Graphical abstract design: a delivery and acceptance checklist

What should a graphical abstract delivery include?

Agree five things before production: the central message, intended use, scientific reviewer, file package and revision scope. Acceptance means that the figure communicates in a clear reading order, its content is approved by the researchers, and the files work for the agreed purpose.

For an earlier discussion about figures, covers or slides, start with the scientific illustration brief.

Prepare four inputs

Message and sequence

Describe the research subject, approach and main takeaway. Separate essential information from detail that can remain in the paper. Give each panel one primary job instead of shrinking every result into the abstract.

Approved content and reviewer

Provide draft copy, a rough sketch and a terminology list. Identify unresolved points and nominate one person to consolidate comments. Preserve the source, units and limits of any data shown; visual design must not add unsupported causal relationships.

Publication requirements

Share the current author instructions, intended dimensions, language and deadline. “High resolution” alone is not a specification. Check the final display size, file type and readable text. Elsevier's guidance also directs authors to journal-specific rules rather than treating one format as universal.

Materials and permitted use

Identify the sources and permitted uses of photographs, structures, icons and fonts. Describe material types in the initial inquiry; agree confidentiality and a transfer method before sharing unpublished files.

Review in three stages

1. Structure: approve the panel order, message, copy and relationships. Resolve major layout changes here.
2. Visuals: check color, detail, labels and readability at the intended size. A new panel or revised research narrative may change the scope.
3. Files: open the actual exports and source package, rather than approving only a compressed preview in a messaging app.

The porous scaffold and cell interface figure moves from material architecture to cell attachment and then to an interface. It provides a useful way to discuss reading order across scales: write down what each region needs to communicate before drawing it.

Acceptance checklist

• Content: the scientific reviewer has approved terminology and claims; unresolved material is corrected or removed.
• Reading: labels and the main message remain legible at the intended output size.
• Specifications: record and check dimensions, formats, color requirements and the relevant journal instructions.
• Version: filenames, revision dates and approval records identify the same final artwork.
• Editing: if source files are included, agree software versions, editable layers and text, fonts and linked assets. A raster image is not automatically fully editable.
• Package: list submission files, presentation versions and source files individually, with their agreed quantities.

Cost, revisions and schedule

Workload depends on panel count, two- or three-dimensional production, material readiness, language versions and timing. Agree review rounds and feedback deadlines, and define how added content or a changed journal specification affects the quote. A new composition after approval is different from correcting a typo.

See scientific illustration services or discuss a graphical abstract. If the figure includes pathways or cell structures, also use the mechanism review checklist.