Circulation Author Guidelines and Submission Requirements

Format-free submission reduces premature styling work. It does not make a manuscript ready when its central claim, files, or required disclosures are unresolved.

Submit If

• the title, abstract, figures, and conclusion make the cardiovascular relevance visible without relying on a broad claim in the cover letter
• the complete author list and author information can be entered consistently in the manuscript and portal
• the text, tables, figures, and applicable supplemental files are complete enough for external reviewers to assess the work
• any clinical trial has been registered as required under the current ICMJE-based policy
• the manuscript's article type has been checked against the live Circulation instructions

Think Twice If

• the paper's broad cardiovascular importance appears only after a specialist methods or subgroup discussion
• a main table is an image rather than editable text, or a decisive figure or supplement is still being prepared
• the clinical-trial registration, author details, disclosure package, or permissions questions remain open
• the manuscript depends on a proposed article type that Circulation says is invited, commissioned, or requires a presubmission inquiry

We reviewed the current Circulation author-instructions, manuscript-preparation, and article-types pages on July 14, 2026. This page is a preparation aid for the author job the publisher materials do not solve on their own: checking that the broad-message argument, evidence package, and portal information agree before upload. It does not estimate an acceptance rate, a decision time, or an editor's unpublished priorities.

We map the submission from the first sentence of the abstract to the files the editor and reviewers can inspect. The purpose is not to predict whether the journal will send a paper out for review. It is to test whether the broad cardiovascular relevance claimed in the portal is supported by the manuscript itself. The AHA instructions explicitly make broad clinical and scientific readership part of the submission frame, so a narrow but technically sound result needs a more precise venue argument rather than a larger adjective in the cover letter.

The Circulation message is broader than the study population or evidence

The scope claim exceeds the visible evidence.

We compare the title, abstract, first figure or table, and conclusion against the stated cardiovascular consequence. A result can be important in a defined population without establishing a general clinical implication. The manuscript should name the population, comparator, outcome, and boundary that let a reader see what transfers and what does not.

The Circulation Clinical Perspective is disconnected from the evidence path

The Clinical Perspective adds an unsupported implication.

The manuscript-preparation guidance asks authors to include a Clinical Perspective that concisely summarizes the key observations and their clinical relevance for a clinical cardiology audience. We check that its statements can be traced to the abstract, results, and discussion. If the section introduces a practice implication not supported in the main manuscript, narrow the perspective or strengthen the visible evidence.

The Circulation review package depends on a file that is not ready

A required review file is incomplete.

We check the manuscript text, tables, figures, supplemental files, author information, and declarations as one package. The official instructions permit one PDF containing text, figures, and tables, or separate files, but a reviewer still needs a coherent version. Tables should be editable text rather than images, and material needed to interpret the main claim should not be left for a later upload.

The Circulation article type was selected before the author instructions were read

We compare the manuscript's actual contribution with the article-types page. The publisher notes that many review formats are invited, although unsolicited material may be considered, and that some other sections are commissioned or require a presubmission inquiry. An Original Research workflow is not automatically the correct route for a review, perspective, or clinical-practice piece.

The AHA author instructions describe two starting file arrangements: one PDF containing text, figures, and tables, or individual manuscript files. Tables may be embedded in the manuscript or uploaded separately, but should be editable text rather than images. Figures can be embedded or separate; the publisher notes that a clear image format is acceptable for initial submission, while publication files have their own requirements. Prepare applicable supplemental files at the same time.

For detailed formatting after revision, use the separate Circulation formatting requirements guide. It owns styling and file-specification questions; this page owns the initial author-guidelines and portal-readiness job.

The Circulation author instructions say that editorial staff and editors first examine a manuscript to decide whether to refer it for external peer review. Work that is not likely to receive sufficient priority for publication may be returned after initial screening. When a reviewed manuscript receives an initial favorable response, the journal says it may undergo independent statistical review when appropriate.

That process description is not a personal timeline or decision forecast. It does explain why the broad cardiovascular message and complete review package belong in the initial submission: they allow an editor to evaluate scope and a reviewer to evaluate the actual evidence without trying to reconstruct a missing rationale from portal fields.

The publisher asks that appeals be submitted in writing to the editorial office. For a manuscript already in revision, use the Circulation response-to-reviewers guide to organize the decision letter, the revised manuscript, and a point-by-point response without treating a response letter as a substitute for the requested work.

The editors state that they do not respond to presubmission inquiries for Original Research Articles. Authors should submit an Original Research manuscript after meeting the minimum submission requirements. The journal does say it will consider presubmission queries for proposed Frame of Reference or State of the Art content; include an abstract or short summary of the proposal.

This is a routing rule, not an invitation to reframe an original-research paper as a review. Use the article-types page to check what the selected route accepts before investing in a proposal or submission package.