Skip to main content Accessibility help
Instructions for authors

Nutrition Research Reviews (NRR) is an international journal that publishes comprehensive and challenging review articles on selected key topics in nutritional science. Authors are encouraged to take a critical approach in appraising the literature while also aiming to advance new concepts and hypotheses. NRR publishes both solicited and unsolicited articles.


NRR publishes critical, narrative review articles on key topics in nutritional science. 

NRR now also accepts substantive systematic reviews; a systematic review is a review of the evidence on a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select and critically appraise relevant primary research, and to extract and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review.

NRR considers a substantive systematic review to be one which covers a broad area to answer a key question and includes in the final analysis a good number of papers (>15) with a range of study designs that can include human, animal and in vitro models.


This journal uses ScholarOne Manuscripts for online submission and peer review. Authors must first complete and submit a review proposal form through the online submission system before submission of a full manuscript. If you have been asked to write a proposal by a member of the Editorial Board, please indicate this on the form. The proposal will be reviewed by the Editorial Board, and if accepted, you will be invited to submit a full manuscript.

As part of the online submission process, authors are asked to affirm that the submission represents original work that has not been published previously, and that it is not currently being considered by another journal. Authors must also confirm that each author has seen and approved the contents of the submitted manuscript. Finally, authors should confirm that permission for all appropriate uses has been obtained from the copyright holder for any figures or other material not in his/her copyright, and that the appropriate acknowledgement has been made to the original source.

At submission, authors are asked to nominate at least two potential referees who may then be asked by the Editorial Board to help review the work. NRR uses a single blind review process, and manuscripts are normally reviewed by two external peer reviewers and a member of the Editorial Board.

When substantial revisions are required to manuscripts after review, authors are normally given the opportunity to do this once only; the need for any further changes should at most reflect only minor issues. If a paper requiring revision is not resubmitted within 2 months, it may, on resubmission, be deemed a new paper and the date of receipt altered accordingly.


ORCID provides a unique identifier for researchers and through integration in key research workflows such as publication and grant applications, links your professional activities. We strongly encourage authors to link their ORCID identifier to their ScholarOne account. If you do not already have an ORCID identifier, registration is fast and free, and you can register directly from your ScholarOne account or at ORCID iDs provided in ScholarOne will be published in the final article.


NRR adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on research and publications ethics. The Journal considers all manuscripts on the strict condition that:

  1. 1. The manuscript is your own original work, and does not duplicate any other previously published work;
  1. 2. The manuscript has been submitted only to the journal - it is not under consideration or peer review or accepted for publication or in press or published elsewhere;
  1. 3. All listed authors know of and agree to the manuscript being submitted to the journal; and
  1. 4. The manuscript contains nothing that is abusive, defamatory, fraudulent, illegal, libellous, or obscene.

Text taken directly or closely paraphrased from earlier published work that has not been acknowledged or referenced will be considered plagiarism. Submitted manuscripts in which such text is identified will be withdrawn from the editorial process. Any concerns raised about possible plagiarism or other violations of ethical guidelines in an article submitted to or published in NRR will be investigated fully and dealt with in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

The Nutrition Society, as the owner of NRR, endorses the Publication Ethics outlined by Cambridge University Press.


The below guidelines apply to full manuscripts submitted after acceptance of a review proposal form.


Papers submitted for publication must be written in English and should be as concise as possible. We recommend that authors have their manuscript checked by an English language native speaker before submission, to ensure that submissions are judged at peer review exclusively on academic merit.

We list a number of third-party services specialising in language editing and / or translation, and suggest that authors contact as appropriate. Use of any of these services is voluntary, and at the author's own expense.

Spelling should generally be that of the Concise Oxford Dictionary (1995), 9th ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Authors are advised to consult a current issue of the journal in order to make themselves familiar with NRR as to typographical and other conventions, layout of tables etc.


