Author Guidelines

All manuscripts must be submitted through the JFNIS Online Submission Portal at submit.jfnis.com. Email submissions are not accepted. Authors must register an account, complete the submission workflow, and confirm compliance with all journal requirements.

Only complete submissions (including all required documents, disclosures, and the applicable reporting guideline checklist) will enter the peer review process. Incomplete submissions will be returned to the corresponding author without review.

JFNIS accepts the following article types. Each type carries specific structural and reporting requirements. Contact the editorial office if your manuscript does not clearly fit one category.

A comprehensive, reproducible synthesis of existing literature using a pre-defined search strategy and documented inclusion/exclusion criteria — without pooled statistical analysis of results. Use this type when your review follows a formal, systematic methodology to answer a specific clinical or scientific question. PRISMA guidelines mandatory. Pre-registration in PROSPERO strongly encouraged. If your systematic review includes pooled statistical analysis across studies, submit as a Meta-Analysis instead.

A systematic review that includes quantitative pooling of results from multiple studies using statistical methods. Use this type when you have conducted a formal systematic search AND performed statistical synthesis of results (e.g., effect sizes, forest plots, heterogeneity analyses). PRISMA guidelines mandatory, including PRISMA for meta-analyses. Pre-registration in PROSPERO strongly encouraged. If you have conducted a systematic review without statistical pooling, submit as a Systematic Review instead.

Prospective studies in which participants are randomly allocated to intervention or control conditions. Use this type specifically for studies with randomization — do not use Original Research for RCTs. Trial registration number (ClinicalTrials.gov or equivalent) required in abstract and title page. CONSORT guidelines and flow diagram mandatory.

Empirical studies with quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods designs. This includes cross-sectional studies, cohort studies (prospective and retrospective), observational studies, intervention studies without randomization, repeated measures studies, reliability and validity studies, and outcome-based analyses. Use this type when your study collects and analyses data from human participants but is not a randomized controlled trial, pilot study, or protocol. Full IMRAD structure required. Applicable reporting guideline checklist mandatory — STROBE for observational and cross-sectional designs, CONSORT for non-randomized interventions.

Studies designed to assess the feasibility, acceptability, or preliminary signal of an intervention before a full trial. Use this type when the primary purpose is to inform the design of a larger study — not to establish efficacy. Must explicitly state feasibility objectives. Follow CONSORT pilot extension. Do not use this type if you are reporting efficacy conclusions from a small sample.

Detailed, pre-publication descriptions of the design and planned methods of a study not yet completed. Use this type to establish a public record of your methodology before data collection is complete. Must be registered in a public trial registry before submission. Follow SPIRIT guidelines.

Structured models for clinical reasoning, assessment, classification, or intervention design — presented as organized systems with defined components, logic, and scope. Use this type when you are proposing or describing a clinical decision-making model rather than reporting data or making purely theoretical arguments. Frameworks must distinguish between evidence-supported and hypothetical elements. See Clinical Frameworks section for specific requirements.

Articles that describe, evaluate, validate, or develop assessment protocols, test batteries, outcome measures, clinical classification systems, or research methodologies. Use this type when the method itself is the primary contribution — not the clinical or scientific findings produced by the method.

Narrative, scoping, or educational reviews that synthesize existing literature without a fully systematic methodology. Use this type when your review provides a broad overview, theoretical synthesis, or educational summary of a topic — and when your literature selection is not fully systematic. Must provide a clear rationale for literature selection. PRISMA for scoping reviews where applicable.

Articles that develop, critically analyse, or challenge concepts, models, mechanisms, or theoretical frameworks — without primary empirical data. Use this type when your contribution is primarily intellectual and argumentative rather than data-driven. Must clearly distinguish between established evidence, plausible interpretation, and hypothesis. See specific requirements under Theoretical Articles below.

Single cases (Case Report) or grouped presentations of 2 or more patients (Case Series) with clear educational, mechanistic, or clinical reasoning value. Use Case Report for a single patient; use Case Series when presenting multiple patients together to illustrate a pattern or finding. CARE guidelines required for both. See the Case Reports section and the Ethics & Consent section for important distinctions between the two types regarding IRB requirements.

Shorter articles presenting a professional position, critical analysis, or expert commentary on an area of active clinical or scientific development. Use this type when your contribution is primarily a well-argued, evidence-informed opinion or analysis — not a data study or formal review. Evidence base must be clearly stated and opinion clearly distinguished from established evidence.

