manuscripts produced by paper mills or allow unaccountable third parties to control data or authorship.
• Authors may suggest qualified reviewers but must disclose relationships and must not suggest recent collaborators, close colleagues, mentors, trainees, family members, or anyone with a conflict.
• Attempts to influence editorial decisions outside the formal process are inappropriate.

6.9 Corrections, concerns, and retractions

MJIRI follows COPE principles when concerns arise before or after publication. Honest errors that affect the record may require a correction. Findings that are unreliable due to a major error or misconduct may require retraction. An expression of concern may be issued while an investigation is pending. Authors are expected to cooperate promptly and transparently. Back to Quick Navigation

7.1 Data Availability statement

Every research article must include a Data Availability statement. The statement should identify where the data and metadata underlying the findings can be accessed, including repository name, persistent identifier, and access conditions. Data should be deposited in a trusted subject-specific or general repository whenever ethical and legal conditions permit.
 

Minimum principle Readers and reviewers should be able to understand which data exist, where they are held, who can access them, and how to request access. “Data available on request” without a clear process and legitimate reason is insufficient.

 

7.2 Restricted or sensitive data

Patient confidentiality, participant consent, national law, contracts, and legitimate security concerns may limit public sharing. When data cannot be openly released, provide a de-identified or aggregated dataset where possible and describe a controlled-access process, the responsible data custodian, eligibility criteria, expected response time, and any data-use agreement. Restrictions must not prevent editors from obtaining sufficient evidence to evaluate the work.

7.3 Code and computational reproducibility

Custom code, scripts, algorithms, and computational workflows necessary to reproduce the results should be shared in a persistent repository that includes version information, documentation, dependencies, and an appropriate license. When proprietary software is essential, describe the software and its settings in sufficient detail to enable replication, and provide an open alternative when feasible.

7.4 Protocols, analysis plans, and materials

Protocols, statistical analysis plans, questionnaires, intervention manuals, laboratory protocols, and other key materials should be cited or made available. Novel biological materials, cell lines, plasmids, and reagents should be deposited in recognized repositories or made available under reasonable conditions, subject to biosafety and legal restrictions.

7.5 Data and software citation

Cite datasets, software, protocols, and preprints as research outputs. Include creators, title, repository or publisher, year, version, and DOI or other persistent identifier. References to dynamic web pages should include an access date.

7.6 Reproducibility review

Editors and reviewers may request data, code, protocols, or additional analyses. The journal may use statistical or image-integrity review for selected manuscripts. Authors should retain original data and records for the period required by their institution, funder, and applicable law. Back to Quick Navigation

8.1 Submission package

Submit through the current MJIRI online submission system linked from the journal website. The corresponding author should ensure that manuscript information in the system matches the uploaded files.

• Cover letter, normally no more than one page.
• Main manuscript with title page, abstract, text, declarations, references, tables, and figure legends.
• Figure files and supplementary material as applicable.
• Completed reporting checklist and flow diagram.
• Ethics approval documentation when requested or required by journal policy.
• Protocol and statistical analysis plan for clinical trials; protocol for systematic reviews when available.
• Related manuscripts, in-press papers, or prior reviewer correspondence when relevant.
• Permissions and consent documentation for identifiable or copyrighted material.

8.2 Cover letter

The cover letter should identify the article type, summarize the research question and principal contribution, explain relevance to MJIRI readers, disclose prior submission or related work, identify preprints and registration records, and note any special ethical or data-access issues. Suggested and opposed reviewers may be listed with brief reasons. Do not include promotional language or requests about publication charges in the scientific cover letter unless the submission system instructs otherwise.

8.3 Initial checks and editorial assessment

The editorial office checks completeness, scope, language, ethics, declarations, reporting checklists, plagiarism, and file quality. A manuscript may be returned for technical correction before editorial review. Editors may reject a manuscript without external review when it is outside scope, methodologically inadequate, ethically unacceptable, insufficiently reported, duplicative, or unlikely to be useful to the journal's readership.