The Journal conforms to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) definition of authorship. Authorship credit should be based on:

  1. Substantial contributions to conception and design, data acquisition, analysis and/or interpretation; and
  2. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and
  3. Final approval of the version to be published; and
  4. 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.

The contribution of individuals who were involved in the review but do not meet these criteria should be described in the Acknowledgments section.

Cover Letter

When invited to submit a full manuscript, authors are also invited to include a cover letter including a brief summary of the review. The text for the cover letter should be entered in the appropriate box as part of the online submission process.

Manuscript Format

The requirements of NRR are in accordance with the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals produced by the ICMJE, and authors are encouraged to consult the latest guidelines, which contain useful, general information about preparing scientific papers.

Typescripts should be prepared with 1.5 line spacing and wide margins (2 cm), the preferred font being Times New Roman size 12. At the ends of lines, words should not be hyphenated unless hyphens are to be printed. Line numbering and page numbering are required.

For detailed instructions regarding statistical analysis and nomenclature requirements, please refer to the Appendix to these instructions.

Manuscripts should be organised as follows, with further sub-divisions depending on the nature of the review:

Title Page

The title page should include:

    1. 1. The title of the article;
    2. 2. Authors' names*;
    3. 3. Name and address of department(s) and institution(s) to which the work should be attributed for each author;
    4. 4. Name, mailing address, email address, telephone and fax numbers of the author responsible for correspondence about the manuscript;
    5. 5. A shortened version of the title, not exceeding 45 characters (including letters and spaces) in length;
    6. 6. At least four keywords or phrases (each containing up to three words).

Authors' names should be given without titles or degrees and one forename may be given in full. Identify each author's institution by a superscript number (e.g. A.B. Smith1) and list the institutions underneath and after the final author.


Each paper must open with an abstract of not more than 250 words. The abstract should be a single paragraph of continuous text outlining the aims of the work, the approach taken, the principal findings and the conclusions and their relevance to nutritional science.

Graphical abstract

A Graphical Abstract is a single image that summarises the main findings of a paper, allowing readers to gain quickly an overview and understanding of your work. Well-designed and prepared graphical abstracts are an important way to publicise your research, attracting readers, and helping to disseminate your work to a wider audience. Ideally, the graphical abstract should be created independently of the figures already in the paper but it could include a (simplified version of) an existing figure. Graphical abstracts are displayed at article level, and on the article landing page online. Submission of a graphical abstract is not mandatory but we welcome authors to submit one alongside their paper.

The graphical abstract should be submitted separately from the main paper using the ‘Graphical Abstract’ file designation on ScholarOne at revised submission stage. Graphical abstracts should be clear and easy for the viewer to read, and should illustrate one main point only. Permission to reuse images should be sought by the authors before submitting a graphical abstract.

We recommend that only TIFF, EPS or PDF formats are used for electronic artwork. Other non-preferred but usable formats are JPG, PPT and GIF files and images created in Microsoft Word. For further information about how to prepare your figures, including sizing and resolution requirements, please see our artwork guide. The image will be scaled to fit the appropriate space on Cambridge Core, so please ensure that any font used is clear to read, and that any text is included as part of the image file (although text should ideally be kept to a minimum). There is also no need to include the title ‘Graphical Abstract’ in your image.


It is not necessary to introduce a paper with a full account of the relevant literature, but the introduction should indicate briefly the nature of the question asked and the reasons for asking it.

Main Body

The main body of the text should use appropriate headings and subheadings to break up the text and guide the reader. Manuscripts should end with a summary of the overall conclusions.


Here you may acknowledge individuals or organizations that provided advice and/or support (non-financial). Formal financial support and funding should be listed in the following section.

