Rhinosinusitis Diagnosis and Stratification
Evidence on phenotyping, biomarkers, imaging interpretation, and risk-based clinical stratification.
Open Call for Sinusitis Research
Call for Papers
Call for Papers
Journal of Sinusitis
Share impactful sinusitis research for rigorous review and global open access visibility.
RigorousReview Standards
FastPublication Process
GlobalResearch Community
OpenAccess Publication
Current Call
Call for Papers in Sinusitis Science and Translation
JS invites high-quality manuscripts that advance sinusitis discovery, characterization, and therapeutic application.
Journal of Sinusitis welcomes clinical, translational, epidemiologic, surgical, and implementation studies with measurable scientific and practical value.
Priority is given to submissions that combine methodological rigor with clear implications for diagnosis, treatment planning, and patient-centered sinusitis outcomes.
Interdisciplinary evidence connecting symptom science, service delivery, ethics, communication, and policy is strongly encouraged.
Medical and Surgical Treatment Pathways
Studies on medication protocols, endoscopic procedures, perioperative planning, and outcome durability.
Allergy, Immunology, and Inflammation
Mechanistic and clinical research on inflammatory drivers, immune signaling, and comorbidity management.
Pediatric and Adult Care Models
Comparative care pathways for pediatric and adult sinus disease across outpatient and hospital settings.
Health Systems and Access
Implementation studies on referral pathways, access equity, telehealth workflows, and clinic performance.
Digital and AI-Enabled ENT Care
Data-driven tools supporting triage, decision support, documentation quality, and follow-up optimization.
Quality Expectations
What Strong Manuscripts Demonstrate
Editorial triage prioritizes clarity, rigor, reproducibility, and practical scientific relevance.
- Clearly justified study question and design logic aligned to stated objectives.
- Transparent methods for recruitment, care setting definition, and outcome assessment workflows.
- Appropriate statistical framing and uncertainty reporting for key outcomes.
- Balanced discussion of limitations and translational boundaries.
- Complete ethics, funding, and conflict declarations where applicable.
- Consistent terminology and accurate references across all sections.
Submissions should explain how results influence sinusitis strategy, model selection, or development decisions.
Studies with strong reproducibility documentation are highly valued during review and editorial decision-making.
Submission Routes
Two Submission Methods, One Review Standard
Both routes are supported by the same editorial quality framework and review governance.
Manuscriptzone
Recommended for teams requiring structured metadata entry, revision tracking, and institution-friendly workflow control.
Simple Manuscript Submission
A lightweight route for fast intake and direct editorial routing when teams prefer a simplified process.
Pre-submission Support
Scope and formatting questions can be sent to [email protected] before upload to reduce avoidable delays.
Scope note: manuscripts outside sinusitis relevance may be declined at triage to preserve review efficiency.
Submission Planning
Execution Notes for Higher Acceptance Readiness
Use these practical notes to improve clarity, policy alignment, and review efficiency before final upload.
Editorial planning insight: Strong papers explain how findings influence sinusitis design, translational strategy, or therapeutic decision pathways. This approach helps editors and reviewers evaluate the manuscript faster without sacrificing rigor.
Author workflow guidance: Endpoint hierarchy and experimental rationale should be explicit to support reviewer assessment quality. Teams that apply this step early usually reduce revision friction and protect publication timelines.
Quality acceleration note: Submissions that address reproducibility, implementation feasibility, and care-delivery barriers are encouraged. The same practice also improves metadata quality and downstream indexing discoverability.
Submission strategy point: Method transparency reduces avoidable revision cycles and improves editorial efficiency. It supports stronger decision transparency and more efficient peer-review communications.
Publication readiness reminder: Collaborative multi-site studies should describe harmonization strategy for protocols and outcome measures. This improves consistency between core manuscript sections and supporting files.
Operational recommendation: For call for papers planning, document reviewer-response changes against exact manuscript locations; state practical limitations and boundary conditions explicitly. This supports cleaner editorial decisions and faster acceptance readiness.
Reviewer-facing clarity note: For call for papers planning, confirm metadata fields and author identifiers before production lock; ensure data and code availability statements match policy language. This improves downstream indexing quality and retrieval relevance.
Production planning guidance: For call for papers planning, tighten conclusion language so claims remain proportional to data strength; ensure data and code availability statements match policy language. This improves downstream indexing quality and retrieval relevance.
Editorial planning insight: For call for papers planning, align title, abstract, and keyword language with the primary evidence claim; verify that tables, figures, and narrative statements remain consistent. This protects release schedules by reducing production-stage rework.
Author workflow guidance: For call for papers planning, map each major result to a clear methods description and reproducibility note; verify that tables, figures, and narrative statements remain consistent. This protects release schedules by reducing production-stage rework.
Quality acceleration note: For call for papers planning, separate prespecified analyses from exploratory findings in a traceable way; capture versioning notes where datasets or scripts may change over time. This increases trust for translational and evidence-synthesis readers.
Submission strategy point: For call for papers planning, synchronize figure legends, unit definitions, and supplementary references; capture versioning notes where datasets or scripts may change over time. This increases trust for translational and evidence-synthesis readers.
Publication readiness reminder: For call for papers planning, validate disclosure, funding, and ethics text before final upload; keep terminology stable across all manuscript files. This typically improves triage confidence and reviewer assignment precision.
Submit to the Current JS Call
Use Manuscriptzone or the simple form and move your manuscript into expert peer review.
Editorial office: [email protected]
