Propose a clinical case — member or nonmember

For this member-initiated review route, at least 50% of all genuine authors must be microscopIA Network members with active paid membership. Exactly 50% qualifies for assessment (5 of 10); 3 of 5 is 60%. Memberships are verified during assessment and before funding authorization.

Support depends on high-quality execution and scientific assessment of your question, methods and work completed. Manuscript support and publication-cost support are separate decisions, with scope and covered costs confirmed in writing before expenses are incurred.

Report microscopIA Network members with active paid membership as a percentage of all genuine authors: active members ÷ total authors × 100. The 50% requirement uses the exact counts, not a rounded percentage.

List every author, scientific contributions and all actual affiliations: microscopIA department or group where applicable, plus external institutions, departments, cities and countries. Membership and institutional affiliation are verified separately.

For an approved collaboration, a qualifying microscopIA researcher retains the corresponding-author role, with real scientific contributions, accountability, all-author agreement and compliance with journal rules.

microscopIA assesses applicable open-access agreements through the corresponding author’s genuine, verifiable affiliations. The publisher and participating institution must confirm eligibility and coverage; no agreement or fee waiver is guaranteed.

Prepare your review question and type, protocol or registration if available, methods, evidence of progress, author list and contributions, total authors and active-member count. Indicate the support needed and any proposed journal or fee estimate; these may be unknown.

Authorship follows actual scientific contributions. Do not add authors to meet the threshold. A request does not guarantee support, journal acceptance or publication.