Common Manuscript Rejection Reasons
Understanding why manuscripts get rejected is the first step to preventing it. Here are the most common rejection reasons at every stage, and how CheckMyManuscript helps you fix them before submission.
Check my manuscript, it's freeNo account required · Results in <2 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX
Why do manuscripts get rejected?
Manuscript rejection happens at two stages: desk rejection (before peer review, based on format and compliance) and post-review rejection (based on scientific merit). Format and compliance rejections are entirely preventable: they result from missing declarations, wrong formatting, incomplete abstracts, citation errors, and non-compliance with journal-specific requirements. Scientific rejection is harder to prevent automatically, but ensuring your manuscript is format-perfect before submission at least removes the preventable failure modes and ensures your paper reaches a reviewer.
How CheckMyManuscript addresses rejection reasons
Catches administrative failures
Missing ethics statements, COI declarations, funding acknowledgments, and author metadata are the most common administrative rejection triggers. CheckMyManuscript checks all of these.
Validates manuscript structure
Incorrect section order, missing required sections, and abstract incompleteness are checked against real journal standards.
Fixes citation problems
Uncited references, missing bibliography entries, and formatting inconsistencies in citations are systematically detected.
Journal-specific compliance
CheckMyManuscript applies journal-specific rules for target journals including Nature, IEEE, Elsevier, APA, and PLOS, catching non-compliance before submission.
Language quality flags
ESL patterns, inconsistent tense, and passive voice overuse that editors flag are identified.
Checks relevant to this topic
Part of our 80+ automated checks
Missing declarations
Ethics, COI, funding, data availability, author contributions: all commonly missing.
Abstract completeness
Missing background, objective, methods, results, or conclusion elements.
Citation mismatches
In-text citations without bibliography entries or vice versa.
Section structure errors
Missing or misordered sections, wrong section headings for journal type.
Author metadata
Incomplete affiliations, missing ORCIDs, no corresponding author contact.
Reference format inconsistency
Mixed citation styles, incorrect journal abbreviations, missing DOIs.
Word count compliance
Abstract or manuscript exceeding journal word limits.
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
The most common desk rejection reasons are: paper out of scope, missing mandatory declarations (ethics, COI, funding), non-compliance with journal formatting template, incomplete abstract, incomplete reference list, missing author metadata (ORCID, affiliations), and word limit violations.
Post-review rejection reasons include: insufficient novelty, methodological flaws, unsupported claims, inadequate literature review, and poor writing clarity. These are harder to prevent automatically, but ensuring format compliance at least gets your paper to reviewers.
Upload your manuscript to CheckMyManuscript for a free overview of the most common format and compliance rejection risks. A full report ($5) provides detailed feedback on all 80+ checks.
Format and compliance rejection reasons (the most common desk rejection causes) can be largely prevented with a systematic pre-submission check. Scientific rejection reasons (novelty, methodology) require peer feedback and revision. CheckMyManuscript focuses on the preventable format layer.
Studies suggest that 20-50% of desk rejections at major journals are for administrative or format reasons rather than scientific quality, representing significant wasted time for authors that could be avoided with a pre-submission check.