Clinical Infectious Diseases Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

CID requires structured abstracts for Major Articles and Brief Reports.

• Word limit: 200 words maximum
• Required sections: Background, Methods, Results, Conclusions
• No citations allowed
• No abbreviations unless universally understood

The 200-word abstract is restrictive. Most clinical infectious disease journals allow 250 to 350 words. At 200 words, you can't afford generic background statements. Start the Background section with the specific gap or question. The Methods section should name the study design and setting in one sentence. Results should include your primary endpoint with the effect size and confidence interval. Conclusions should be one sentence.

One thing that trips authors up: CID doesn't allow "Objective" or "Purpose" as a heading. It must be "Background." This is different from journals like Clinical Cancer Research which uses "Purpose" and "Experimental Design." Use exactly the headings CID specifies.

Review Articles use unstructured abstracts of up to 200 words. These should outline the scope of the review and its main conclusions.

CID allows up to 6 combined figures and tables for Major Articles. This is a combined cap, so if you have 4 figures, you can only have 2 tables.

Figure requirements:

Table requirements:

• Created in Word using the table function
• Every column needs a header row
• Horizontal rules only
• No vertical lines or shading
• Abbreviations defined in footnotes
• P values to appropriate decimal places
• Denominators included for all percentages

Specific figure expectations for CID:

• Kaplan-Meier curves must include numbers at risk below the x-axis
• Forest plots should follow standard formatting with diamond summary estimates
• Antibiogram tables should use standard susceptibility breakpoints (CLSI or EUCAST)
• Flowcharts for patient selection should follow CONSORT or STROBE conventions
• Epidemic curves should use standard epidemiologic formatting

CID's readership includes practicing clinicians, epidemiologists, and microbiologists. Figures need to be immediately interpretable without extensive reference to the text. Don't rely on color alone to convey information; use patterns or labels for accessibility.

CID uses the Vancouver/NLM numbered reference style, standard across OUP medical journals.

In-text citations: Superscript numbers, placed after punctuation. Multiple references: ^1-3 or ^1,3,5. Don't use brackets; CID uses superscript numbers only.

Reference list format:

1. Smith AB, Jones CD, Brown EF. Risk factors for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae in hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2025;80(3):412-420.

Key formatting rules:

• List all authors up to 6; for 7+, list first 3 followed by "et al."
• Journal titles abbreviated per NLM/Index Medicus
• Volume, issue in parentheses, and page range
• DOIs encouraged for all references
• No period after journal abbreviation (e.g., "Clin Infect Dis" not "Clin. Infect. Dis.")
• Reference to a website must include access date

The 40-reference cap for Major Articles is enforced. This is tighter than many comparable journals and forces you to cite only the most relevant literature. If you need more references, consider whether some belong in the Supplementary Data as a supplementary reference list. CID does allow supplementary references for extended literature coverage.

One common mistake: CID uses the NLM abbreviation "Clin Infect Dis" without periods, which is standard NLM style. Some reference managers add periods to abbreviations. Check your output format.

CID hosts supplementary data through Oxford Academic's online platform.

Common supplementary content:

• Extended methods (laboratory protocols, statistical analysis details)
• Additional tables (complete antibiotic susceptibility data, subgroup analyses)
• Additional figures (supplementary Kaplan-Meier curves, sensitivity analyses)
• Supplementary references beyond the 40-reference cap
• Case report forms and questionnaires
• Raw data tables for genomic or epidemiologic studies

Formatting:

• Submit as a single PDF or as separate files
• Label as Supplementary Figure S1, Supplementary Table S1, etc.
• Include a Supplementary Data section at the end of the main manuscript
• Supplementary data is peer reviewed

For multicenter studies or clinical trials, CID encourages detailed site-level data in the Supplementary Data section. Reviewers often request this during revision, so including it proactively can speed up the review process.

CID accepts both, but Word is the standard for this community.