8.4 External peer review

Manuscripts selected for external review are normally assessed by at least two independent experts when feasible. Reviewers evaluate validity, transparency, ethics, interpretation, and relevance. The editors make editorial decisions and are not determined by a simple vote. Reviewer identities are confidential unless the journal has explicitly adopted and disclosed an open-review option.
Peer review is confidential. Authors must not post reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, or confidential manuscript information without permission. Reviewers are expected to disclose conflicts and to protect manuscript content, including when using AI-assisted tools.

8.5 Editorial decisions

• Accept: the manuscript is suitable subject to production checks.
• Minor revision: limited changes are required and may be assessed by the editor.
• Major revision: substantial scientific or reporting changes are required; revision does not guarantee acceptance.
• Reject and resubmit: a fundamentally revised manuscript may be considered as a new submission when invited.
• Reject: the manuscript will not be considered further in its present form.

8.6 Preparing a revision

Submit a clean revised manuscript, a version showing changes when requested, and a point-by-point response. Quote each editor and reviewer comment, describe exactly what was changed, and provide page and line numbers. When a suggested change is not made, explain the scientific reason respectfully and provide evidence. Do not add analyses solely to obtain a preferred result; label new exploratory analyses clearly.

8.7 Appeals and complaints

Authors may appeal a rejection when they believe a material factual or procedural error affected the decision. An appeal should be submitted promptly and address the decision letter with specific evidence, rather than restate the manuscript's importance. Appeals do not guarantee re-review. Complaints about process, ethics, or conduct should be directed to the editor-in-chief or the institutional channel identified on the journal website. They will be handled in accordance with COPE principles.

8.8 Timelines

Editorial and publication timelines vary with manuscript complexity, reviewer availability, revision quality, ethics checks, and production requirements. Any average timeline stated on the journal website is indicative rather than guaranteed. Authors should use the submission system to check status and should contact the editorial office only when a manuscript has remained beyond the journal's stated interval without an update. Back to Quick Navigation

9.1 Final files and production checks

After acceptance, authors may be asked for final editable source files, high-resolution figures, completed forms, permissions, and confirmation of declarations. The journal may copyedit for clarity, consistency, and house style without changing scientific meaning. Major scientific changes after acceptance require editorial approval and may trigger additional review.

9.2 Proofs

Proofs are provided to identify production errors, not to rewrite the article. The corresponding author should coordinate a single set of corrections from all authors and return it within the deadline in the proof email. Changes to results, authorship, funding, or disclosures must be explained and may delay publication.

9.3 Authorship and affiliation changes after acceptance

Changes are permitted only in exceptional circumstances and require a detailed explanation and written agreement from all authors. Changes requested after online publication normally require a formal correction notice rather than silent alteration of the article.

9.4 License, permissions, and third-party material

Authors must complete the journal's publication agreement and comply with the license displayed at acceptance. Permission must cover electronic open-access publication and any reuse allowed by the license. Acknowledgment of a source does not substitute for permission when permission is required.

9.5 Online publication, DOI, and dissemination

Accepted articles are published online with a persistent DOI in accordance with the journal's production schedule. Authors should cite the final published version rather than an accepted manuscript when available. Authors may share the article in accordance with its license and should update preprints, repositories, institutional profiles, and trial or review registries with the final citation.

9.6 Post-publication responsibilities

Authors must notify the journal promptly if they discover an error that could affect interpretation, attribution, ethics, or reproducibility. Authors should respond constructively to post-publication correspondence and reasonable requests for data or clarification. Corrections and retractions are linked to the original article to preserve the integrity of the record. Back to Quick Navigation

10.1 Author checklist before submission

☐ The manuscript fits MJIRI's scope, and the correct article type has been selected.
☐ The title is in sentence case, is specific, and includes the study design when relevant.
☐ All authors meet ICMJE criteria, approve the submission, and have agreed on order and CRediT roles.
☐ The corresponding author and guarantor are identified; ORCID iDs are included where available.
☐ The abstract contains the main numerical findings and has no references.
☐ The Research in Context and Knowledge Translation panel is included when required.
☐ The appropriate EQUATOR checklist and flow diagram are complete and uploaded.
☐ Ethics approval, informed consent, registration, and protocol details are reported accurately.
☐ Primary and secondary outcomes, sample-size methods, missing data, and statistical analyses are fully described.
☐ Tables are editable; figures are legible, accurately labeled, and supported by original files.
☐ All references are cited in order, checked against the original source, and formatted consistently.
☐ Data Availability, code, funding, role of funder, competing interests, CRediT, acknowledgments, and AI declarations are included.
☐ Related manuscripts, preprints, and prior publication are disclosed.
☐ Permissions and consent for publication have been obtained.
☐ Files are unlocked, clearly named, and represent the final approved version.

