Journal Guidelines Checker
Verify your manuscript meets journal formatting and submission requirements. Catch compliance issues before the editorial desk does.
Check my manuscript, it's freeNo account required · Results in <2 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX
What is a journal guidelines checker?
A journal guidelines checker validates your manuscript against standard academic publishing requirements, the structural and formatting rules that journals enforce before peer review. These include section structure, abstract format and word count, author metadata completeness, keyword requirements, reference style consistency, figure and table formatting, and statement requirements (funding, conflicts of interest, ethics). Failing these checks leads to desk rejection, rejection before your paper ever reaches a reviewer. CheckMyManuscript automates this compliance check so you can fix issues before submission.
Compliance checks we perform
Section structure validation
Confirm your manuscript contains all standard sections in the correct order.
Abstract format compliance
Check word count, structure, and required elements against journal standards.
Reference format consistency
Detect mixed citation styles, missing DOIs, and incomplete reference entries.
Required statements
Flag missing funding declarations, conflict of interest statements, and ethics approvals.
Author information
Validate author names, affiliations, and corresponding author details.
Keywords and metadata
Verify keyword count, formatting, and relevance to the manuscript content.
Checks relevant to this topic
Part of our 80+ automated checks
Funding statement
Check for required funding acknowledgment section.
Conflict of interest
Verify conflict of interest statement is present.
Ethics statement
Flag missing ethics approval declarations for clinical research.
Reference completeness
Identify incomplete or malformed bibliography entries.
Keyword format
Validate keyword list format and count requirements.
Author affiliations
Check all author affiliations are present and formatted correctly.
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
Journal submission guidelines are the formatting and content requirements set by a journal for manuscript submission. They cover file format, word count, section structure, abstract requirements, citation style, figure format, and mandatory statements. Non-compliance leads to desk rejection.
Desk rejection is when an editor rejects your manuscript before sending it to peer reviewers. It typically happens due to scope mismatch, formatting non-compliance, or incomplete submissions. Up to 50% of manuscripts at major journals are desk-rejected.
Our checker validates against common journal standards that apply across most publishers. We're continuously expanding coverage for specific journal families (Nature, Elsevier, IEEE, Springer, PLOS).
The most common reasons include: scope mismatch, missing sections, incomplete metadata, abstract not meeting requirements, and inconsistent references. Our checker catches all of these automatically.
After running the checker, you'll receive a submission readiness score and a prioritized list of issues to fix. Addressing all critical issues significantly reduces your risk of desk rejection.