Preparation of manuscripts

Submissions should be submitted to:


Research Reports | Reviews | Short Communications | Revisions

Hypotheses  | Commentaries | Editorials | Book Reviews

Ethics Review | Ethics ResponseLetters to the Editor

Research Reports

Organization and style of presentation

  • Manuscripts must be written in US English. Authors whose native language is not English are recommended to seek the advice of a native English speaker or English language service before submitting their manuscripts. A language or editing service that we recommend is PeerWith.
  • Nomenclature for amyloids should follow the 2018 guidelines of the International Society of Amyloidosis (ISA) nomenclature committee (Amyloid 25, 215-219, 2018), e.g., amyloid-β (Aβ) and amyloid-β protein precursor (AβPP). Also preferred is Aβ42 and sAβPPα.
  • Manuscripts should be double spaced throughout with wide margins (2.5 cm or 1 in), including the abstract and references. Every page of the manuscript, including the title page, references, tables, etc., should include a page number centered at the bottom. Do not number headings or subheadings (use all caps, italics, then underline). Footnotes should be avoided.
  • There are no page or word limits for Research Reports but manuscripts over 10,000 words (Introduction through Discussion) should be approved by the Editor-in-Chief before submission.
  • Abbreviations should be defined at first use and avoided if not used more than 3 times. We do not typically include abbreviation lists in published manuscripts.
  • Manuscripts should be organized in the following order with headings and subheadings typed on a separate line, without indentation.
  • Permission should be obtained to reproduce/adapt figures or tables from another publication and properly acknowledged in the text. Submission of a paper will be interpreted as a statement that the author has obtained all the necessary permissions. See our Policy on Copyright for more information.

Title page

  • Title (should be clear, descriptive, concise, and avoid the use of abbreviations)
  • Full name(s) of author(s). Last names can be bolded to help with proper indexing in PubMed.
  • Full affiliation(s). Delineate affiliations with lowercase letters.
  • Present address of author(s), if different from affiliation
  • Running title (45 characters or less, including spaces)
  • Complete correspondence address, including telephone number and e-mail address


To be considered as an author of an article, the following criteria must be met:

  • Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
  • Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
  • Final approval of the version to be published; AND
  • Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

When submitting the manuscript, the author listing and order should be FINAL. If any addition, deletion, or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list does need to be made after submission, this can be done with agreement among all co-authors. Permission is not needed from the journal/Editor-in-Chief. To request such a change AFTER FINAL acceptance, the Editor-in-Chief must receive the following from the corresponding author: (1) the reason for the change in author list and (2) written confirmation from all authors, including the affected author, that they agree with the addition, removal, or rearrangement. Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editor consider the addition, deletion, or rearrangement of authors AFTER the manuscript has been accepted. While the Editor considers the request, publication of the manuscript will be suspended. If the manuscript has already been published in an issue, any requests approved by the Editor will result in an Erratum. Please contact the Managing Editor ( for more information.

Abstract and Keywords

  • The abstract should be clear, descriptive, self-explanatory, and no longer than 250 words.
  • A structured abstract for Research Reports and Systematic Reviews should include the following sections: Background, Objective, Methods, Results, and Conclusion. Short communications, literature reviews, hypotheses, commentaries, editorials, and ethics reviews do not require a structured abstract.
  • Do not include references in the abstract.
  • Include a list of 4-10 keywords. These keywords should be terms from the MeSH database.
  • Note that ALL articles (except book reviews and letters to the editor) must include an abstract.


Provide enough information to put your work into context. Be concise. Clearly address the following points:

  • What information is already available?
  • What is the rationale or reason for your research?
  • What problem(s) does it address?

Do not include a comprehensive literature review of your research. End the Introduction by clearly stating the aims of your study.

Materials and Methods

This section should be well structured and detailed enough for others to be able to reproduce your experiments. Use clear sub-headings throughout. Start by describing the materials use, the supplier source, including any relevant catalog information, and supplier location. Use references appropriately to refer to published protocols or methodology. Do not repeat a detailed description of an already-published method or protocol. 


This section should present the results and summarize the findings of your study. Do not provide any data in great detail. If you need to include additional detailed data, do so in supplementary files submitted with the paper. Consider providing a one-sentence summary at the beginning of each paragraph in the Results section, if you think that this would help the reader in understanding your findings.


