International Journal of Negative Results publishes negative, null, and inconclusive findings across scientific disciplines. Authors should present complete outcomes with clear methodology, transparent analysis, and honest interpretation.

Submissions should avoid overstating conclusions and should emphasize how negative results inform future research.

• Original research with negative or null outcomes
• Replication studies and validation reports
• Systematic reviews and meta-analyses including null results
• Methods papers detailing unsuccessful approaches
• Short communications and negative findings reports

We expect full reporting of outcomes, including non-significant results, deviations from protocol, and limitations. Studies should include clear hypotheses, defined endpoints, and transparent statistical analysis.

• Provide preregistration identifiers when applicable
• Report sample size calculations and power analysis
• Include confidence intervals and effect sizes
• Describe protocol deviations and missing data

Transparency is critical for negative results. Authors should provide data availability statements, code repositories, and clear documentation of analysis pipelines.

• Provide repository links or access instructions
• Document software versions and analysis scripts
• Describe data preprocessing steps and exclusions
• Include validation checks and quality control

• State ethics approvals and consent requirements
• Disclose funding sources and conflicts of interest
• Provide patient privacy and data governance details
• Confirm adherence to relevant reporting guidelines

Editorial screening checks scope fit, reporting completeness, and adherence to transparency standards. Manuscripts then proceed to peer review for methodological evaluation.

• Initial screening for scope and compliance
• Peer review by subject experts
• Revision requests with specific guidance
• Final decision and production

• Title page with author affiliations and contact details
• Structured abstract with objectives, methods, results, conclusions
• Keywords that reflect negative results focus
• Figures and tables with clear captions
• References with DOIs where available

• Hypotheses and outcomes clearly defined
• Null or negative results reported in full
• Data availability statement included
• Ethics approvals and consent described
• Funding and conflict disclosures included
• Provide a structured abstract with objectives, methods, results, and conclusions.
• Include preregistration identifiers when applicable.
• Report statistical tests, effect sizes, and confidence intervals.
• Describe negative or null findings without overstating conclusions.
• Include data availability statements with repository links.
• Disclose funding sources, grant numbers, and conflicts of interest.
• Report ethical approvals and informed consent requirements.
• Provide clear figure legends and indicate sample sizes.
• Describe methodology changes or deviations from the protocol.
• Include limitations and implications for future research.
• State whether hypotheses were preregistered or exploratory.
• Report all primary and secondary outcomes, including null findings.
• Describe any interim analyses or stopping rules used.
• Provide details on randomization, allocation, or blinding.
• Report inclusion and exclusion criteria with rationale.
• Describe recruitment methods and response rates.
• Include baseline characteristics and comparability of groups.
• Report handling of missing data and imputation methods.
• Provide sensitivity analyses for key assumptions.
• Describe data preprocessing steps and quality checks.
• Include software versions and analysis scripts used.
• Report confidence intervals and effect size measures.
• Clarify whether analyses were adjusted for multiple comparisons.
• Describe measurement instruments and validation status.
• Report reliability or inter-rater agreement when relevant.
• Include details on control conditions and comparators.
• Explain how null findings inform future research directions.
• Describe limitations and potential sources of bias.
• State whether datasets are available in repositories.
• Provide accession numbers or persistent identifiers for datasets.
• Describe consent limitations or data access restrictions.
• Include ethics approvals and IRB identifiers when applicable.
• Report conflicts of interest and sponsor involvement clearly.
• Provide a clear data availability statement in the manuscript.
• Include trial registration numbers for clinical studies.
• Describe adherence or compliance measurements in interventions.
• Report protocol deviations and their impact on outcomes.
• Clarify if results contradict prior studies and why.
• Provide detailed tables or supplementary materials as needed.
• Summarize practical lessons learned from null results.
• Include a statement on publication bias relevance.
• Describe data collection timelines and follow up periods.
• Report limitations related to sample size or power.
• Explain why negative results are meaningful for the field.
• Describe replication materials and access for reuse.
• State how conclusions avoid overstating null results.
• Provide a concise summary of methods for reader clarity.
• Report any adverse events or unintended outcomes.
• Clarify whether outcomes were pre-specified or post hoc.
• Include information about data cleaning or exclusion rules.
• Report any deviations in planned statistical analysis.
• Describe external validity and generalizability considerations.
• Provide a summary of key datasets and variables used.
• Include references to reporting guidelines used.
• Describe how negative results will guide future studies.
• Report raw and processed data availability with clear access instructions.
• Describe statistical software packages and versions used for analysis.
• Explain how multiple comparisons were handled and corrected.
• Include details on randomization sequence generation when applicable.
• Provide allocation concealment and blinding details where relevant.
• Describe calibration procedures for instruments and measurement tools.
• Include timelines for recruitment, follow up, and data collection.
• Report attrition rates and reasons for participant loss.
• Clarify whether sensitivity analyses changed interpretation of null results.
• Provide details on data transformations or normalization steps.
• Include tables summarizing primary and secondary outcomes.
• Describe criteria for excluding data points or participants.
• Explain handling of protocol amendments during the study.
• Provide access to questionnaires, surveys, or stimuli used.
• Indicate whether negative findings were consistent across subgroups.
• Summarize reproducibility steps taken to validate null outcomes.
• Describe controls used to validate assays or computational pipelines.
• Provide details on batch effects and mitigation strategies.
• Report effect direction even when statistical significance is not achieved.
• Clarify whether the study was exploratory, confirmatory, or both.
• Include a statement on the relevance of null results to publication bias.
• Describe data storage locations and backup procedures for study materials.
• Include a statement on adherence to reporting guidelines.
• State any software or code licenses that limit reuse.
• Include a clear limitations section tied to study design.
• Provide suggestions for future research based on null findings.
• Confirm that all authors approved the final manuscript.
• Describe how missing data influenced interpretation of outcomes.
• Clarify whether the dataset supports independent replication.
• Provide a brief summary of key methods in the introduction.
• Explain deviations from preregistered hypotheses if applicable.
• Describe quality control for data entry and validation.
• Report if any outcomes were stopped early due to feasibility.
• Explain whether negative results align with related studies.
• Provide dataset identifiers or accession numbers in the methods section.
• Include a statement on data reuse permissions and licensing when datasets are shared.
• Provide clear definitions for all abbreviations and acronyms at first use.
• Describe any pilot studies or preliminary analyses that informed the study design.
• Report whether hypotheses were revised during analysis and justify changes.
• Clarify how missing data were assessed for potential bias.
• Include details on software settings or parameter choices for computational models.
• Provide summaries of quality assurance checks for laboratory assays.
• Report any deviations from standard protocols and their potential impact.
• Explain whether sensitivity analyses affected conclusions about null outcomes.
• Include a concise statement on limitations of generalizability for the findings.
• Summarize key null outcomes in the discussion without adding speculative claims.
• Provide a brief statement on how findings affect ongoing or planned studies.

The editorial office can clarify scope fit, reporting standards, and data sharing expectations. Contact [email protected] for assistance.

IJNR is committed to rigorous, transparent publishing of negative, null, and inconclusive results. We emphasize reproducible methods, full outcome reporting, and ethical compliance across all article types.

The editorial office supports authors, editors, and reviewers with clear guidance and responsive communication. For questions about scope or workflow, contact [email protected].

We encourage complete reporting, data availability, and candid discussion of limitations to strengthen the research record.