JAMA Manuscript Workflow (jama-workflow)
Overview
This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill; it tells you which jama- skill to use for the stage you are at* when preparing an Original Investigation (or systematic review / meta-analysis) for JAMA.
Default assumption: unless the user says the target is a different journal, treat the manuscript as aimed at JAMA — a big-four general medical journal (alongside NEJM, The Lancet, The BMJ) that demands general medical importance, a clean EQUATOR-aligned reporting standard (CONSORT / STROBE / PRISMA / STARD), prospective trial registration, and dedicated statistical review.
When to trigger
- "What should I do next?" on a clinical manuscript
- A draft is handed over and the current bottleneck is unclear
- You are bouncing between design, stats, writing, and reviewer replies
- You received JAMA decision letter / reviewer comments and must switch to revision mode
Routing table
| Current symptom |
Next skill |
| Unsure the topic clears JAMA's general-medical-importance bar |
jama-scope-fit |
| Design questions: RCT vs cohort vs diagnostic vs review; ITT, bias |
jama-study-design |
| Need the right EQUATOR checklist + flow diagram (CONSORT/PRISMA…) |
jama-reporting-standards |
| p-values only, no effect sizes/CIs; multiplicity not handled |
jama-statistics |
| Figures/tables cluttered, no CONSORT/PRISMA diagram, units wrong |
jama-figures-tables |
| Abstract not in JAMA structure; no Key Points box |
jama-structured-abstract |
| Trial not registered / registered late; missing IRB, consent, COI |
jama-ethics-registration |
| Prose verbose, jargon-heavy, "spin" in conclusions |
jama-writing-style |
| Need a cover letter pitching importance to the editor |
jama-cover-letter |
| Ready to submit; need the pre-submission preflight |
jama-submission |
| Received reviewer comments / a revise decision |
jama-peer-review-revision |
Default order
jama-scope-fit — decide whether JAMA is the right home before investing more
jama-study-design — lock the design and its internal-validity safeguards
jama-reporting-standards — choose and complete the EQUATOR checklist + diagram
jama-statistics — pre-specified outcomes, effect sizes + 95% CIs, multiplicity
jama-figures-tables — finalize the flow diagram, baseline table, main exhibits
jama-structured-abstract — JAMA structured abstract + Key Points box
jama-ethics-registration — registration, IRB/consent, ICMJE disclosures, data sharing
jama-writing-style — tighten prose, remove spin, match house style (polish)
jama-cover-letter — editor-facing pitch of general medical importance
jama-submission — final preflight against author instructions
jama-peer-review-revision — response after the decision letter
jama-structured-abstract and jama-writing-style are late-stage polish — do not perfect prose while the design or primary outcome is still unsettled.
Decision shortcuts
- "I have a finding but it's narrow / subspecialty-only" →
jama-scope-fit
- "Reviewers will ask if this is ITT or per-protocol" →
jama-study-design
- "I don't know whether I need CONSORT or STROBE" →
jama-reporting-standards
- "My results are all p < 0.05 with no CIs" →
jama-statistics
- "My RCT has no participant flow diagram" →
jama-figures-tables
- "My abstract is one block paragraph" →
jama-structured-abstract
- "I registered the trial after enrollment started" →
jama-ethics-registration
- "My conclusion overstates a secondary outcome" →
jama-writing-style
- "I need to convince the editor this matters to clinicians" →
jama-cover-letter
- "Submitting tomorrow" →
jama-submission
- "I got three reviews and a major-revision letter" →
jama-peer-review-revision
Differences vs. specialty-journal skills
If the work is mechanistic, bench, or narrowly subspecialty (e.g., molecular oncology), a specialty journal stack fits better than JAMA. Core contrast:
- JAMA: broad clinician readership; demands general medical importance and pragmatic clinical relevance.
- Specialty / basic-science journals: tolerate narrow scope and mechanistic depth that JAMA would consider off-fit.
Worked routing example (illustrative)
A team hands over a near-complete multicenter randomized clinical trial (illustrative: N = 4,200, 90-day mortality, absolute risk difference -3.3 percentage points [95% CI, -5.9 to -0.7]) bound for the Journal of the American Medical Association, but the abstract is one block paragraph, the registration date is unverified, and the Results report only p-values. Route in dependency order, not symptom order: jama-ethics-registration first (registration timing is a hard gate), then jama-statistics (effect sizes with CIs, ITT), then jama-figures-tables (CONSORT diagram reconciles all 4,200), then jama-structured-abstract, with style and submission last. The job is to stop teams from polishing prose while a registration defect sits unaddressed.
Router output format
【Stage detected】scope / design / stats / exhibits / abstract / ethics / submit / revision
【Hard gate unresolved?】registration timing / primary outcome / none
【Recommended next skill】jama-...
【Why this order】what must precede polish
【Sibling-venue check】NEJM / Lancet / specialty re-route? yes-with-reason / no
Anti-patterns
- Do not skip
jama-scope-fit and polish a manuscript that a JAMA editor will desk-reject for narrow importance.
- Do not let
jama-figures-tables beautify exhibits before the reporting standard and primary outcome are settled.
- Do not let
jama-peer-review-revision draft a response letter before the manuscript itself is actually revised.
- Do not defer
jama-ethics-registration — a retrospectively registered trial cannot be fixed at submission.