Begin this section with a brief summary of the main findings. Ensure that you answer all the questions posed in the Introduction. Mention both the strengths and the limitations for your study, as well as applications and implications of your findings. Compare these to other published findings.

Acknowledgments (including sources of support)

Include individuals or companies which have assisted with your study, including advisors, funding sources, administrative support and suppliers who may have donated or given materials used in the study.

Conflict of Interest/Disclosure Statement

If there is no conflict of interest to declare, do still include this section and insert "The authors have no conflict of interest to report". If the article is accepted, this section will be replaced by a link to the online disclosures which must be completed by all authors within one week of acceptance. See our policy on Financial Disclosure for more information.

References (Download the EndNote style from EndNote ( A .csl file is available here.)

  1. Place citations as numbers in square brackets (not superscript) in the text in order of appearance (inside/before punctuation with a space between text and citation; e.g., "Alzheimer's disease [1]."). Each citation should be to one manuscript only. All publications cited in the text should be presented in a list of references following the text of the manuscript. Only articles published or accepted for publication should be listed in the reference list. Submitted articles can be listed in the text as (Author(s), unpublished data) and should NOT be numbered and included in the reference list. Personal communications should also only appear in the text (e.g., "Person name, personal communication") and not in the reference list.
  2. All authors should be listed in the reference list.
  3. Please include doi numbers for "in press" articles if available. 
  4. Carefully check for and remove any duplicates (especially when using reference software).
  5. References should be listed in the order of appearance in the following style:

[1] Nance C, Ritter A, Miller JB, Lapin B, Banks SJ (2019) The pathology of rapid cognitive decline in clinically diagnosed Alzheimer's disease. J Alzheimers Dis 70, 983-993.
[2] Zhuang ZQ, Shen LL, Li WW, Fu X, Zeng F, Gui L, Lü Y, Cai M, Zhu C, Tan YL, Zheng P, Li HY, Zhu J, Zhou HD, Bu XL, Wang YJ (2018) Gut microbiota is altered in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis 63, 1337-1346.
[3] Paxinos G, Watson C (1986) The Rat Brain in Stereotaxic Coordinates, Academic Press, Sydney.
[4] Perry G, Zhu X, Smith MA, Sorensen A, Avila J (2013) Alzheimer’s Disease: Advances for a New Century, IOS Press, Amsterdam.
[5] Smith MA (2006) Oxidative stress and iron imbalance in Alzheimer disease: how rust became the fuss! In Alzheimer's Disease: A Century of Scientific and Clinical Research, Perry G, Avila J, Kinoshita J, Smith MA, eds. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 305-308.
[6] LoBue C, Munro C, Schaffert J, Didehbani N, Hart Jr. J, Batjer H, Cullum CM (2020) Traumatic brain injury and risk of long-term brain changes, accumulation of pathological markers, and developing dementia: a review. In Handbook of Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurodegeneration, Castellani RJ, ed. IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp. 193-218.
[7] Prince M, Comas-Herrera A, Knapp M, Guerchet M, Karagiannidou M (2016) World Alzheimer Report 2016. Improving Healthcare for People Living with Dementia: Coverage, Quality and Costs Now and in the Future. Alzheimer’s Disease International, London.
[8] Alzheimer Research Forum, Drugs in Clinical Trials: AAB-001,, Last updated May 29, 2007, Accessed on January 29, 2008.
[9] World Health Organization (2020) Dementia., Last updated September 21, 2020, Accessed on October 6, 2020.

If you are using EndNote and the journal names are not properly abbreviating, please try updating your Journals Term List (

Datasets and Data Articles

  • All datasets and data articles referenced in your manuscript should be cited in the main reference list of your article (not in a separate box or in the article text).


  • Number according to their sequence in the text. The text should include references to all tables.
  • Provide each table on a separate page of the manuscript after the references. Tables can also be integrated into the main body if desired.
  • Tables should be in an editable format (not inserted as pictures).
  • Include a brief and self-explanatory title with any explanations essential to the understanding of the table given in footnotes at the bottom of the table.
  • Vertical lines should not be used to separate columns. Leave some extra space between the columns instead.
  • Citations in the tables should be numbered and included in the Reference list.

