Annals of Internal Medicine Submission Requirements
Validate your internal-medicine manuscript against Annals of Internal Medicine's submission requirements before submission.
Check my manuscript, it's freeNo account required · Results in <2 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX
What Annals of Internal Medicine requires
Annals of Internal Medicine, published by the American College of Physicians, is a leading internal-medicine journal. It uses a structured abstract and is notable for requiring a reproducible research statement (covering availability of the protocol, statistical code, and data) and an explicit role-of-the-funding-source statement. It also expects trial registration, conflict-of-interest disclosures, and reporting-guideline compliance (CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE). CheckMyManuscript flags the presence and structure of these elements before submission.
Annals requirements, and what CMM checks
These reflect Annals of Internal Medicine's own author instructions.
Structured abstract
✓ CMM checks thisA structured abstract appropriate to the article type.
Source: acpjournals.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Reproducible research statement
✓ CMM checks thisStatement on the availability of the study protocol, statistical code, and data.
Flag: no reproducible research statement, a distinctive Annals requirement.
Source: acpjournals.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Role of the funding source
✓ CMM checks thisAn explicit statement of the funder's role in the study.
Source: acpjournals.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Trial registration & disclosures
✓ CMM checks thisTrial registration number for trials and conflict-of-interest disclosures for all authors.
Source: acpjournals.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Reporting guideline
✓ CMM checks thisCONSORT (trials), PRISMA (reviews), or STROBE (observational), with the completed checklist.
Source: equator-network.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Importance to internal medicine
Editorial, not auto-checkableWhether the findings are important for an internal-medicine readership.
Editorial judgement, not auto-checkable.
Source: acpjournals.org · verified Jun 16, 2026
Annals of Internal Medicine commonly follows ICMJE-style expectations, but this page is based on its own author instructions. CheckMyManuscript checks presence and structure, not methodological quality. Verify the live author instructions before submitting, last checked 16 June 2026.
Annals of Internal Medicine is a leading internal-medicine journal from the American College of Physicians. It is notable for its reproducible research statement and explicit role-of-the-funding-source statement, alongside a structured abstract, trial registration, disclosures, and reporting-guideline compliance. CheckMyManuscript screens your manuscript for the presence and structure of these elements before submission.
What CheckMyManuscript checks, and what it does not
CheckMyManuscript flags structural signals: a missing reproducible research statement, no role-of-funding-source statement, an absent trial registration number, or a missing reporting-guideline checklist. It does not judge importance or methodological quality. Use the checker as a pre-submission completeness screen, not a compliance certificate.
Also see: The Lancet checker | JAMA checker | STROBE checklist checker
What gets returned before review at Annals of Internal Medicine
Common structural reasons internal-medicine manuscripts are returned at the editorial screen, each maps to a signal CMM can flag.
1.
No reproducible research statement
A research article without the protocol/code/data availability statement.
CMM checks for: Reproducible research statement
2.
Role of funding source missing
No explicit statement of the funder's role.
CMM checks for: Role of the funding source
3.
Trial registration missing
A randomised trial with no registration number.
CMM checks for: Trial registration
4.
Wrong reporting guideline
A study submitted without the matching checklist.
CMM checks for: Reporting guideline
Annals checks
Structured abstract
Flags an abstract not structured for the article type.
Reproducible research statement
Flags a missing protocol/code/data availability statement.
Role of funding source
Flags a missing role-of-the-funding-source statement.
Trial registration
Flags a missing trial registration number.
Reporting guideline
Flags a missing CONSORT/PRISMA/STROBE checklist.
Checks relevant to this topic
Part of our 80+ automated checks
Structured abstract
Structured abstract present.
Reproducible research statement
Protocol/code/data availability stated.
Role of funding source
Funder-role statement present.
Trial registration
Trial registration number present.
Reporting guideline
Design-appropriate checklist present.
The practical edge your peers already use
Across disciplines and career stages, researchers reduce bottlenecks and submit with confidence: clearer drafts, easier guideline compliance, and less back and forth with co‑authors and reviewers.
I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.
Ilyass
Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal
I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.
Manon
Master's Student in Speech Therapy
I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.
Afonso
PhD Candidate, UFPE
It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.
Félix
Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology
A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.
Oleg
Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.
Ilyass
Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal
I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.
Manon
Master's Student in Speech Therapy
I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.
Afonso
PhD Candidate, UFPE
It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.
Félix
Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology
A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.
Oleg
Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
Frequently asked questions
Annals of Internal Medicine asks authors to state the availability of the study protocol, statistical code, and data, for example whether each is available, from whom, and how. It is a distinctive Annals requirement and a common reason for queries when missing.
Yes. Annals asks for an explicit statement describing the role of the funder in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of the study, or that the funder had no such role.
No. CheckMyManuscript checks the presence and structure of required elements such as the reproducible research and funding-role statements. It does not judge importance or methodological quality, and it does not replace peer review.