Design-appropriate reporting
Choose reporting conventions suited to the study design. State the research question, context, population and sampling approach. Explain the measures and analytical strategy. Distinguish planned analyses from exploratory work where relevant. Systematic reviews should make their search and selection process clear; qualitative studies should describe recruitment, interpretation and reflexivity.
Statistical and comparative interpretation
Report the information needed to interpret an estimate rather than relying solely on a significance label. Explain missing-data handling, uncertainty and relevant sensitivity tests. Cross-institution comparisons should consider mission, size, subject mix, database coverage and the possibility of unequal data quality.
- Avoid implying causation from an unsupported observational association.
- Do not treat citation counts as a complete account of scholarly quality.
- Distinguish absolute output from normalized or per-capita measures.
- Explain the limits of comparisons across different editions.
Figures, tables and images
Present readable figures and tables with clear labels, units, denominators and source notes. Do not alter visual material in a way that misrepresents the evidence. Explain any legitimate processing and retain the original files when possible. Secure permission for third-party material before publication.