In Blog

In my previous post, I outlined how to identify a novel review topic. Now you have your great idea for a review article ready, you might think that this is the time to start writing. While this strategy can pay off for some, it is a risky and often time-consuming approach. The fact is that some journals do not accept unsolicited reviews, while others do but with varying frequency. This doesn’t mean that you can’t write a review if you haven’t been asked to do so; but, reaching out to the journal at an early stage can save you time if the journal is not interested, already has plans to cover your topic, or might like to modify your ideas to suit their needs.

Before we talk about how to approach the journal, let’s think about why reaching out during the planning stage of the review is a good idea. Most reviews in top journals are commissioned by journal editors because review articles typically bring in the bulk of a journal’s annual citations. If a journal misreads their audience (or their competitors) and chooses the “wrong topic” to review, they can potentially reduce their next year’s impact factor. So, journal editors take great care when thinking about the next review they publish. This means that your pre-submission enquiry needs to be sensitive to these issues: you need to explain the novelty of your review, how it will align with the journal’s scope and readership’s interests, and why having a review written by you is going to attract citations for their journal.

Next, we need to think about where to reach out to. Statistically, it is unlikely that the first journal you pitch your idea to is going to be the one that wants to roll with it. So it’s a good idea to start by generating a list of potential target journals and to work through it by sending out pre-submission enquiries. To produce this all important list, you could establish where most of the cited primary research papers you identified in your literature search have been published: do any of these journals publish reviews and consider unsolicited requests? If so, then note them down and take a look at their website for other useful information and to make sure that your proposed piece fits well with their published scope. You might also look at journals where you have successfully published your research in recent years and so have an “exsiting relationship”, as they will already know the quality of your work and writing. The good news is that, unlike the submission of the article itself, there is nothing to stop you sending enquiries to several different journals at once, so set aside an afternoon and get emailing!

When you contact your target journals, what do you need to tell them? The basics of a pre-submission enquiry should ideally include the following:

  • Your proposed title and author list
  • An outline of your expertise to write an authoritative review
  • Your top 10-15 selected references from the bibliography
  • A draft of your figures and tables
  • An outline of the key points – perhaps your section headings and figure titles

Also in the covering letter you should state clearly why you think that their journal is a great match for the work, for example how it will appeal to different sectors of their readership, and how you anticipate it will generate interest and/or new research ideas across the field. If it is an opinionated review, are you suporting a new or controversial viewpoint that will get people talking? Is your review particularly timely, coming off the back of a new and exciting discovery, or quesitoning an established dogma? These are all things that will help attract readers, and so will help generate editorial interest in your proposal.

By approaching several journals at this stage, before you’ve written the full text, you avoid both the risk of investing a lot of time in a draft that a journal might then request major changes to, and the stress of having a finalised document and struggling to find someone to publish it. Moreover, most journal editors will appreciate the opportunity to collaborate with you on your review article so that the content is likely to attract as many of their readers as possible. It’s a win win!

In Blog

Authoring a review article is a great way to stand out as a key opinion leader in your field. What’s more, it’s an opportunity to flex your scientific writing skills. But writing a non-commissioned review can be a daunting task. In this series of three blog posts, I will take you through IEL’s top tips and tricks to perfecting your pitch to your target journal.


In this first post, I am going to focus on selecting your review topic. It might seem obvious to write about your area of expertise that you have honed over the past few years, but it’s essential that you offer something new and up-to-date to your prospective readership. If similar reviews are already available, you dilute your potential to be cited.


You stand a good chance of finding a novel area to cover if you do not think too broadly. For example, writing about the genetic mechanisms of cancer will likely overlap with hundreds of other reviews. But if you narrow down your mechanistic pathway and cancer type, you might start to find interesting gaps in the review literature.


Once you have narrowed down your list of ideas, you should conduct a thorough scan of the published literature covering the past 3-4 years as a priority. Find what relevant, new primary data have been published. Ask yourself, if new data are lacking, is now the right time for this review article? If, however, the field has taken steps forward over the past few years, then take time to decide which studies you will summarize, interpret and speculate on.


While you won’t be able to cover everything in detail, you should still try to capture the full spectrum of the field and give fair attention to conflicting and contrasting opinions — even if they differ from your own. The list you compile now will start to form your review’s bibliography. A good rule of thumb is to ensure that at least 80% of the cited literature was published within the past five years, with 50% from the previous two years, and that your bibliography predominantly comprises primary sources.

Next up: Pitching for Success

In Editing

The success of Insight Editing has grown considerably over the past two years, predominantly through recommendation by existing clients. To recognize this we are now officially launching our new “Spread the Word” discount scheme.

Do you have any colleagues that you think would benefit from working with us to elevate their chances of publication success?

When your recommendation leads a new client to make a booking with our team, we will reward both of you with 15% off your next manuscript edit when they mention your name. So please do “Spread the Word” about our services with your colleagues, so both of you can enjoy the benefits of the scheme!

Terms apply, see STW promotion terms and conditions.docx

In Editing

Introducing Alexandra Roberts, who has come to us following a career with Nature Publishing Group and as a freelance editor.  Alexandra’s scientific background is in Zoology, while she has edited across the academic sector including clinical oncology and cardiovascular medicine/cardiology.  See Who we are for more on Alexandra’s experience or Contact us to book an editing slot with Alexandra.