Expectations for the quality and originality of communications submitted to The Analyst

---

Abstract

Publishing an Analyst communication is one of the fastest and most effective ways analytical scientists can disseminate exciting new results and ensure their work is read by their peers. This editorial explains this journal's publication criteria for communications, giving guidelines on preparing articles for submission.

---

Several forums exist for physical and life scientists to publish their significant early research findings urgently – Nature Letters, Science Reports, JACS Communications and Chemical Communications to mention a few. These journals are very broad in scope and readership, however, so where can analytical scientists publish their exciting new results and ensure they reach a really targeted audience? The Analyst offers authors the unique possibility of publishing an urgent communication and this editorial is one of a series on standards of publication for The Analyst.^1,2 Here we focus on explaining the journal's publication criteria for communications.

Firstly, we will define an Analyst communication. Communications report preliminary research findings that are highly original, of immediate interest and are likely to have a high impact. The key aim of Analyst communications is to present innovative chemical concepts with important analytical implications. Communications are given priority treatment, are fast-tracked through the publication process and appear prominently at the front of the journal in a dedicated communications section.

For the author, publication of an Analyst communication is a significant achievement. Less than three in every ten communications received are actually deemed suitable for urgent publication. Authors can be guaranteed that only the most exciting, promising and prestigious work is included. Additionally, The Analyst is widely regarded as one of the fastest journals publishing analytical chemistry research.³ Publication times in The Analyst are quicker than ever: on average, papers are published in less than 100 days from receipt and communications accelerated to be published in half that time. Our target is to get reviewer reports to the author in just two weeks and publication within 50 days of submission. Also worth mentioning here is that, contrary to popular belief, publishing a communication does not preclude subsequent publication of a full paper. In fact quite the opposite is true — we expect a communication to be followed by a full paper, ideally in The Analyst.

One potential dilemma is that analytical chemistry is traditionally about getting reliable, realistic and reproducible results. And, as Michael Freund debated in a recent editorial² “new approaches and directions do not always immediately impact sensitivity, selectivity or the limit of detection”. He stresses that “we must not loose sight of the importance of fostering innovation”. With this in mind, Analyst communications need only demonstrate “proof of principle”: it is not expected that the analytical figures of merit will necessarily surpass those of existing, highly refined analytical techniques.

Some might argue that judging whether a contribution is very significant to its field is a highly subjective matter. Certainly, it is difficult for us to define here which areas of analytical science might be considered sufficiently exciting to be worthy of urgent publication. It is clear however that papers that report a technical improvement or enhancement in sensitivity or selectivity of an established analytical technique will not normally be sufficient to merit urgent publication unless they contain chemical principles or applications of exceptional novelty.

Authors of communications should provide at the time of submission a brief statement explaining how the work meets the criteria of urgency and significance. This statement is supplied to the referees to aid them when making their recommendation regarding any submitted manuscript. It follows that when submitting a communication to The Analyst it is assumed that the major concepts presented in the manuscript will not have appeared previously as a publication. If a previous communication by the same author(s) has already appeared and the present manuscript describes a technical improvement or increase in the scope of the work, it will not be accepted in the absence of a novel conceptual advance.

To ensure communications are succinct and have maximum impact on the reader, a strict two-journal-pages limit is enforced. This is consistent with page restrictions for Chemical Communications and JACS Communications for example. This page limit is equivalent to approximately 2000 words with 15 references or 1300 words with two single column figures and around 15 references. Authors are strongly encouraged to use the article template for communications available at http://www.rsc.org/authors when preparing their manuscript. Lengthy introductions and discussion, extensive data, and excessive experimental details and conjecture should not be included in communications; the abstract is limited to one sentence (up to 30 words); there should be no section headings in the body of text; no separate conclusions section; and figures and tables should be kept to a minimum number (additional figures can be supplied as Electronic Supplementary Information, see http://www.rsc.org/esi for details).

For further details and guidelines about preparing a communication for submission to The Analyst please consult the detailed guidelines for authors available on The Analyst website (http:/www.rsc.org/analyst). As always, we warmly invite you to provide feedback on this editorial and indeed any issues regarding the development of The Analyst and we strongly encourage you to send your communications for urgent dissemination via our pages.

Gillian Greenway (Chair, Editorial Board)

and Sarah Day (Managing Editor)

on behalf ofThe AnalystEditorial Board

References

1. M. Thompson and G. Greenway, Expectations for the quality and originality of articles submitted to The Analyst, Analyst, 2002, 127, iii.
2. M. Freund, Broadening the scope of The Analyst and fostering innovation, Analyst, 2004, 129, 283.
3. I. Dióspatonyi, G. Horvai and T. Braun, Publication speed in analytical chemistry journals, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 2001, 41, 1452–1456.

---