brain

name	brain
description	Use when targeting Brain or deciding whether a clinical-neurology or translational-neuroscience study fits this venue. Encodes the journal's fit, the mechanistic-depth-with-clinical-relevance evidence bar, reporting-guideline and registration requirements, Guarantors of Brain/OUP house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics. Venue-fit aid only, not clinical advice.

Brain (brain)

Journal positioning

Brain is published by the Guarantors of Brain (Oxford University Press) and is a leading journal of clinical neurology and translational neuroscience, distinguished by its demand for both mechanistic depth and clinical relevance to human nervous-system disease — neurodegeneration, epilepsy, movement disorders, neuroimmunology and neuro-inflammation, neuromuscular disease, neuro-oncology, and the genetics, imaging, and pathology that illuminate disease mechanisms. It serves academic neurologists and neuroscientists and expects work that advances understanding of how a neurological disease arises or progresses, grounded in human data or strongly disease-relevant models; routine clinical-trial reporting without mechanistic insight, and bench neuroscience with no clear disease anchor, are a weak fit. This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing aid; it is not clinical or regulatory advice and does not replace the journal's current instructions for authors. Before submitting, re-check the live Brain author instructions.

When to trigger

• The author names Brain for a mechanistic clinical-neurology or translational-neuroscience study and wants a fit/framing check.
• A neurology study must be re-framed around a disease mechanism with clinical relevance rather than a descriptive cohort or routine trial report.
• The author is choosing between Brain, a clinical-trials neurology journal, and a cerebrovascular-specific or basic-neuroscience venue.
• The author needs the journal's mechanistic-evidence, reporting-guideline, and desk-reject expectations.

Scope & topic fit

• Neurodegeneration (Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, ALS, FTD, prion disease): mechanism, biomarkers, neuropathology, and genotype-phenotype studies.
• Epilepsy: mechanisms of epileptogenesis, networks, genetics, and surgically/electrophysiologically anchored human studies.
• Movement disorders and neuromuscular disease with mechanistic, genetic, or neuropathological depth.
• Neuroimmunology and neuro-inflammation (MS, autoimmune encephalitis, antibody-mediated disease) with mechanistic insight.
• Disease-relevant neurogenetics, advanced neuroimaging tied to mechanism, and human neuropathology/biomarker studies.
• Translational neuroscience in disease-relevant models that directly informs human neurological disease.

Method & evidence bar

• Studies are expected to combine rigorous methodology with a clear mechanistic advance grounded in human data or strongly disease-relevant models; correlation-only descriptive cohorts are insufficient.
• The applicable reporting guideline must be followed and its checklist supplied: STROBE for observational studies, CONSORT for trials, PRISMA for systematic reviews, STARD for diagnostic/biomarker accuracy; ARRIVE-aligned reporting for animal work.
• Interventional trials require prospective registration with the registration number and protocol/statistical-analysis plan.
• Mechanistic claims must rest on direct, manipulative or convergent evidence (genetics, pathology, functional readouts), with adequate controls, replication, and human validation where feasible.
• Biomarker and imaging claims require an independent validation cohort and comparison against an accepted reference standard.
• Genetic and neuropathological studies need adequate sample size/segregation evidence and appropriate statistical handling of multiple comparisons.

Structure & house style

• Guarantors of Brain/OUP format with a structured abstract; re-check current article types (Original Article, etc.), graphical-abstract requirements, and limits on the live guide.
• The introduction frames a focused disease-mechanism question and its clinical relevance; the discussion integrates mechanism with implications for understanding or managing the neurological disease.
• Figures must show controls, replication, and quantification supporting each mechanistic claim; STROBE/CONSORT/PRISMA flow diagrams are expected where applicable.
• Supplements carry full methods, genetic/pathological and reagent details, the protocol, and extended cohorts/analyses.

Official-submission checklist

• Before giving submission-ready advice, read ../../resources/source-basis.md and ../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the ICMJE/EQUATOR and Guarantors of Brain/OUP anchors, then cite the current Brain page you checked.
• Search the live site for "Brain journal instructions to authors" and follow the current Guarantors of Brain/OUP version.
• Re-check article types, word/figure limits, structured- and graphical-abstract format, and statistical-reporting requirements.
• Confirm trial registration, the reporting checklist (STROBE/CONSORT/PRISMA/STARD), data/code-sharing statement, and protocol/SAP submission.
• Re-check IRB/ethics and consent, brain-bank/tissue and genetic-data governance, animal-use approval and ARRIVE-aligned reporting, ICMJE authorship and conflict-of-interest disclosure, funding, and AI-use disclosure.
• If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win.

Pre-submission self-check

• The study delivers a clear disease mechanism with clinical relevance, grounded in human data or a disease-relevant model.
• Mechanistic claims rest on convergent/manipulative evidence with adequate controls, replication, and human validation where feasible.
• The correct reporting checklist (STROBE/CONSORT/PRISMA/STARD) and, for animal work, ARRIVE-aligned reporting are completed.
• Biomarker/imaging/genetic claims include an independent validation cohort and appropriate multiple-comparison handling.
• Interventional trials are prospectively registered with the number in the manuscript; protocol/SAP provided.
• IRB/tissue/animal ethics and consent, ICMJE disclosures, and a data-sharing statement are prepared.

Common desk-reject triggers

• Descriptive clinical cohorts or case series with no mechanistic advance.
• Mechanistic claims from a single model with correlative-only data and no human validation.
• Routine trial or registry reports without mechanistic or conceptual insight.
• Biomarker/imaging/genetic studies without an independent validation cohort or reference standard.
• Missing trial registration, tissue/animal-ethics approval, or the required reporting checklist.
• Basic neuroscience with no clear neurological-disease anchor, better served by a basic-neuroscience venue.

Re-routing decision

• Clinical-trial or observational neurology emphasis without deep mechanism → jama-neurology.
• Cerebrovascular-specific (ischemic/hemorrhagic stroke, prevention, recovery) → stroke.
• Practice-changing, broadly significant trial → general medicine (jama / NEJM / The Lancet in the natural-science bundle).
• Neuro-oncology dominated by a systemic-oncology endpoint → jama-oncology / annals-of-oncology.
• Pure basic neuroscience mechanism with no disease translation → a basic-neuroscience venue in the natural-science bundle.

Output format

[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] Brain (Guarantors of Brain / OUP)
[Neuroscience tags] <2–3 closest topics, e.g. neurodegeneration mechanism, epilepsy genetics, autoimmune encephalitis>
[Study design / reporting guideline] <mechanistic / cohort-STROBE / RCT-CONSORT / review-PRISMA / diagnostic-STARD>
[Method/evidence] <mechanistic depth, human validation, replication, registration>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <article type / registration / checklist / tissue-animal ethics / disclosures>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>