Financial Support

Please provide details of the sources of financial support for all authors, including grant numbers. For example, "This work was supported by the Medical research Council (grant number XXXXXXX)". Multiple grant numbers should be separated by a comma and space, and where research was funded by more than one agency the different agencies should be separated by a semi-colon, with "and" before the final funder. Grants held by different authors should be identified as belonging to individual authors by the authors' initials. For example, "This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust (A.B., grant numbers XXXX, YYYY), (C.D., grant number ZZZZ); the Natural Environment Research Council (E.F., grant number FFFF); and the National Institutes of Health (A.B., grant number GGGG), (E.F., grant number HHHH)".

Where no specific funding has been provided for research, please provide the following statement: "This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors."

In addition to the source of financial support, please state whether the funder contributed to any aspect of the review, including interpretation of findings or the preparation of the manuscript. If the funder made no such contribution, please provide the following statement: "[Funder's name] had no role in the design, analysis or writing of this article."

Conflict of Interest

Conflict of interest exists when an author has interests that might inappropriately influence his or her judgement, even if that judgement is not influenced. Because of this, authors must disclose potentially conflicting interests so that others can make judgements about such effects. Please provide details of all known financial and non-financial (professional and personal) relationships with the potential to bias the work. Where no known conflicts of interest exist, please include the following statement: "None."

For more information on what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see the ICMJE guidelines.


Please provide a very brief description of the contribution of each author to the review. Their roles in planning and writing the article should be made plain.


References should be numbered consecutively in the order in which they first appear in the text using superscript Arabic numerals in parentheses, e.g. 'The conceptual difficulty of this approach has recently been highlighted(1,2)'. If a reference is cited more than once, the same number should be used each time. References cited only in tables and figure legends should be numbered in sequence from the last number used in the text and in the order of mention of the individual tables and figures in the text.

Names and initials of authors of unpublished work should be given in the text as 'unpublished results' and not included in the References. References that have been published online only but not yet in an issue should include the online publication date and the Digital Object Identifier (doi) reference, as per the example below.

At the end of the paper, on a page(s) separate from the text, references should be listed in numerical order using the Vancouver system. When an article has more than three authors only the names of the first three authors should be given followed by 'et al.' The issue number should be omitted if there is continuous pagination throughout a volume. Titles of journals should appear in their abbreviated form using the NCBI LinkOut page. References to books and monographs should include the town of publication and the number of the edition to which reference is made. References to material available on websites should follow a similar style, with the full URL included at the end of the reference, as well as the date of the version cited and the date of access.

Examples of correct forms of references are given below.

Journal articles

    1. Rebello SA, Koh H, Chen C et al. (2014) Amount, type, and sources of carbohydrates in relation to ischemic heart disease mortality in a Chinese population: a prospective cohort study. Am J Clin Nutr 100, 53-64.
    1. Villar J, Ismail LC, Victora CG et al. (2014) International standards for newborn weight, length, and head circumference by gestational age and sex: the Newborn Cross-Sectional Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project.Lancet 384, 857-868.
    1. Alonso VR & Guarner F (2013) Linking the gut microbiota to human health. Br J Nutr 109, Suppl. 2, S21–S26.
    1. Bauserman M, Lokangaka A, Gado J et al. A cluster-randomized trial determining the efficacy of caterpillar cereal as a locally available and sustainable complementary food to prevent stunting and anaemia. Public Health Nutr. Published online: 29 January 2015. doi: 10.1017/S1368980014003334.

Books and monographs

    1. Bradbury J (2002) Dietary intervention in edentulous patients. PhD Thesis, University of Newcastle.
    1. Ailhaud G & Hauner H (2004) Development of white adipose tissue. In Handbook of Obesity. Etiology and Pathophysiology, 2nd ed., pp. 481–514 [GA Bray and C Bouchard, editors]. New York: Marcel Dekker.
    1. Bruinsma J (editor) (2003) World Agriculture towards 2015/2030: An FAO Perspective. London: Earthscan Publications.
    2. World Health Organization (2003) Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases. Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation. WHO Technical Report Series no. 916. Geneva: WHO.
    1. Keiding L (1997) Astma, Allergi og Anden Overfølsomhed i Danmark – Og Udviklingen 1987–199I (Asthma, Allergy and Other Hypersensitivities in Denmark, 1987–1991). Copenhagen, Denmark: Dansk Institut for Klinisk Epidemiologi.

