Allergy Submission Guide: Requirements & Editorial Fit

Allergy is an official EAACI journal published by Wiley. EAACI's profile establishes that identity. The published scope includes educational, basic, translational, and clinical allergy/immunology research. It does not justify a universal requirement that every animal study include patient validation, or that every clinical study include a new molecular mechanism experiment.

Explain the particular allergy or immunology question your study addresses and why its answer matters to the journal's readers. Keep the system, population, and outcome visible. A change in an immune readout and a demonstrated clinical benefit are different findings; the cover letter should not treat them as interchangeable.

Use our guide to choosing a journal if several audiences are plausible. A scope-fit check can help examine the argument, but it cannot decide scientific fit on the basis of the journal name alone.

Create a short record before cutting a full report into a brief format. For every removed passage or display item, identify its role. The relevant question is whether the shortened submission remains assessable, not whether every original paragraph survives.

The record should end with a category decision. If the brief version requires readers to accept a result whose basis they cannot inspect, keep the fuller format or reduce the claim. Moving a decisive analysis out of view is not a substitute for choosing an appropriate article type.

Review the methods that must remain visible before shortening the Results.

An invented team has an observational allergy study with several outcome measures. Its preferred result is a difference on one symptom measure; other outcomes are uncertain. The team proposes a Letter to make the submission shorter and deletes the outcome-selection explanation, the uncertain results, and most of the limitations.

Shorter text, broader apparent claim. The brief version now looks more conclusive because its boundaries have disappeared. The repair is to preserve the information that changes interpretation and state exactly which result is supported. Choosing a short category cannot justify an exaggerated treatment claim.

Supplement as a hiding place. Detailed procedures may belong in supporting material when permitted, but the reader still needs enough context to understand the main result. Identify the exact passage or figure the main text depends on, make the connection explicit, and check the category's supplement limits. Do not treat supplementary space as unlimited across every format.

Category chosen by word count alone. A brief original observation, a single case report, and a response to a published article are different jobs. The publisher's Letter exclusion for single case reports still applies after a case description is shortened. A response belongs under the relevant response category only if it performs that task.

Manusights judgment: We created this compression audit to expose evidence lost during a format change. It cannot predict an editorial decision or determine whether a study is scientifically valid. The case is fictional, and the audit does not establish a private rejection pattern or an acceptance-rate estimate.

Check the shortened manuscript's claim boundaries, then check the abstract against the submitted evidence.

For Original articles, the author guidelines specify an informative title under 100 characters and require the species in the title for animal-model experiments. They allow up to five keywords, in alphabetical order. Keep these fields consistent with the actual study rather than importing requirements from another Wiley journal.

Make the abstract an accurate miniature of the submitted version. If a result or qualification was removed from the main text, check whether the abstract still depends on it. Avoid an abstract that describes the earlier, fuller draft while the reviewer receives a reduced evidence package.

The journal's figure guidance distinguishes initial-submission and publication-ready resolution. It specifies at least 300 dpi initially and 600 dpi for publication-ready figures. Inspect labels at the intended viewing size; increasing a file's resolution setting cannot recover detail absent from the original image. Preserve the unaltered source data and follow the applicable image-integrity rules.

Check figure and method coherence. For citations, review the reference list and verify the status and relevance of the sources on which the conclusion depends.

Name the article category and explain what the submission contributes. If the paper exceeds a stated limit, explain the request where the guidelines direct you to do so. A cover letter should clarify the submitted work, not promise evidence missing from it.

Use the journal cover-letter guide for drafting structure. Confirm author approval, interests, funding, ethics, consent, and any applicable registration and reporting requirements against the actual design and current instructions. Do not turn one approval statement into an assurance that every requirement is satisfied.

Follow the submission link on Wiley's current author page. The current destination is the Allergy author portal. Use the fields and file requirements shown there; this guide does not claim to have submitted a private manuscript or verified a fixed sequence of account screens.

Before opening that link, assemble the applicable submission artifacts:

• Main manuscript file: Include the author information, abstract, text, references, tables, and figure legends in the prescribed order.
• Figure files and supplementary material: Supply these separately and ensure each is cited from the correct place in the text.
• Cover letter: Wiley strongly recommends it and specifies its upload designation; explain the contribution and any requested exception.
• Ethics statements and trial registration: Check applicability against the study design and current ethical policies, rather than copying another paper's declarations.
• Competing-interests statement and funding information: Obtain agreement from co-authors and identify the actual support accurately.
• Graphical abstract and highlights: Follow the journal's preparation and file-designation instructions for the submitted category.

Inspect the generated submission PDF before completion. Compare the title, author order, abstract, figure labels, references, and declarations with the author-approved version. Save the submitted files and identifier.

If the draft still has unresolved decisions, use the signs a paper is not ready guide before upload. An Allergy readiness check is useful only when the actual manuscript and supporting material are available.

Check Wiley's Allergy open-access information for the current route and applicable terms. Separate an optional open-access charge from other possible publication charges. Institutional coverage or membership eligibility must be confirmed for the actual author and article; this guide does not quote an unverified universal APC or discount.

The following action map is not a promised timeline. It does not assign fixed desk-rejection percentages or review durations to Allergy.

• Receipt: Confirm that the submitted version and manuscript identifier are correct.
• Office request: If files or declarations need correction, make the changes consistently and retain a record.
• Editorial decision: Read the actual correspondence; a status label does not establish acceptance or guarantee external review.
• External review, if undertaken: Separate requests for explanation from limits of the design and evidence.
• Revision: Respond to each substantive point and obtain author agreement on the revised manuscript before resubmitting.

For waiting and status interpretation, use the Allergy under-review guide. It owns that post-submission task; this page prepares the package.