In January 2026, the Journal Systems Framework (JSF) was introduced for a systems-based approach to scholarly journals. An update clarifies terminology across its four dimensions without altering the framework. The JSF is being cited in diverse contexts, prompting a call for authors to report their uses to track its impact and evolution.
Tag: editors
How should editors use the EQUATOR network when evaluating manuscripts?
Roger Watson, BSc PhD FRCP Edin FAAN
At the Trailhead
- Why this matters: Reporting guidelines are widely recommended, but editors must decide how strictly to apply them and how to avoid turning them into box-ticking exercises.
- What judgment this supports: When to require reporting guidelines, whether to desk reject manuscripts that do not use them appropriately, and how to balance checklist compliance with editorial judgment.
- How an editor might use this: To revise author instructions, incorporate checklist requirements into submission workflows, strengthen editorial triage, or guide decision letters when reporting standards are not met.
This content is part of the Working Guide to Editorial Systems.
Access is available to subscribers.
Join us for practical guidance, real editorial decisions,
and to learn more about the systems that shape scholarly publishing.
Already a subscriber? Log in here
How Journals Work: A Systems-Based Framework for Understanding Scholarly Publishing
Scholarly journals are often judged by prestige or impact, yet these signals reveal little about how journals actually function. The Journal Systems Framework offers a systems-based way to understand differences in editorial intent, capacity, infrastructure, and governance—helping authors, editors, and institutions move beyond simplistic labels toward clearer, more informed conversations about publishing.