Brief, focused descriptions of specific assessment methods, measurement principles, clinical tools, software, or technical protocols. Use this type when you are presenting a technical procedure or instrument rather than clinical findings or a full research study. Structured abstract optional.

Brief, focused responses to articles published in JFNIS, or short commentaries on topics of immediate relevance to the field. Use this type to engage directly with published content, raise a methodological concern, offer an alternative interpretation, or draw attention to an important clinical or scientific issue. Letters are not peer-reviewed but are subject to editorial review and may be declined if they do not meet scientific or professional standards. Authors of the original article may be invited to respond. Letters must be constructive, scientifically grounded, and free of personal criticism.

The following word count ranges are guides, not strict limits. Scientific quality and completeness are the primary criteria. Word count excludes abstract, references, tables, and figure legends.

All manuscripts must be submitted in Microsoft Word (.docx) format. The manuscript file submitted for review must be fully anonymized: no author names, institutional affiliations, funding acknowledgements, or other identifying information in the main document.

Use standard formatting: 12pt font, double line spacing, continuous line numbers, and 2.5cm margins. Do not embed figures in the manuscript; submit them as separate files.

Please name your files exactly as shown below. This allows the editorial office to identify each file immediately and ensures the correct version reaches reviewers.

JFNIS uses double-blind peer review. Reviewers do not know who the authors are, and authors do not know who the reviewers are. For this to work, your manuscript file must be prepared without any information that could identify you or your institution. The title page (submitted separately) carries all identifying information.

Remove or replace the following from your manuscript file before submission:

The title page is submitted as a separate file and is seen only by the editor, never by reviewers. It must contain:

A cover letter is required with every submission. Keep it brief, one page maximum. The cover letter is not shared with reviewers and is read by the editor only. Its purpose is to confirm that the submission is complete, ethical, and appropriate for JFNIS. You do not need to sell your research or explain your methodology; the manuscript does that.

Your cover letter must include the following four elements, in any order:

That is all that is required. Do not include a summary of your findings, justification of your methods, or arguments for why the manuscript should be accepted. These are not relevant at this stage.

The title page must be submitted as a separate document and must not appear in the anonymized manuscript file.

Structured abstracts are required for original research, RCTs, systematic reviews, pilot studies, protocol articles, case reports, and case series. Maximum 300 words.

The following structure is mandatory for original research articles and strongly recommended for all empirical article types. Theoretical articles, perspectives, and frameworks may use alternative structures with justification.

The Methods section must be sufficiently detailed to allow full replication. Use the following subheadings in order:

Concise summary of main take-home messages. Conclusions must be proportionate to the data presented — do not overstate findings.

For applied research, a brief section describing practical translation into clinical practice, rehabilitation, or performance optimization. This section is particularly valued by JFNIS reviewers.

Every JFNIS manuscript must include a Declarations section at the end of the main text, immediately before the reference list. The section heading is "Declarations" and each subsection label is written in bold, followed by the text inline on the same line.

All ten subsections below are mandatory. If a subsection does not apply, you must still include it and state that explicitly. Do not omit it. The only exception is Editorial role disclosure, which is included only when an author holds an editorial role at JFNIS.

The subsections must appear in the following order:

In the submitted manuscript, author names in the author list should appear as: First name, middle initial(s) if applicable, Last name (e.g. Alexandra M. Thornton). This is the format that will appear in the published article. Do not use Last name, First name format.

Each author should be numbered to match their affiliation(s). If two authors share all affiliations they share the same number. Affiliations should be listed as: Department, Institution, City, Country (no postal codes or street addresses).

If two or more authors contributed equally to the work, indicate this with a footnote: "These authors contributed equally to this work."

APA 7th edition is the mandatory reference format for all JFNIS submissions. Vancouver style may be used by prior written agreement with the editorial office.

Include the full author list for all references. Do not use "et al." in the reference list. Include full article titles, complete journal names (not abbreviated), year, volume, issue, page range, and DOI or PubMed ID where available.

Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy and completeness of all references. Reference lists will not be edited by the editorial office.

All submissions must comply with the applicable reporting guideline. A completed checklist must be uploaded as a separate file with the submission. Manuscripts submitted without the required checklist will not enter peer review.