Word submissions:

• Times New Roman or Arial, 12-point
• Double-spaced throughout
• Continuous line numbering
• Page numbers
• Figures uploaded separately through the Oxford submission system
• Tables placed at the end of the manuscript, one per page

LaTeX submissions:

• No CID-specific template; use a standard article class
• Submit compiled PDF and source files
• Include bibliography files
• Expect conversion issues with complex tables during production

Infectious disease research is a clinical field where Word dominates. LaTeX submissions to CID are very rare. Unless your paper involves significant mathematical modeling or bioinformatics, there's no advantage to using LaTeX for this journal.

CID has several requirements and practices that set it apart from other infectious disease journals.

1. IDSA conflict of interest requirements. CID uses the IDSA conflict of interest form, which is more detailed than the standard ICMJE form. All authors must disclose financial relationships with pharmaceutical and diagnostic companies. Given that many CID papers involve antimicrobial agents, this is scrutinized carefully.

2. Antimicrobial susceptibility reporting standards. CID expects susceptibility data to follow CLSI (Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute) or EUCAST breakpoints. You must specify which standard you used and which version. Don't report susceptibility results without identifying the breakpoint criteria.

3. Patient consent and IRB documentation. CID requires a statement about institutional review board approval and patient consent in the Methods section. For studies involving identifiable patients, the specific consent process must be described.

4. ClinicalTrials.gov registration. All clinical trials must be registered before enrollment of the first patient. The registration number must appear in the abstract. CID follows ICMJE policy strictly on this.

5. Transfer between CID and Open Forum Infectious Diseases. If your paper is rejected from CID, you can opt for transfer to Open Forum Infectious Diseases (OFID), the IDSA's open-access companion journal. Formatting requirements are similar, so minimal reformatting is needed.

6. Nomenclature standards. CID enforces standard nomenclature for organisms. Use current taxonomic names (e.g., Clostridioides difficile, not Clostridium difficile). Drug names should use generic (nonproprietary) names throughout, with brand names in parentheses at first mention only.

7. Structured Discussion section. While CID doesn't formally require structured Discussion headings, the journal expects a specific pattern: key findings, comparison with prior literature, limitations, and conclusions. Reviewers and editors will push back on Discussion sections that don't follow this logical flow.

CID expects compliance with standard reporting guidelines:

Checklists should be uploaded during submission. The ORION statement for outbreak investigations is particularly relevant for CID and often overlooked.

Frequent reasons for administrative returns at CID:

• Exceeding the 200-word abstract limit
• Using wrong abstract section headings
• Exceeding 6 combined figures and tables
• Missing IRB approval statement in Methods
• Not specifying CLSI or EUCAST breakpoints for susceptibility data
• References exceeding the 40-item cap
• Using outdated organism nomenclature
• Missing ClinicalTrials.gov number for trial reports

For quick answers to the most common CID formatting questions, see the FAQ section at the top of this page.

In our pre-submission review work with manuscripts targeting Clinical Infectious Diseases, four patterns generate the most consistent desk-rejection outcomes.

Abstract word count exceeds the 250-word OUP limit. CID uses Oxford University Press formatting, which enforces a 250-word structured abstract limit with specific section headings: Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusions. Abstracts exceeding this limit or using non-OUP headings (such as "Patients and Methods" or "Objective") are returned for reformatting before peer review. The structured format applies to all original articles and brief reports.

Reporting checklist not submitted for study design. CID requires CONSORT checklists for randomized trials, STROBE checklists for observational studies, and PRISMA checklists for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. These must be submitted as supplementary documents with page numbers indicating where each item appears in the manuscript. Submissions without the required checklist are returned administratively.

Scope is laboratory or basic immunology without clinical patient data. CID is a clinical journal whose scope is infectious diseases as they present in clinical practice. Papers reporting in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility, animal model infection data, or basic immunological mechanisms without a clinical cohort, case series, or direct clinical application are desk-rejected for scope. The IDSA journal family has separate outlets for basic science (JID) and clinical care (CID).

Single-center, retrospective study without adequately powered sample size. CID receives a high volume of single-center retrospective cohort submissions. Papers with very small sample sizes (under 50 cases for rare infections, under 200 for common presentations) that do not include power calculations or acknowledge sample size as a limitation in the Discussion are often rejected as underpowered to support the conclusions.

A Clinical Infectious Diseases submission readiness check evaluates manuscript scope, OUP abstract format, and reporting checklist compliance against these desk-rejection patterns.