Figure Legends/Figures

  • Number the figures according to their sequence in the text. The text should include references to all figures.
  • Figures and their legends should be provided on a separate page, following any tables. Figures can also be integrated in the main body if desired.
  • Figures should preferably be formatted in TIF or EPS format. We can also accept PDF or Powerpoint.
  • Composite figures (with multiple panels) MUST be preassembled.
  • Figures should be designed with the format of JAD in mind. They should be of such a size as to allow a reduction of 50%.
  • Line art should have a minimum resolution of 1200 dpi and be saved as an EPS or TIF.
    • Do not use faint lines and/or lettering and check that all lines and lettering within the figures are legible at the final size.
    • All lines should be at least 0.1 mm (0.3 pt) wide.
    • Vector graphics containing fonts must have the fonts embedded in the files.
  • Grayscale figures (including photos) should have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi, or 600 dpi for combination art (lettering and images) and be saved as a TIF.
  • Figures should be cropped to include the figure only (no blank space). 
  • Do not save figures as JPG; this format may lose information in the publishing process.
  • Do not use figures taken from the Internet; the resolution will be too low for printing.
  • Do not use color in your figures if they are to be printed in black & white, as this will reduce the print quality (note that in software often the default is color; this can be changed in the settings).
  • For figures to be printed in color, please send a CMYK encoded EPS or TIF.
  • On figures where a scale is needed, use bar scales rather than numerical ones, i.e., do not use scales of the type 1:10,000. This avoids problems if the figure needs to be reduced.
  • Each figure should have a self-explanatory caption, which should be typed separately from the figure in the manuscript. Do not embed the legend in the figure file.
  • Photographs are only acceptable if they have good contrast and intensity.
  • Color figures will be published online at no charge.
  • Costs for color figures in the print version of the journal are as follows: 1 figure - 650 euro; 2 figures - 900 euro; 3 figures - 1050 euro; 4 figures - 1200 euro; 5 figures - 1350 euro. Cost for each additional color figure will be 150 euro. Unless the color printing charge is paid, color figures will be automatically adjusted to gray-scale in print. You may opt to send in both black/white figures for print, and color figures for the online PDF (please adjust the figure legend appropriately).

Image integrity
Images submitted with a manuscript for review should be minimally processed. No specific feature within an image may be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced. The grouping or consolidation of images from multiple sources must be made explicit by the arrangement of the figure and in the figure legend. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if they are applied to the whole image and if they do not obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any information present in the original, including backgrounds.

Unprocessed data files may be requested to help in manuscript evaluation during the peer review process or may be needed to respond to post-publication issues that may arise with published papers. Unprocessed data and metadata files should be retained, ideally forever.

Unprocessed original images of gels and western blots must be included with submissions as Supplementary Material for reviewers to examine (not for publication). This must include the full blots, not cropped sections.

Supplementary Material

Supplementary material is peer-reviewed material directly relevant to the conclusion of a paper that cannot be included in the printed version for reasons of space or medium (for example, movie clips or sound files). The supplement will be available for download from the publisher's content library site at the time of publication and will be made available in the format in which it was provided.

Supplementary tables and figures must have a separate numbering system from that used for tables and figures that appear in the print version of the paper (the first figure displayed should be labeled "Supplementary Figure 1", the first table "Supplementary Table 1", and so on). References should also be cited in supplements started with [1] and listed separately.

Supplementary files are limited to 10MB, except videos which can be up to 25MB.

Supplementary material for Short Communications is limited to 500 words and 1 table or figure.


Reviews (narrative) should be authoritative and topical and provide comprehensive and balanced coverage of a timely and/or controversial issue. Reviews should be prepared as detailed above for a Research Report, omitting Introduction through Discussion, and include a conclusion. An abstract must also be included. The length of the review article is at the discretion of the author but should be within reasonable limits. The Editor-in-Chief can be consulted regarding reviews of unusual length.

Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, scoping reviews, and any other type articles that include a methods section are typically considered as a Research report or Systematic review and should be formatted as such (with a structured abstract and Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion sections).


