Someone from PLOS sent me a form letter addressed to Dr. Rothwell, suggesting I visit their online guide to writing and publishing scientific papers. I do not know whether to take that as a compliment or an insult. I would like to think it means they are reading the JCMNS and other papers. Anyway, their guide is pretty good:
https://plos.org/resources/writing-center/ "The PLOS Writing Center is your guide to preparing a successful manuscript. Drawn from the cumulative expertise of researchers, professional scientific editors, and journal staff, the Writing Center offers detailed, practical guidance for writing each section of a research article." It has various suggestions such as "do not use an acronym in the abstract." And, "when you mention something in the abstract, be sure you discuss it in the paper." Regarding acronyms -- When I copy edit papers I often nitpick the use of acronyms. Here are the rules I learned in high school. The first time an acronym appears in the paper you should define it. Widely used technical terms come first with the definition in parenthesis "SEM (scanning electron microscope)." Terms that we use in this field that people outside the field may not know might be presented in the opposite order: "cold fusion (CF)," "Fleischmann and Pons (F&P)," "nuclear active environment (NAE)." When a term is only used once or twice in a paper, I suggest you forgo the use of the acronym. Just spell out "nuclear active environment" every time you use it. It is a burden on the reader having to remember what the acronym stands for. "SEM" is so widely used, everyone knows what it means and most people refer to it by the acronym, so perhaps you do not need to define that one. You can use it even if it only appears once or twice.
