| name | en-clinmed-journal-workflow |
| description | Use when deciding which English specialty clinical-medicine journal skill to invoke next, comparing fit across the 30-journal clinical-medicine roadmap, or routing a manuscript before venue-specific re-framing. Routes by specialty, study design (RCT / observational / diagnostic-accuracy / review), and evidence strength, and flags trial registration and the reporting checklist as prerequisites. |
Clinical-medicine journal workflow (en-clinmed-journal-workflow)
Purpose
This is the routing skill for the specialty-clinical bundle. It does not replace a
single-journal profile; it first classifies the study by specialty, study design,
and evidence strength, then routes into the matching per-journal skill for fit and
re-framing. It is a sibling to en-natsci-journal-workflow (which holds the general
big-four and broad-specialty clinical flagships). These skills are venue-fit aids
only — not clinical, diagnostic, or regulatory advice.
Ask four things first
- Specialty: internal/general medicine, oncology, cardiology, neurology,
pediatrics, psychiatry, surgery, respiratory/critical care, nephrology,
endocrinology/diabetes, hepatology/GI, allergy/immunology, rheumatology, stroke,
radiology, anesthesiology, obstetrics/gynecology, or urology?
- Study design: randomized controlled trial, prospective cohort / observational
study, diagnostic-accuracy study, systematic review / meta-analysis, guideline /
consensus, mechanistic/translational study, or narrative/invited review?
- Evidence strength & impact: practice-changing definitive trial, an important
but not definitive result, a hypothesis-generating or exploratory finding, or a
synthesis?
- Audience: the whole specialty (a society/JAMA-Network/Lancet specialty
flagship), a sub-specialty community, or a general-medicine audience (route up to
the big-four in the natural-science bundle)?
Quick routing
| Manuscript signature | Prefer skill |
|---|
| General internal-medicine trial / comparative effectiveness | jama-internal-medicine |
| Oncology clinical trial / practice-changing | jama-oncology / annals-of-oncology |
| Authoritative oncology review | nature-reviews-clinical-oncology |
| Cardiology specialty study | jama-cardiology |
| Neurology clinical study | jama-neurology |
| Neuroscience-to-clinical brain disorders, mechanism + clinical | brain |
| Cerebrovascular / stroke | stroke |
| Pediatrics | jama-pediatrics |
| Psychiatry / mental-health (clinical or population) | jama-psychiatry / the-lancet-psychiatry |
| Surgery / perioperative outcomes | jama-surgery |
| Respiratory / pulmonary / critical-care medicine | the-lancet-respiratory-medicine / american-journal-of-respiratory-and-critical-care-medicine |
| Intensive / critical care | critical-care-medicine |
| Diabetes / endocrinology (clinical or population) | the-lancet-diabetes-and-endocrinology / journal-of-clinical-endocrinology-and-metabolism / diabetologia |
| Nephrology / kidney disease | journal-of-the-american-society-of-nephrology / kidney-international |
| Liver disease / hepatology | journal-of-hepatology / hepatology |
| Gastroenterology (clinical) | american-journal-of-gastroenterology |
| Allergy / clinical immunology | journal-of-allergy-and-clinical-immunology |
| Rheumatology / autoimmune | arthritis-and-rheumatology |
Sibling-journal disambiguation
| Confusable targets | Decision rule |
|---|
| A JAMA Network specialty title vs the general big-four (NEJM/JAMA/Lancet/BMJ in the natural-science bundle) | A practice-changing, broadly significant trial may belong at the general venue; a strong specialty-relevant result routes to the JAMA Network / Lancet specialty title. |
jama-oncology vs annals-of-oncology | Route by audience and society fit (JAMA Network vs ESMO) and re-check current scopes; both take high-quality oncology clinical research. |
journal-of-the-american-society-of-nephrology vs kidney-international | Both are top nephrology venues (ASN vs ISN); route by society fit and emphasis and re-check current scopes. |
journal-of-hepatology vs hepatology | EASL vs AASLD flagships; route by society fit and audience and re-check current scopes. |
the-lancet-psychiatry vs jama-psychiatry | Both are top psychiatry venues; route by family fit (Lancet vs JAMA Network) and the framing/audience. |
Specialty journal vs the-lancet-public-health | A population-health/policy intervention routes to public health; a disease-specific clinical result routes to the specialty journal. |
Decision rules
- Match the reporting guideline before submitting. RCT → CONSORT + prospective
trial registration (number in the manuscript); systematic review → PRISMA;
observational → STROBE; diagnostic accuracy → STARD. These are prerequisites, not
nice-to-haves, at these venues.
- Evidence hierarchy sets the venue. A definitive randomized trial outranks an
observational study, which outranks a single-center case series; route the design to
the venue that expects that level of evidence.
- Specialty fit beats prestige. A strong nephrology or rheumatology result is often
better served by the society specialty flagship than by a general journal that will
desk-reject for limited general interest.
- Review vs primary. Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology and similar are largely
invited/commissioned — propose, do not submit unsolicited primary data.
- Ethics, consent, and disclosures (IRB approval, informed consent, ICMJE COI and
authorship, data sharing) are gating items at every clinical venue.
- Always enter the single-journal skill's official-submission checklist before
submitting; never rely on a stale template.
Output format
[Top journal skill] <skill-name>
[Alt 1] <skill-name> (reason)
[Alt 2] <skill-name> (reason)
[Do not submit to] <journal> (one-line mismatch reason)
[Study design / reporting guideline] <RCT-CONSORT / cohort-STROBE / review-PRISMA / diagnostic-STARD>
[Biggest current gap] evidence-strength / specialty-fit / registration / reporting-checklist / ethics / official requirements
[Next step] invoke <skill-name> for single-venue fit and re-framing
