Why Publish Your Surgical Biomechanics Research With Us?

The International Journal of Surgical Techniques (IJST) is dedicated to advancing the scientific understanding of surgical procedures through biomechanical analysis, medical device innovation, and biomedical materials research. We provide a specialized platform for researchers investigating the mechanical principles underlying surgical techniques, instrument design, tissue-device interactions, and surgical simulation technologies.

Our journal serves the unique needs of biomedical engineers, surgical researchers, and materials scientists who are pushing the boundaries of surgical innovation through quantitative analysis and experimental validation. With expert reviewers from biomechanics, biomedical engineering, and surgical research communities, your work receives evaluation from peers who truly understand the technical rigor and clinical relevance of your research.

Choose Your Submission Method

We offer two convenient online submission pathways designed to accommodate different research workflows and author preferences. Both methods ensure your manuscript receives the same rigorous peer review and editorial attention.

Article Types We Accept

We publish diverse research formats that contribute to the biomechanical understanding of surgical techniques. Each article type undergoes rigorous peer review by experts in surgical biomechanics and biomedical engineering.

Peer Review Timeline

We are committed to providing transparent, efficient peer review while maintaining the highest standards of scientific rigor. Our editorial team works diligently to ensure your research receives timely expert evaluation.

Average time from submission to publication: 60 days (including author revision time)

What Happens After Submission?

Initial Editorial Assessment (Days 0-3)

Upon receiving your submission, our editorial team conducts an initial assessment to verify that your manuscript falls within the journal's scope, meets basic formatting requirements, and passes plagiarism screening using iThenticate. Manuscripts with similarity indices exceeding 30% are returned for revision before peer review begins. This rapid screening ensures that only appropriate manuscripts proceed to peer review, respecting both your time and our reviewers' expertise.

Editor Assignment (Days 3-5)

Your manuscript is assigned to an Associate Editor with specific expertise in your research area—whether biomechanics, medical device engineering, surgical simulation, or materials science. This specialized matching ensures your work receives evaluation from someone who understands the technical nuances and clinical relevance of your research. The assigned editor oversees the entire review process and makes the final publication decision.

Peer Review Process (Days 5-28)

The editor selects 2-3 expert reviewers from our international panel of biomechanics researchers, biomedical engineers, and surgical technology specialists. Reviewers are chosen based on their publication record, technical expertise, and familiarity with your specific research methodology. They evaluate your manuscript for scientific rigor, methodological soundness, novelty, and significance to the field. Our single-blind review process ensures unbiased evaluation focused solely on research quality.

Editorial Decision (Day 28)

Based on reviewer recommendations and their own assessment, the editor makes one of four decisions: Accept (rare for initial submission), Minor Revisions (typically requiring clarifications or additional analyses), Major Revisions (requiring substantial additional work or experiments), or Reject (if fundamental flaws exist or the work falls outside our scope). You receive detailed reviewer comments and specific guidance on addressing concerns.

Revision and Re-review (Author Timeline + 14 Days)

If revisions are requested, you'll have the opportunity to address reviewer comments and resubmit your improved manuscript. We recommend submitting revisions within 60 days to maintain reviewer availability and publication momentum. Your revised manuscript returns to the same reviewers who evaluate whether their concerns have been adequately addressed. This focused re-review typically takes 14 days.

Acceptance and Production (Days 42-60)

Once accepted, your manuscript enters our production workflow. Our copyediting team ensures consistency, clarity, and adherence to journal style while preserving your scientific content. You'll receive proofs for final approval before publication. The entire production process takes approximately 10 days, after which your article receives a DOI and is published online with immediate open access availability.

Manuscript Preparation Guidelines

Formatting Requirements

Manuscripts should be prepared in Microsoft Word (.doc or .docx) or LaTeX format. Use double-spacing throughout, including references and figure legends. Number all pages consecutively, starting with the title page. Use a standard 12-point font (Times New Roman, Arial, or similar) with 1-inch margins on all sides. Organize your manuscript in the following order: Title Page, Abstract, Keywords, Main Text (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion), Acknowledgments, References, Tables, Figure Legends, Figures.

Title Page

Include a concise, descriptive title (maximum 150 characters) that accurately reflects your research focus. List all authors with their full names, institutional affiliations, and ORCID identifiers. Designate one corresponding author and provide complete contact information including email address, phone number, and mailing address. Include a running head (maximum 50 characters) for page headers.

Abstract and Keywords

Provide a structured abstract of 250 words maximum, organized into Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusions sections. The abstract should be self-contained and understandable without reference to the main text. Include 4-6 keywords that accurately describe your research topic, using terms from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) database when possible to enhance discoverability.

