When to Create a Graphical Abstract During the Journal Submission Cycle

• A practical timeline
• A checklist for the typical submission workflow
• Design and file-spec reminders
• How a graphical abstract can improve dissemination

Why Timing Matters

Creating a graphical abstract too late can lead to rushed design choices, inaccuracies, and multiple revision rounds if the journal requests technical changes.

Creating one too early before results are finalized or coauthors approve can result in a misleading visual that must be redone.

Optimal timing balances scientific accuracy with workflow efficiency:

• Build the concept during manuscript drafting
• Refine and finalize before submission where possible
• Be ready to supply high-resolution or source files at acceptance

Where Journals Stand: Expectations and Variability

Journal policies vary widely:

• Many publishers encourage or require graphical abstracts at initial submission
• Some treat them as optional
• Others request them only after acceptance

Authors should always consult the Guide for Authors of the target journal.

Examples:

• Elsevier journals commonly encourage submission alongside the manuscript and often provide templates with strict file-size and resolution rules
• Journal of Cell Biology encourages graphical abstracts but lists them as optional, with detailed formatting guidance

Failing to check requirements early can lead to format or timing mismatches.

When to Create a Graphical Abstract: Recommended Stages

1. During Manuscript Drafting (Concept Stage)

• Create a simple sketch capturing:
  • Research question
  • Approach
  • Primary result
  • Key implication
• This helps clarify the research narrative and identify data that may not translate visually

2. During Internal Review (Pre-submission)

• Convert the sketch into a polished draft
• Share with coauthors to:
  • Ensure scientific accuracy
  • Align with the written abstract and main figures
• Resolve conceptual disagreements early

3. At Submission (Finalization Stage)

• Submit a high-resolution image if requested or recommended
• If source files are required only after acceptance:
  • Submit the best possible version to enhance discoverability during peer review and early dissemination

How This Timing Improves Accuracy and Efficiency

Early planning reduces rework:

• Drafting the graphical abstract alongside methods and results ensures consistency in data, labels, and terminology
• Finalizing pre-submission minimizes changes during peer review
• Having journal-ready files at submission accelerates production after acceptance
• Reduces the need for last-minute or expedited professional design services

Practical Timeline and Workflow (Recommended)

• Week 0–2 (Drafting): Sketch the visual narrative; define one primary take-home message
• Week 2–4 (Internal Review): Share draft with coauthors; revise labels and captions
• Week 4 (Pre-submission): Create a submission-ready raster image (PNG/JPEG/TIFF); retain editable source files (AI, PSD, PPTX)
• At Submission: Upload the image if requested; include a brief caption in submission metadata if supported
• At Revision or Acceptance: Supply editable files and requested adjustments quickly using preapproved sources

A Concise Checklist for Authors (Before Submission)

1. Confirm whether the target journal requires or recommends a graphical abstract and note file specifications
2. Ensure the graphic communicates one clear take-home message
3. Verify that data, labels, abbreviations, and terminology match the manuscript and have coauthor approval
4. Retain editable source files to speed revisions if requested post-acceptance

Design and Technical Points to Follow

• Clarity over decoration: Use simplified diagrams, icons, or charts; avoid dense plots or tables
• Readability at small sizes: Test visibility at thumbnail or social-media preview dimensions
• File specifications: Follow journal requirements for format (TIFF, EPS, PDF, PNG, or MS Office), resolution (often ≥300 dpi), and aspect ratio. Retain a layered master file
• Permissions and originality: Use original or properly licensed artwork; declare third-party components

Evidence: Do Graphical Abstracts Increase Visibility?

Multiple studies show that visual abstracts significantly increase dissemination:

• Journal-led initiatives (e.g., Annals of Surgery) reported large boosts in social-media impressions and article visits
• Randomized and crossover trials demonstrate higher:
  • Twitter impressions
  • Engagements
  • Link clicks

Visual abstracts consistently outperform text-only or title-based tweets, supporting their value for broader research visibility.

Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

• Mistake: Designing before results are final Fix: Create early sketches only; finalize after results are settled
• Mistake: Overloading with text Fix: Replace sentences with icons and short labels
• Mistake: Ignoring journal specifications Fix: Review author guidelines early and follow format requirements

When Professional Help Makes Sense

Professional support is useful when:

• Research includes complex diagrams or 3D visuals
• Timelines are tight
• Coauthor bandwidth is limited

Services that read the manuscript, develop a visual concept, and deliver journal-compliant files can reduce delays while maintaining scientific accuracy.

Enago’s graphical-abstract and figure services offer such support, along with optional language polishing for captions and metadata.

Conclusion

The optimal approach to creating a graphical abstract is staged:

1. Concept during manuscript drafting
2. Refinement during internal review
3. Finalization before or at submission unless the journal requests it only at acceptance

Early planning reduces rework, improves accuracy, and accelerates production. Because journal policies vary, authors should always consult the target journal’s author guidelines and retain editable source files.

Given strong evidence that graphical abstracts boost visibility and engagement, a well-timed visual summary can be a high-return component of the submission workflow.