The Impact of Figures and Schematics on Reviewer Ratings and Manuscript Acceptance: A Cross-sectional Survey

Background and Aim: The process of manuscript submission and review in academic publishing is multifaceted, with figures playing a crucial role in communicating research findings effectively. However, the precise impact of these visual elements on reviewer perceptions and manuscript acceptance remains underexplored. This study aims to investigate the significance of figures in the peer-review process of medical imaging journals, elucidating their impact on reviewer approval ratings and manuscript acceptance. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 105 clinicians, predominantly from orthopaedics and radiology specialities, who serve as editors and reviewers for imaging journals. Participants were queried on the importance of figures, preferred types of images, the impact of schematics on reviewer decisions, and the significance of graphical abstracts (GA) and detailed legends. Results: The survey revealed that the majority of respondents accorded paramount importance to the inclusion of figures in manuscripts (91.7%), with original images (85.7%) and schematics (60.5%) being preferred. While the presence of schematics alongside original images was perceived to enhance manuscript acceptance (57.1%), the number of figures did not necessarily correlate with reviewer favourability (25.6% against). Additionally, opinions on the inclusion of GA were divided (40% in favour vs. 32.3% against). Concise and informative legends were deemed essential for figure comprehension. Conclusion: Figures play a pivotal role in shaping reviewer perceptions and manuscript acceptance in imaging journals. While visually appealing figures enhance comprehension and engagement, they should complement methodological rigour and comprehensive textual exposition. Authors are encouraged to allocate resources judiciously towards creating figures that encapsulate the essence of their research endeavours, thereby augmenting the likelihood of manuscript acceptance and dissemination within the academic community.