Main Text Structure

The Introduction should clearly state the research problem, review relevant literature, and articulate specific research objectives or hypotheses. The Methods section must provide sufficient detail for replication, including equipment specifications, material properties, experimental protocols, and statistical analyses. Report biomechanical measurements with appropriate units and precision. The Results section presents findings objectively without interpretation, using tables and figures to illustrate key data. The Discussion interprets results in context of existing literature, acknowledges limitations, and suggests future research directions.

Figures and Tables

Submit figures as separate high-resolution files (TIFF or EPS format, minimum 300 DPI for photographs, 600 DPI for line art). Ensure all text within figures is legible at final publication size. Use consistent terminology and abbreviations across all figures. Tables should be created using Word's table function or LaTeX table environment, not as images. Number tables and figures consecutively in order of first mention in text. Provide descriptive legends that allow each figure or table to stand alone.

References

Use Vancouver style for references, numbered consecutively in order of appearance in the text. Include all authors for references with six or fewer authors; for seven or more authors, list the first three followed by "et al." Journal abbreviations should follow Index Medicus conventions. Verify all references for accuracy and completeness. Include DOIs when available to facilitate reader access to cited works.

Ethical Considerations

Research Ethics Approval

Studies involving human subjects, human tissue, or human data must have received approval from an appropriate institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee. Include the approval number and name of the approving body in your Methods section. For animal studies, provide ethics approval details and confirm adherence to ARRIVE guidelines. Studies involving cadaveric tissue must include appropriate consent and institutional approval documentation.

Informed Consent

For research involving human participants, confirm that informed consent was obtained and documented according to institutional requirements and the Declaration of Helsinki. If your manuscript includes any images, videos, or case details that could potentially identify individuals, you must obtain explicit written consent for publication and include this statement in your manuscript.

Competing Interests

All authors must disclose any financial or non-financial competing interests that could be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation. This includes employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, patents, or research funding from commercial entities. If no competing interests exist, state "The authors declare no competing interests." Transparency in competing interests builds trust and allows readers to evaluate potential biases.

Data Availability

We encourage authors to make research data underlying their findings publicly available whenever possible. Include a data availability statement describing where readers can access your data, whether in a public repository, as supplementary files, or available upon reasonable request. For biomechanical data, consider depositing in discipline-specific repositories. If data cannot be shared due to ethical or legal restrictions, explain these limitations.

Authorship Criteria

All listed authors must meet ICMJE authorship criteria: substantial contributions to conception/design or data acquisition/analysis, drafting or critically revising the manuscript, final approval of the version to be published, and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Contributors who do not meet all criteria should be acknowledged rather than listed as authors. All authors must approve the final manuscript before submission.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the article processing charges (APCs)?

Our standard APC covers the costs of peer review, copyediting, production, and open access hosting. We offer APC waivers for authors from low-income countries and discounts for authors from middle-income countries based on World Bank classifications. Financial constraints should never prevent publication of quality research—contact our editorial office to discuss waiver eligibility before submission.

Can I suggest reviewers for my manuscript?

Yes, you may suggest potential reviewers during submission. Provide names, affiliations, email addresses, and a brief explanation of their expertise relevant to your work. While editors are not obligated to use suggested reviewers, appropriate suggestions can expedite the review process. Do not suggest reviewers with whom you have collaborated recently or who have competing interests.

How do I track my manuscript status?

If you submitted via ManuscriptZone, log into your account to view real-time status updates, editor decisions, and reviewer comments. You'll also receive email notifications at each stage of the review process. For quick form submissions, you'll receive email updates as your manuscript progresses through review and production.

What if my research involves proprietary devices or techniques?

We understand that some surgical device research involves proprietary technology or techniques under development. You may request confidential review, and we will ensure reviewers sign confidentiality agreements before accessing your manuscript. However, sufficient methodological detail must be provided to allow peer review and eventual replication by other researchers.

Can I submit a manuscript that has been posted as a preprint?

Yes, we encourage preprint posting and do not consider preprints as prior publication. Posting your work on preprint servers like bioRxiv or medRxiv can accelerate dissemination and gather early feedback. Please disclose the preprint DOI during submission so editors and reviewers are aware of the preprint version.

What happens if reviewers disagree about my manuscript?

When reviewers provide conflicting recommendations, the assigned editor carefully evaluates all comments and makes an independent decision based on their expertise and the manuscript's merit. The editor may seek additional reviews to resolve disagreements or may make a decision based on the weight of evidence and the specific concerns raised. You'll receive all reviewer comments regardless of the final decision.