JAMA Neurology (jama-neurology)
Journal positioning
JAMA Neurology is a JAMA Network specialty journal for clinical neurology research
across the breadth of neurological disease — neurodegenerative, cerebrovascular,
neuroimmune, epilepsy, movement, neuromuscular, and headache disorders. It favors
randomized clinical trials and rigorous observational and biomarker studies tied to
clinically meaningful neurological outcomes, with JAMA's emphasis on adequate power,
validated endpoints, and direct relevance to neurological practice. Mechanistic
bench neuroscience, small case series, and biomarker correlations without clinical
endpoints are a weak fit; that work belongs to a translational-neuroscience venue.
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 JAMA Neurology author instructions.
When to trigger
- The author names JAMA Neurology for a clinical-neurology trial, cohort, or biomarker
study and wants a fit/framing check.
- A neurological study must be re-framed around a validated clinical or functional
endpoint (disability scale, cognitive measure, seizure freedom) for a practicing-
neurology audience.
- The author is choosing between JAMA Neurology, JAMA, a mechanistic-translational venue
(
brain), or a cerebrovascular-specific venue (stroke).
- The author needs the journal's reporting-guideline, registration, and desk-reject
expectations for neurology work.
Scope & topic fit
- Randomized clinical trials in neurology (disease-modifying, symptomatic, or
device/neuromodulation), including pragmatic designs.
- Observational and cohort studies across neurodegenerative (Alzheimer, Parkinson),
cerebrovascular, demyelinating, epilepsy, and neuromuscular disease with clinical
endpoints.
- Fluid and imaging biomarker studies (e.g., amyloid/tau, neurofilament, MRI markers)
validated against diagnosis, progression, or outcome.
- Diagnostic, prognostic, and natural-history studies with validated neurological scales
and meaningful follow-up.
- Health-services, epidemiology, and disparities research in neurological disease.
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses answering a focused neurological question.
Method & evidence bar
- Trials must be adequately powered with a prespecified, clinically meaningful primary
endpoint using validated neurological/functional outcome measures; biomarker-only
endpoints need strong justification.
- The applicable reporting guideline and checklist are required: CONSORT for trials,
STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews; biomarker/diagnostic
work should follow STARD-style rigor where relevant.
- Trials require prospective registration; registration number, protocol, and
statistical-analysis plan are expected.
- Outcome scales must be validated and analyzed appropriately (e.g., ordinal/repeated-
measures methods); minimal clinically important differences should be addressed.
- Observational and biomarker claims must address confounding, verification bias, and
the diagnosis reference standard; causal language must match the design.
- Longitudinal/progression studies need adequate follow-up and handling of dropout and
competing risks.
Structure & house style
- JAMA Network format with a structured abstract and a Key Points box; re-check current
article types (Original Investigation, Brief Report, Research Letter, etc.) and limits
on the live guide.
- The introduction frames a focused, practice-relevant neurological question; the
discussion states the clinical or diagnostic implication plainly.
- Tables/figures follow JAMA Network statistical-reporting standards; CONSORT/STROBE
flow diagrams and outcome-distribution figures are expected where applicable.
- Supplements carry the protocol, SAP, scale definitions, and additional analyses.
Official-submission checklist
- Before giving submission-ready advice, read
../../resources/source-basis.md and
../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the ICMJE and JAMA Network
anchors, then cite the current JAMA Neurology page you checked.
- Search the live site for "JAMA Neurology instructions for authors" and follow the
current version.
- Re-check article types and word/reference/table limits, structured-abstract and Key
Points format, and the JAMA Network statistical-reporting requirements.
- Confirm trial registration, the reporting checklist (CONSORT/STROBE/PRISMA), the
data-sharing statement, and protocol/SAP submission.
- Re-check IRB/ethics and consent statements (including capacity/surrogate consent in
cognitive-impairment studies), ICMJE disclosures, funding, and AI-use disclosure.
- If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions
win.
Pre-submission self-check
Common desk-reject triggers
- Small case series or single-center cohorts with no validated endpoint or generalizability.
- Biomarker correlations with no clinical/diagnostic endpoint or independent validation.
- Trials using non-validated or improperly analyzed outcome scales, or underpowered for the endpoint.
- Observational analyses with verification bias or overstated causal claims.
- Missing trial registration, protocol, or the required reporting checklist.
- Mechanistic/bench neuroscience better served by a translational-neuroscience journal.
Re-routing decision
- Mechanistic translational neuroscience-to-clinical advance →
brain.
- Cerebrovascular/stroke-specific clinical focus →
stroke.
- Broadly practice-changing, top-tier neurology trial → general medicine (
jama / NEJM / The Lancet in the natural-science bundle).
- General internal-medicine relevance over neurology specialty →
jama-internal-medicine.
- Neuropsychiatric/mental-health primary focus →
jama-psychiatry / the-lancet-psychiatry.
Output format
[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] JAMA Neurology
[Specialty tags] <2–3 closest neurology topics>
[Study design / reporting guideline] <RCT-CONSORT / cohort-STROBE / biomarker-STARD / review-PRISMA>
[Method/evidence] <does power, validated endpoint, registration, and validation clear the bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <article type / registration / checklist / scale validation / consent / disclosures>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>