10.2 Model statements

Statement	Example wording
Ethics approval	“The study was approved by the [full committee name] ([approval number], [date]) and was conducted in accordance with applicable ethical standards.”
Consent to participate	“All participants provided written informed consent before enrolment.” / “The ethics committee waived informed consent because [reason].”
Consent for publication	“Written informed consent for publication of potentially identifiable information and images was obtained from the participant [or legal representative].”
Trial registration	“Registered at [registry], [number], on [date], before enrolment of the first participant.”
Data Availability - open	“The de-identified data and data dictionary are available in [repository] at [DOI/persistent link].”
Data Availability - controlled	“The data are not publicly available because [ethical/legal reason]. Qualified researchers may apply to [data custodian/contact or portal] subject to [conditions].”
Code availability	“Analysis code and software documentation are available at [repository and DOI], version [number].”
Funding	“This work was supported by [funder] (grant [number]).” / “This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.”
Role of funder	“The funder had no role in study design; data collection, analysis, or interpretation; manuscript preparation; or the decision to submit.”
Competing interests	“The authors declare no competing interests.”
AI-assisted writing	“During preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [tool, version] for [purpose]. The authors reviewed and edited the output and take full responsibility for the content.”
No AI use	“The authors did not use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the writing of this manuscript.”

 

10.3 Contact and current operational information

Submit manuscripts and consult current operational information through the MJIRI website. Because submission platforms, email addresses, fees, licenses, and processing timelines may change, the website should be treated as the authoritative source for these details.
https://mjiri.iums.ac.ir Back to Quick Navigation
References are numbered in the order first cited and identified in the text by Arabic numerals in square brackets. Use the same number for repeated citations. Place citation numbers before closing punctuation when this is the journal's house style and apply the rule consistently. List the first six authors followed by “et al” when there are more than six. Include a DOI whenever available.

Source type	Format/example
Journal article	Vega KJ, Pina I, Krevsky B. Heart transplantation is associated with an increased risk for pancreatobiliary disease. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124(11):980-983. doi:10.xxxx/xxxxx.
More than six authors	Parkin DM, Clayton D, Black RJ, Masuyer E, Friedl HP, Ivanov E, et al. Childhood leukemia in Europe after Chornobyl: 5-year follow-up. Br J Cancer. 1996;73:1006-1012.
Article published online ahead of print	Author AA, Author BB. Article title. Journal Name. Published online Month Day, Year. doi:10.xxxx/xxxxx.
Systematic review or guideline	Organization or Author Group. Title of guideline or review. Journal or Publisher; Year. doi or URL.
Book	Ringsven MK, Bond D. Gerontology and Leadership Skills for Nurses. 2nd ed. Delmar Publishers; 1996.
Chapter in a book	Phillips SJ, Whisnant JP. Hypertension and stroke. In: Laragh JH, Brenner BM, eds. Hypertension: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management. 2nd ed. Raven Press; 1995:465-478.
Website	World Health Organization. Title of web page. Updated Month Day, Year. Accessed Month Day, Year. URL.
Preprint	Author AA, Author BB. Title. Preprint. Repository. Posted Month Day, Year. doi:10.xxxx/xxxxx.
Dataset	Creator AA, Creator BB. Dataset title. Repository; Year. Version. doi:10.xxxx/xxxxx.
Software	Developer or Group. Software name. Version. Publisher or repository; Year. doi or URL.
Clinical trial registry	Study title. Registry name. Identifier. First posted Month Day, Year. Accessed Month Day, Year. URL.

Avoid citing personal communications or inaccessible material in the reference list. Cite a personal communication in the text only when essential and with written permission. Clearly identify retracted articles if they are cited for historical or methodological reasons. Do not rely on a retracted article as evidence for a scientific claim.
Return to Quick Navigation