The Author is able to upload the Supplementary Files in Step 4 of the Submission Process. The Supplementary Files are intended to include research data sets. How do I get a 20% discount on the Article Processing Fee if my protocol was previously published in JMIR Research Protocols? You should leave figures in the manuscript file during the initial round(s) of peer-review, but also upload high-quality figures in PNG format as. Thank you for submitting your manuscript to JDR. This page allows you to add a Supplementary File to that submission. Please read and follow the advice given.
A maximum of 5 files is acceptable to make up the supplementary data unit for an article. The maximum size per file should not exceed 2 MB although text files should be a great deal smaller , and files should be as small as possible, so that they can be downloaded quickly.
An HTML index page is created to link the supplementary data file s to the article. Please provide short word titles for each individual file-these will be used to create links to the files from the index page. If you require further help or information regarding submission or preparation of supplementary data, please contact the Managing Editor at toxsci toxicology. Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Sign In or Create an Account. Supplementary Data Guidelines Supplementary Data is supporting material that cannot be included in the printed version for reasons of space, and that is not essential for inclusion in the full text of the manuscript but would nevertheless benefit the reader.
Provide text files in Portable Document Format. Provide spreadsheet files in Microsoft Excel. Provide image files as Tagged Image Format. Images should be a maximum size of x pixels 9 x 6. At the same time, many other journals do not provide any guidance to reviewers, thereby encouraging ad hoc reviewing practices that ultimately depend on each reviewer's own decisions.
Despite the instructions provided to reviewers by some journals, supplementary material are rarely reviewed, especially when the length of the supplementary text far exceeds that of the article being published. This fact is well evidenced by the manuscripts highlighted above [ 1 , 2 ], which are merely two examples among thousands of manuscripts submitted each year with lengthy supplements.
Despite the fact that the instructions to authors for the journal Science require that all items in the supplementary material be appropriately referenced from the main text, in Werren et al. The entirety of the 71 pages of supplementary text are referenced through a single citation from the main text citation 6 in the article , making it difficult for an interested reader or reviewer to even find the specific section being referenced.
The fact that this article ignores the journal's own policy strongly suggests that neither the reviewers nor the editors carefully evaluated the supplementary material. We do not wish to single out this article; in fact, we would argue that this example is typical of most high-profile papers published today. This is a troubling observation as it suggests the possibility that fundamental errors in methods or analyses buried in supplementary files may go undetected, thereby bringing into question the scientific accuracy and validity of the published articles.
The primary intent of supplementary material is to provide additional useful information that supports and complements the main text. In addition to figures, the most common form of supplementary information are tables detailing data presented in the main text.
These tables are often extensive, containing, for example, information about a large set of genes in an organism. Such information is most useful to readers in a computer readable format such as tab- or comma-separated plain text files, or a common spreadsheet format.
In many cases, though, supplementary tables are provided only in PDF format, thereby significantly hampering the use of these data by researchers attempting to reproduce published results. Furthermore, as we already highlighted above, the main text is often not well integrated with the supporting information provided in supplementary material.
Readers often have to sift through tens or hundreds of pages of text to find information simply referenced from the main text as 'see Supplementary material'. The situation outlined above is simply unacceptable in today's technologically-advanced world.
The limits imposed on the length of articles and their corresponding references derive almost entirely from the constraints of paper-based publication. While these made sense for most of the 20th century, they make no sense at all today, and they distort and even imperil the scientific process.
In the 21st century, fewer and fewer scientists peruse paper copies of journals. While one might argue that supplementary material can help improve the presentation of articles, especially in electronic form, the excessive and largely unregulated use of supplementary material is harmful to science.
As we discussed above, the scientific quality and validity of supplementary files is rarely evaluated during the review process.
Furthermore, cross-referencing prior works is a vital component of the scientific endeavor, yet many scientists' contributions go unrecognized, buried deeply in supplementary files and not tracked by citation indices. This situation disproportionately affects scientists developing the analytical methods that have, in many respects, made the current scientific revolution possible.
Authors, reviewers, and journals alike must ensure the adequate acknowledgment, within every scientific article, of all prior work relevant to the study being published. The ubiquitous use of electronic media in modern scientific publishing provides an opportunity for the better integration of supplementary material with the primary article.
Specifically, we propose that supplementary items, irrespective of format, be directly hyper-linked from the text itself. Such references should be to specific sections of the supplementary material rather than the full supplementary text. Mechanisms for providing such links are available in virtually all commonly used word processors, as well as in the commonly used display media HTML, PDF, etc.
The availability of the supplementary information just 'one click away' would not only dramatically improve the utility of published scientific articles, but also increase the likelihood that supplementary material are adequately evaluated during the review process. Some journals have already taken steps towards providing a rich interface to their articles, and in many cases the supplementary tables, figures, or other media are appropriately hyperlinked directly from the manuscript.
In PNAS, for example, online articles are presented in a feature-rich format that includes several useful interactive items: In most other journals supplementary material must be downloaded separately.
In addition, we believe that removing arbitrary article size limits, at least for the online versions of articles, would have an important impact on removing the artificial distinction between supplementary material and the main manuscript text.
An interesting compromise in this direction is exemplified by Nature Methods , where articles are accompanied by an Online Methods section that appears in both the online version of the article and the downloaded PDF.
In our discussion above we have singled out two manuscripts published in Science , primarily because Science is one of the few journals that provides clear instructions to authors and reviewers on supplementary material, yet articles published in this journal frequently overuse supplements. A more extensive analysis of supplementary materials across journals is beyond the scope of this editorial, however interested readers can examine such an analysis recently done for environmental science journals [ 5 ], as well as our own survey of 70 highly cited genomics papers from 7 different journals Additional file 1: Given the extensive use of supplementary material, and the potential harm it poses to science, it is critical that all scientific journals develop clear and consistent policies on the use and review of supplementary material.
Some initial recommendations on the use of supplementary material were recently outlined in a report of the National Information Standards Organization and the National Federation of Advanced Information Services [ 8 ], but these recommendations still need to be implemented and refined to ensure the ethical and consistent use of supplementary material in our discipline. We hope our paper will motivate scientists and publishers to enact desperately needed changes in the way supplementary materials are evaluated and used in scientific publishing.
Spreadsheet containing summary statistics about supplementary material use in 7 scientific journals. Data is presented for 10 genomics papers from each journal selected based on their number of citations during — This paper was inspired by a spirited discussion with Julien Tap.
National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Published online Nov 3. Mihai Pop and Steven L. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Received Jul 8; Accepted Jul 9. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
Associated Data Supplementary Materials Additional file 1: Abstract Supplementary material is a ubiquitous feature of scientific articles, particularly in journals that limit the length of the articles.
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article doi: Introduction Supplementary material is ubiquitous in scientific papers.
Why is supplementary material needed? Why is it a problem? Is supplementary material being reviewed? Is supplementary material easy to use? A way forward The situation outlined above is simply unacceptable in today's technologically-advanced world. Additional file Additional file 1:
Use and mis-use of supplementary material in science publications
This step is optional. If you have any supplementary files, such as research instruments, data sets, etc., you may add them here. These files are also indexed by. Supplementary files will be uploaded as supplied. They will not be checked for accuracy, copyedited, typeset or proofread. The responsibility for scientific. SAGE will not host codec files, or be responsible for supporting video supplemental material where the.