JFNIS exclusively publishes human-subject research. All studies must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and applicable national regulations. The ethical requirements vary by study type. Authors must apply the standards appropriate to their specific submission.

Single case reports are generally not classified as research under most national regulations and institutional policies. Research, in the regulatory sense, requires systematic data collection with intent to produce generalizable conclusions. A single patient's clinical course, described for educational or clinical communication purposes, typically falls outside this definition.

This position is consistent with CARE guidelines, ICMJE recommendations, and established practice in academic publishing. It is supported by published guidance including: de Sanctis V, Soliman AT, Daar S, et al. Retrospective observational studies: Lights and shadows for medical writers. Acta Biomed. 2022;93(5):e2022319. doi:10.23750/abm.v93i5.13179

IRB/ethics committee approval is therefore not required for single case reports. Authors are not required to obtain or document formal ethical approval or an exemption determination for single-patient submissions.

What is required for single case reports:

When a submission involves two or more patients presented together as a series, the nature of the work begins to resemble systematic data collection — particularly when cases are selected, compared, or analysed across patients to support a conclusion, and this distinction matters ethically and legally.

For case series, authors must contact their institutional ethics committee or IRB to determine whether formal review is required. The outcome will depend on the institution, jurisdiction, study design, and whether identifiable data is involved. Authors must include a statement confirming what determination was made and on what basis.

JFNIS does not require full IRB approval for all case series, but does require that authors have actively sought guidance from their institution and can document the outcome of that process.

All prospective studies, intervention studies, cohort studies, randomized controlled trials, and systematic data collection involving human participants require full ethical approval from an appropriate national or institutional ethics committee or IRB. The approval statement must include the committee name, approval number, and date of approval. Trial registration is mandatory for all intervention studies.

All submissions involving human participants must include one of the following statements, or a closely equivalent formulation, in the Methods section or a dedicated Ethics Statement section. Authors may copy and adapt these statements directly.

Authorship must reflect substantial contributions in accordance with ICMJE criteria. All four ICMJE conditions must be met: (1) substantial contribution to conception, design, data acquisition, or analysis; (2) drafting or critically revising the manuscript; (3) final approval of the version to be published; (4) accountability for all aspects of the work. The CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework is encouraged for specifying individual contributions.

All submissions are screened for plagiarism. Manuscripts must be original and must not be under consideration at another journal. Redundant or duplicate publication is not permitted. Significant overlap with the author's own previously published work must be disclosed at submission.

Authors must disclose any use of AI tools in manuscript preparation, including language editing, data analysis support, figure generation, or literature organization. AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and citation quality of all submitted work.

All allegations of misconduct — including data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or inappropriate authorship — are handled following COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. The editorial office is committed to investigating all credible concerns.

JFNIS strongly encourages open data, protocol pre-registration, and sharing of analysis code or supplementary materials. All submissions must include a Data Availability Statement explaining how the data underpinning the findings can be accessed, or providing a clear reason why data cannot be made available.

Case reports and case series are welcome when they provide clear educational, mechanistic, or clinical reasoning value. A case report should not merely describe improvement after an intervention. It should clarify the reasoning process, assessment logic, intervention selection, outcome tracking, and alternative explanations considered.

CARE guidelines are mandatory for all case-based submissions. A completed CARE checklist must be uploaded with the submission.

JFNIS welcomes clinical frameworks when they are presented as structured models for reasoning, assessment, classification, or intervention design. Frameworks must clearly distinguish between evidence-supported elements and elements that remain theoretical or hypothetical.

Frameworks must not be presented as validated diagnostic systems unless sufficient validation data are provided.

Theoretical articles developing or critically analyzing concepts, models, or mechanisms are a core article type at JFNIS. These manuscripts are evaluated on conceptual clarity, mechanistic plausibility, internal consistency, and contribution to the field.

Authors must distinguish clearly between established evidence, plausible interpretation, and speculative hypothesis. Claims must be proportionate to the supporting evidence. Theoretical models should include discussion of how the model could be empirically tested or falsified.

Because JFNIS addresses interdisciplinary fields, authors must define specialized terminology clearly. Terms such as "functional," "integration," "network," "dysregulation," "plasticity," "reflex," "gain," "gating," "sensorimotor," "autonomic," and "systems-level" must be used with precision and operationalized where possible.