1---2name: jama-workflow3description: Use when deciding which jama-* sub-skill to invoke next, or when sequencing a clinical manuscript from scope check through revision for JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association). Routes — does not replace — the specialized skills.4---56# JAMA Manuscript Workflow (jama-workflow)78## Overview910This is the router. It does not replace any specialized skill; it tells you **which jama-* skill to use for the stage you are at** when preparing an Original Investigation (or systematic review / meta-analysis) for JAMA.1112Default assumption: unless the user says the target is a different journal, treat the manuscript as aimed at JAMA — a big-four general medical journal (alongside NEJM, The Lancet, The BMJ) that demands **general medical importance**, a clean **EQUATOR-aligned reporting standard** (CONSORT / STROBE / PRISMA / STARD), prospective **trial registration**, and dedicated **statistical review**.1314## When to trigger1516- "What should I do next?" on a clinical manuscript17- A draft is handed over and the current bottleneck is unclear18- You are bouncing between design, stats, writing, and reviewer replies19- You received JAMA decision letter / reviewer comments and must switch to revision mode2021## Routing table2223| Current symptom | Next skill |24|----------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|25| Unsure the topic clears JAMA's general-medical-importance bar | `jama-scope-fit` |26| Design questions: RCT vs cohort vs diagnostic vs review; ITT, bias | `jama-study-design` |27| Need the right EQUATOR checklist + flow diagram (CONSORT/PRISMA…) | `jama-reporting-standards` |28| p-values only, no effect sizes/CIs; multiplicity not handled | `jama-statistics` |29| Figures/tables cluttered, no CONSORT/PRISMA diagram, units wrong | `jama-figures-tables` |30| Abstract not in JAMA structure; no Key Points box | `jama-structured-abstract` |31| Trial not registered / registered late; missing IRB, consent, COI | `jama-ethics-registration` |32| Prose verbose, jargon-heavy, "spin" in conclusions | `jama-writing-style` |33| Need a cover letter pitching importance to the editor | `jama-cover-letter` |34| Ready to submit; need the pre-submission preflight | `jama-submission` |35| Received reviewer comments / a revise decision | `jama-peer-review-revision` |3637## Default order38391. `jama-scope-fit` — decide whether JAMA is the right home before investing more402. `jama-study-design` — lock the design and its internal-validity safeguards413. `jama-reporting-standards` — choose and complete the EQUATOR checklist + diagram424. `jama-statistics` — pre-specified outcomes, effect sizes + 95% CIs, multiplicity435. `jama-figures-tables` — finalize the flow diagram, baseline table, main exhibits446. `jama-structured-abstract` — JAMA structured abstract + Key Points box457. `jama-ethics-registration` — registration, IRB/consent, ICMJE disclosures, data sharing468. `jama-writing-style` — tighten prose, remove spin, match house style (polish)479. `jama-cover-letter` — editor-facing pitch of general medical importance4810. `jama-submission` — final preflight against author instructions4911. `jama-peer-review-revision` — response after the decision letter5051> `jama-structured-abstract` and `jama-writing-style` are **late-stage polish** — do not perfect prose while the design or primary outcome is still unsettled.5253## Decision shortcuts5455- "I have a finding but it's narrow / subspecialty-only" → `jama-scope-fit`56- "Reviewers will ask if this is ITT or per-protocol" → `jama-study-design`57- "I don't know whether I need CONSORT or STROBE" → `jama-reporting-standards`58- "My results are all p < 0.05 with no CIs" → `jama-statistics`59- "My RCT has no participant flow diagram" → `jama-figures-tables`60- "My abstract is one block paragraph" → `jama-structured-abstract`61- "I registered the trial after enrollment started" → `jama-ethics-registration`62- "My conclusion overstates a secondary outcome" → `jama-writing-style`63- "I need to convince the editor this matters to clinicians" → `jama-cover-letter`64- "Submitting tomorrow" → `jama-submission`65- "I got three reviews and a major-revision letter" → `jama-peer-review-revision`6667## Differences vs. specialty-journal skills6869If the work is mechanistic, bench, or narrowly subspecialty (e.g., molecular oncology), a specialty journal stack fits better than JAMA. Core contrast:7071- JAMA: broad clinician readership; demands **general medical importance** and pragmatic clinical relevance.72- Specialty / basic-science journals: tolerate narrow scope and mechanistic depth that JAMA would consider off-fit.7374## Worked routing example (illustrative)7576A team hands over a near-complete multicenter randomized clinical trial (illustrative: N = 4,200, 90-day mortality, absolute risk difference -3.3 percentage points [95% CI, -5.9 to -0.7]) bound for the Journal of the American Medical Association, but the abstract is one block paragraph, the registration date is unverified, and the Results report only p-values. Route in dependency order, not symptom order: `jama-ethics-registration` first (registration timing is a hard gate), then `jama-statistics` (effect sizes with CIs, ITT), then `jama-figures-tables` (CONSORT diagram reconciles all 4,200), then `jama-structured-abstract`, with style and submission last. The job is to stop teams from polishing prose while a registration defect sits unaddressed.7778## Router output format7980```81【Stage detected】scope / design / stats / exhibits / abstract / ethics / submit / revision82【Hard gate unresolved?】registration timing / primary outcome / none83【Recommended next skill】jama-...84【Why this order】what must precede polish85【Sibling-venue check】NEJM / Lancet / specialty re-route? yes-with-reason / no86```8788## Anti-patterns8990- **Do not** skip `jama-scope-fit` and polish a manuscript that a JAMA editor will desk-reject for narrow importance.91- **Do not** let `jama-figures-tables` beautify exhibits before the reporting standard and primary outcome are settled.92- **Do not** let `jama-peer-review-revision` draft a response letter before the manuscript itself is actually revised.93- **Do not** defer `jama-ethics-registration` — a retrospectively registered trial cannot be fixed at submission.