Sources from the internet

    1. Nationmaster (2005) HIV AIDS – Adult prevalence rate. (accessed June 2013).

For authors that use Endnote, please find the style guide for NRR here


Figures should be supplied as separate electronic files. Figure legends should be grouped in a section at the end of the manuscript text. Each figure should be clearly marked with its number and separate panels within figures should be clearly marked (a), (b), (c) etc. so that they are easily identifiable when the article and figure files are merged for review. Each figure, with its legend, should be comprehensible without reference to the text and should include definitions of abbreviations.

We recommend that only TIFF, EPS or PDF formats are used for electronic artwork. For further information about how to prepare your figures, including sizing and resolution requirements, please see our artwork guide.

In curves presenting experimental results the determined points should be clearly shown, the symbols used being, in order of preference, ○, ●, ∆, ▲, □, ■, ×, +. Curves and symbols should not extend beyond the experimental points. Scale-marks on the axes should be on the inner side of each axis and should extend beyond the last experimental point. Ensure that lines and symbols used in graphs and shading used in histograms are large enough to be easily identified when the figure size is reduced to fit the page.

Images submitted with a manuscript should be minimally processed; some image processing is acceptable (and may be unavoidable), but the final image must accurately represent the original data. Grouping or cropping of images must be identified in the legend and indicated by clear demarcation. Adjustment of brightness, contrast or colour balance is acceptable if applied to the whole image and to controls and if data do not disappear as the result of the manipulation. Authors should provide sufficient detail of image-gathering procedures and process manipulation in the Methods sections to enable the accuracy of image presentation to be assessed. Authors should retain their original data, as Editors may request them for comparison during manuscript review. If such data are unavailable the manuscript may be withdrawn from the review process. If a concern is raised about possible image manipulation in an article published in NRR, this will be investigated fully and dealt with in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines.


Tables should be placed in the main manuscript file at the end of the document, not within the main text. Be sure that each table is cited in the text. Tables should carry headings describing their content and should be comprehensible without reference to the text. Tables should not be subdivided by ruled lines.

The dimensions of the values, e.g. mg/kg, should be given at the top of each column. Separate columns should be used for measures of variance (SD, SE etc.), the ± sign should not be used. The number of decimal places used should be standardized; for whole numbers 1.0, 2.0 etc. should be used. Shortened forms of the words weight (wt) height (ht) and experiment (Expt) may be used to save space in tables, but only Expt (when referring to a specified experiment, e.g. Expt 1) is acceptable in the heading.

Footnotes are given in the following order: (1) abbreviations, (2) superscript letters, (3) symbols. Abbreviations are given in the format: RS, resistant starch. Abbreviations in tables must be defined in footnotes in the order that they appear in the table (reading from left to right across the table, then down each column). Symbols for footnotes should be used in the sequence: *†‡§||¶, then ** etc. (omit * or †, or both, from the sequence if they are used to indicate levels of significance).

For indicating statistical significance, superscript letters or symbols may be used. Superscript letters are useful where comparisons are within a row or column and the level of significance is uniform, e.g. 'a,b,cMean values within a column with unlike superscript letters were significantly different (P<0•05)'. Symbols are useful for indicating significant differences between rows or columns, especially where different levels of significance are found, e.g. 'Mean values were significantly different from those of the control group: *P<0•05, **P<0•01, ***P<0•001'. The symbols used for P values in the tables must be consistent.

Supplementary material

Additional data (e.g. data sets, large tables) relevant to the paper can be submitted for publication online only, where they are made available via a link from the paper. The paper should stand alone without these data. Supplementary Material must be cited in a relevant place in the text of the paper.

