PLOS is a non-profit organization on a mission to drive open science forward with measurable, meaningful change in research publishing, policy, and practice.

Building on a strong legacy of pioneering innovation, PLOS continues to be a catalyst, reimagining models to meet open science principles, removing barriers and promoting inclusion in knowledge creation and sharing, and publishing research outputs that enable everyone to learn from, reuse and build upon scientific knowledge.

We believe in a better future where science is open to all, for all.

Journals
More Content
PLOS BLOGS Speaking of Medicine and Health
Browse all PLOS Blogs
Browse all PLOS Blogs

What to know before submitting systematic and scoping reviews to PLOS Mental Health

PLOS Mental Health Author Tips
Grey laptop next to a blank notebook on a brown, wooden desk.
Image credit
StartupStockPhotos from Pixabay

Since opening for submissions in November 2023, PLOS Mental Health has been lucky to receive a large number of impactful systematic reviews and scoping reviews. At PLOS, such articles are actually classified as Research Articles rather than reviews and authors are not always aware of this. Misclassification upon submission can end up not just drawing out the submission process but also causing confusion regarding potential article publishing charges. In this blog, we summarize what systematic reviews, scoping reviews, mixed method reviews, and meta-analyses are, why they are considered Research Articles, and why being aware of this is important for authors….

What are systematic reviews?

Systematic reviews are articles that have a clearly defined question that the authors aim to answer using relevant, existing research studies, which have been identified using systematic and transparent methods, and critically appraised. Authors will also evaluate the data that is available within the selected studies but this analysis does not necessarily need to include statistics. These are not narrative reviews (which are commissioned article types at PLOS).

At PLOS, all systematic reviews, scoping reviews, mixed method reviews and meta-analyses must include the following upon submission:

  • A completed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist.
  • A flow diagram accompanying the main text to represent study handling. 
  • A ‘Methods’ section that describes the protocol used. A copy of the protocol should be provided as supplementary information and the registry number should be in the abstract.
  • The term ‘systematic review’ should be present in the title and clearly communicated in the cover letter.
Image credit: Tumisu from Pixabay

What are mixed method reviews?

Mixed method reviews are a type of systematic review that combine different types of data – both quantitative and qualitative – to answer a specific question. These approaches are especially useful for informing clinical practice, organizational changes, and policies as the insights gained are more likely to be multifaceted. This is especially useful when combining studies that use population data and service user perspectives.

What are scoping reviews?

Scoping reviews are most useful for analysing emerging evidence. Authors can consider this type of article when it is still not clear what specific questions they could ask. In this respect, scoping reviews are sometimes viewed as a precursor for systematic reviews and are designed to map what is available and identify gaps. Although not strictly classified as systematic reviews, scoping reviews still use systematic and transparent methods.

What are meta-analyses?

A meta-analysis is a statistical examination of data from available studies in order to identify trends in populations. In this respect, a meta-analysis aims to provide new insights. A meta-analysis can only be performed if the studies are similar enough in nature – for instance, the same intervention is tested in the same population in different studies. If this cannot be done because the studies are not similar enough (e.g. different interventions in the same population), then a systematic review is more appropriate.

Why does it matter to me?

Submitting your article as the wrong format will slow down the submission process as it will be sent back to you so that you can change the article type before further assessments can be made. Most importantly, Research Articles have an Article Processing Charge. It is therefore important to select the correct article type upon submissions to ensure that it is handled appropriately and that authors have the opportunity to apply for a waiver if they qualify. Waivers must be applied for upon submission. If the article type is changed further into peer review, authors will not be able to apply for a waiver.

Take home: All of the above should be submitted as a Research Article as they include transparent and reproducible methods, generate new insights, and provide conceptual advances. 

So what is considered a ‘Review’?

Finally, given the above, you may be wondering what we consider to be a ‘review’. Reviews are commissioned by journal editors. They are narrative in nature and are intended to discuss current developments in a field and draw meaningful conclusions/point to future directions. Narrative reviews do not need to answer a specific question and can be less focused than systematic reviews. They can include a variety of studies and an overall summary and do not need to include a comprehensive ‘Methods’ section. The conclusion does not need to be as definitive as the conclusion provided by a systematic review. 

If you are ever unsure about what article type you should select, please take a look at previous publications in the journal to guide you or reach out to mentalhealth@plos.org.

Related Posts
Back to top