Revisions should be returned within two months of receiving a decision. Authors needing more time should email the Editor-in-Chief for an extension. When submitting a revised manuscript, please indicate your revisions in the text (either in revision mode or by highlighting) and provide a point-by-point response to the reviews at the beginning of your manuscript. Also include your previous manuscript number in your cover letter.

If you choose not to resubmit to JAD after receiving a decision, please inform the editorial office ( that you wish to withdraw your manuscript from further consideration. You can also "Decline to Revise" within Editorial Manager.

Short Communications

A short communication is an article of original scholarship of unusual interest of less than 2000 words (Introduction through Discussion). An abstract of 100 words or less should be included with no subdivison of the abstract into sections. References should be formatted as above. A total of three tables and/or figures are allowed. Submissions that exceed the word or figure/table limits will be considered a Research Report. Supplementary Material for Short Communications is limited to 500 words and 1 table or figure.


A hypothesis article should be a balanced and insightful consideration of a topic with novel hypotheses well presented and supported. The article should be prepared as a Research Report but without Methods or Results sections. An abstract should also be included.


Commentaries are usually commissioned and of around 1000 words with a short abstract (100 words or less) and no other subdivisions. References should be formatted as above.


Editorials are usually around 1000 words with a short abstract (100 words or less) and no other subdivisions. References should be formatted as above.

Book Reviews

Book reviews should be 750 words or less and without sections. While most reviews are commissioned, suggestions can be proposed to the Editor-in-Chief.

Letters to the Editor

Authors can submit comments of 1000 words or less concerning prior articles published in JAD to the Editor-in-Chief through the Editorial Office ( for possible inclusion at our online site as a Letter to the Editor. Letters will be shared with the authors of the original article for possible response prior to posting. Letters are not included in the published version of JAD nor are indexed in PubMed.

Ethics Review

The goal of an Ethics Review is to address ethical issues that alter progress in Alzheimer’s disease research, clinical practice, and policy. Ultimately the aim is to highlight and target unresolved issues where failure to act or resolve disagreements leads to bottlenecks in productivity in research, policy, and clinical services. Ethics Review is slightly different from a JAD typical review in that that the topics and presentation are balanced but controversial so that they would likely elicit Ethics Responses. Ethics Responses from multiple disciplines and perspectives are encouraged. Whereas addressing controversial topics is encouraged, reviews should focus on constructively moving debates forward to accelerate progress.

Features of an effective an Ethics Review are as follows:

  1. Clearly identify points of disagreement and agreement in the field noting where empirical data are lacking or present that could resolve disagreements.
  2. Highlight current empirical findings that are relevant to resolving controversial topics in novel ways with productive cross disciplinary applications.
  3. Identify novel applications from fields not typically related to Alzheimer’s research and care which could enhance implementation and ethics.

The manuscripts should be consistent with the current standards for the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease and the Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium. As with other JAD reviews, submissions should be authoritative and topical and provide comprehensive and balanced coverage of a timely and/or controversial issue. Reviews should be prepared as detailed above for a Research Report, omitting Introduction through Discussion, and include a conclusion. An abstract must also be included.

Ethics Response

The purpose of the Ethics Response is to engage interdisciplinary constructive interaction between the author(s) of the Ethics Review and an author who wishes to provide balance and perspective. Authors of an Ethics Response should provide substantive elaboration and references. There should be a title and the number of words can range between 750 to 1500, with no more than 10 citations (reference limit will be less strictly enforced). An abstract should also be included.

The Ethics Review will be distributed and responses will be requested. Potential authors should give a brief synopsis of their response in no more than 4 sentences by the target proposal date. These proposals will be reviewed and if accepted they will be allowed to write an Ethics Response in time for that second deadline. Acceptance of a proposal is no guarantee that the Ethics Response is accepted. The format of the Ethics Responses will be the same as for a Commentary.

Authors of published articles (non-prepress, final articles) will be contacted by Kudos. Kudos is a service that helps researchers maximize the impact and visibility of their research. It allows authors to enrich their articles with lay metadata, add links to related materials and promote their articles through the Kudos system to a wider public. Authors will receive no more than three emails: one invitation and a maximum of two reminders to register for the service and link the published article to their profile. Using and registering for Kudos remains entirely optional. For more information, please have a look at the Kudos section on the "Promote Your Article" page of the IOS Press website.