Urologic Oncology and Outcomes
Studies on diagnosis pathways, perioperative strategy, functional outcomes, and long-term survivorship metrics.
Contribute clinically meaningful urology research designed to improve real-world decisions across medical and surgical practice.
We invite clinically relevant manuscripts that improve diagnosis, treatment pathways, surgical outcomes, and long-term patient quality of life.
Journal of Medical and Surgical Urology welcomes rigorous submissions from urology, uro-oncology, reconstructive surgery, pediatric urology, andrology, nephro-urology interface care, and translational science teams.
Priority is given to studies that combine methodological strength with practical implications for decision-making in clinics, operating rooms, and multidisciplinary treatment planning.
The journal values evidence that advances standards of care, strengthens risk stratification, and clarifies outcomes across diverse patient populations and healthcare settings.
Studies on diagnosis pathways, perioperative strategy, functional outcomes, and long-term survivorship metrics.
Comparative effectiveness, technical refinement, safety outcomes, and implementation efficiency analyses.
Evidence on procedural optimization, recurrence prevention, and real-world treatment sequencing.
Research addressing continence, voiding disorders, reconstruction techniques, and patient-reported outcomes.
Data-driven studies on fertility, hormonal pathways, sexual function, and therapeutic decision frameworks.
Age-specific diagnosis and intervention evidence supporting continuity from pediatric to adult care pathways.
Editorial triage and review prioritize transparent methods, defensible interpretation, and clinical relevance.
Authors are encouraged to describe implementation context, including service constraints and resource conditions, so readers can evaluate transferability of findings.
Multicenter submissions should clarify center-level variation handling and protocol harmonization strategy to strengthen reproducibility claims.
Multiple manuscript categories are accepted when evidence quality and reporting standards are met.
Prospective or retrospective analyses with robust methodology and clinically interpretable outcomes.
Protocol-based evidence synthesis with transparent search and selection logic.
Mechanistic or biomarker studies linked to diagnostic or therapeutic decision value.
Operational research on pathway redesign, quality improvement, and access optimization.
Focused findings with immediate relevance and strong methodological framing.
Evidence-grounded expert viewpoints on evolving standards and strategic priorities.
Both submission options are supported by the same editorial team and quality framework.
Recommended for teams needing structured data fields, formal revision tracking, and institutional workflow compatibility.
Suitable for rapid initial intake when authors require a streamlined process and direct communication.
Scope and formatting questions can be sent to [email protected] before submission to reduce avoidable delays.
After submission, manuscripts move through editorial screening, specialist reviewer assignment, and decision communication with actionable revision priorities.
High-quality studies that align with these priorities are positioned for global open access visibility through the journals indexing ecosystem.
High-impact manuscripts typically explain how findings alter diagnosis, treatment selection, or patient pathway planning in real practice.
Authors should state endpoint hierarchy clearly so reviewers can assess interpretive strength without ambiguity.
Submissions addressing underserved populations and implementation barriers are strongly encouraged.
Structured reporting improves review efficiency and reduces avoidable revision cycles.
Collaborative multicenter studies are welcome when data governance and method consistency are clearly documented.
High-impact manuscripts typically explain how findings alter diagnosis, treatment selection, or patient pathway planning in real practice.
Authors should state endpoint hierarchy clearly so reviewers can assess interpretive strength without ambiguity.
Submissions addressing underserved populations and implementation barriers are strongly encouraged.
Structured reporting improves review efficiency and reduces avoidable revision cycles.
Collaborative multicenter studies are welcome when data governance and method consistency are clearly documented.
High-impact manuscripts typically explain how findings alter diagnosis, treatment selection, or patient pathway planning in real practice.
Authors should state endpoint hierarchy clearly so reviewers can assess interpretive strength without ambiguity.
Submissions addressing underserved populations and implementation barriers are strongly encouraged.
Structured reporting improves review efficiency and reduces avoidable revision cycles.
Collaborative multicenter studies are welcome when data governance and method consistency are clearly documented.
High-impact manuscripts typically explain how findings alter diagnosis, treatment selection, or patient pathway planning in real practice.
Authors should state endpoint hierarchy clearly so reviewers can assess interpretive strength without ambiguity.
Submissions addressing underserved populations and implementation barriers are strongly encouraged.
Structured reporting improves review efficiency and reduces avoidable revision cycles.
Collaborative multicenter studies are welcome when data governance and method consistency are clearly documented.
Choose your preferred submission workflow and move your manuscript into a rigorous, clinically focused peer review process.
Editorial office: [email protected]