Although Supplementary Material is peer reviewed, it is not checked, copyedited or typeset after acceptance and it is loaded onto the journal's website exactly as supplied. You should check your Supplementary Material carefully to ensure that it adheres to journal styles. Corrections cannot be made to the Supplementary Material after acceptance of the manuscript. Please bear this in mind when deciding what content to include as Supplementary Material.


Authors or their institutions retain copyright of papers published in NRR. The corresponding author is asked to complete a Publication Agreement form on behalf of all authors, and send this to the Editorial Office as instructed on acceptance on the manuscript. Failure to return a completed License to Publish form will result in a delay in publishing your article.


Authors in NRR have the option to publish their paper under a fully Open Access agreement, upon payment of a one-off Article Processing Charge. In this case, the final published Version of Record will be made freely available to all in perpetuity under a creative commons license, enabling its re-use and re-distribution. This Open Access option is only offered to authors upon acceptance of an article for publication.

Authors choosing the Open Access option are required to complete the Open Access License to Publish form. More information about Open Access in NRR, including the current Article Processing Charge, can be found on our website.


Nutrition Research Reviews has generous options to enable sharing of published articles through the Nutrition Society’s Green Open Access policy (Burdge et al. Br J Nutr. 2016 116(4):571-572): All material is freely available 36 months after publication.

Personal webpage


Institutional Repository

Non-commercial subject repository

Commercial repository/Social media sites

Accepted Manuscript*

On acceptance for publication

On acceptance for publication

On acceptance for publication

Abstract only in PDF or HTML format no sooner than the first publication of the full article

Version of record**

On publication

12 Months after first publication

12 Months after first publication

Abstract only in PDF or HTML format no sooner than the first publication of the full article

*The version that was accepted by the journal which has not been subjected to typesetting or other modification by the publisher

**The fully typeset version that appears in the online issues of the journal.


AuthorAID is a global network that provides free support, mentoring, resources and training to help researchers in low- and middle-income countries to write, publish and otherwise communicate their work.

Key features of AuthorAID are:

  • a community space for discussion and questions where researchers can benefit from advice and insights from members across the globe
  • access to a range of documents and presentations on best practice in writing and publication
  • world-wide training workshops and MOOCs on scientific writing
  • a chance to network with other researchers
  • personal mentoring by highly published researchers and professional editors

For any authors new to publishing research articles, we encourage you to make use of the AuthorAID resources before submitting your paper to NRR. Through the AuthorAID network, guidance can be found to help researchers through the process of writing and submitting scientific papers, advice about responding to reviewer comments, as well as research design and grant applications.

Please note that seeking support through AuthorAID will not guarantee acceptance for publication in NRR, or affect the editorial process in any way.


Accepted manuscripts are published online as is (before copy-editing or typesetting) within approximately a week of final acceptance, provided we have received all final files and a completed license to publish form. At this point, the article will have a DOI and be considered published and citable. You will subsequently receive a proof of your typeset, edited article, which will eventually replace the accepted manuscript online and be considered the final version of record. For more information, please click here.


PDF proofs are sent to authors in order to make sure that the paper has been correctly set up in type. Only changes to errors induced by typesetting/copy-editing or typographical errors will be accepted.

Corrected proofs should be returned within 3 days by email to:

Rachael Lowther
Production Editor
Cambridge University Press
Telephone: +44 1223 325032

If corrected proofs are not received from authors within 7 days the paper may be published as it stands.


A PDF file of the paper will be supplied free of charge to the corresponding author of each paper, and offprints may be ordered on the order form sent with the proofs.


For resources about peer review, including guides on how to peer review journal articles and book proposals, in addition to information on ethics in peer review, OPRS blinding, and Publons, please visit our ‘Information for Peer Reviewers’ page.


Prospective authors may contact the Editorial Office directly on +44 (0) 1223 347922 (telephone) or

Additionally, more information about the journal, including recent issues, can be found here.