1. Scope & Editorial Mission
The Neuroscience discipline within Aevum Encyclopedia covers the scientific study of the nervous system, including neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, neurochemistry, cognitive neuroscience, computational neuroscience, and clinical neurology. All entries must maintain scientific rigor, interdisciplinary clarity, and accessibility for both academic and educated general audiences.
Neuroscience entries must bridge fundamental mechanisms with functional implications, avoiding reductionism while maintaining mechanistic precision.
2. Citation & Source Verification
All claims, classifications, and mechanistic descriptions must be anchored to peer-reviewed literature. Aevum follows a modified APA 7th citation standard, augmented with DOI and PubMed ID requirements.
- Primary Sources: Original research articles in indexed journals (Impact Factor ≥ 2.0 preferred, with exceptions for landmark historical papers).
- Review Articles: Accepted for contextual framing, but not for primary mechanistic claims.
- Grey Literature: Conference abstracts, preprints, and institutional reports may be cited only when primary data is unavailable, and must be clearly flagged as such.
- AI-Generated Content: Must not be cited as a primary source. AI may only be used for synthesis drafting, with full human verification required.
Any claim regarding neural circuitry, receptor pharmacology, or diagnostic criteria must be cross-referenced with at least two independent primary studies or an established clinical guideline (e.g., NICE, AAN, DSM-5-TR).
3. Article Structure
Standard neuroscience entries must follow a consistent hierarchical structure to ensure navigability and machine-readability for the Aevum Knowledge Graph.
| Section | Requirements | Length |
|---|---|---|
| Overview & Definition | Clear, concise scope statement; distinguish from adjacent fields | 150–250 words |
| Historical Context | Key discoveries, paradigm shifts, seminal figures | 200–400 words |
| Mechanisms & Physiology | Cellular/molecular/circuit-level details; include models | 400–800 words |
| Clinical & Translational Relevance | Disease associations, biomarkers, therapeutic implications | 300–600 words |
| Current Research Frontiers | Open questions, emerging methodologies, debate areas | 200–400 words |
| References & Further Reading | Minimum 8 primary sources; 3–5 curated reviews | Structured list |
4. Terminology & Nomenclature Standards
Precise language is non-negotiable in neuroscience. Authors must adhere to established nomenclature bodies and avoid colloquial or historically inaccurate terms.
- Terminologia Anatomica (TA)
- Mandatory for all neuroanatomical references (e.g., use substantia nigra pars compacta, not "black substance").
- MeSH / NeuroVoc
- Preferred for functional and systems-level terminology. Synonyms must be mapped to canonical identifiers.
- Neuroimaging Metrics
- Use standard conventions:
BOLD,fMRI,EEG/MEG,DWI/DTI. Always specify resolution, preprocessing pipeline, and correction methods (e.g., FSL, AFNI, SPM).
Avoid "mind reading", "brainwashing", "emotional brain vs rational brain", and "left-brain/right-brain personality". These are scientifically invalid and perpetuate neuro-myths.
5. Clinical & Translational Research
Entries covering neurological and psychiatric conditions must distinguish between established clinical evidence, emerging biomarkers, and experimental therapeutics.
- Diagnostic Criteria: Reference current standards (DSM-5-TR, ICD-11, AAN guidelines). Note regional or population-specific variations where applicable.
- Pharmacology: Include mechanism of action, approved indications, contraindications, and evidence grade. Off-label uses must be explicitly labeled.
- Neuroethics: Address privacy, informed consent, algorithmic bias, and cognitive liberty where relevant (especially for BCI and neuro-AI topics).
6. Peer Review Workflow
All neuroscience submissions undergo a three-tier review process:
- Automated Screening: AI-assisted checks for citation validity, terminology compliance, and structural integrity.
- Domain Expert Review: Two independent reviewers (one academic, one clinical/translational) assess scientific accuracy and clarity.
- Editorial Finalization: Senior editor verifies alignment with Aevum standards, resolves conflicts, and approves publication.
Revisions must be documented in the article's changelog. Disputed claims undergo mediation by the Neuroscience Editorial Committee.
7. Versioning & Maintenance
Neuroscience is a rapidly evolving field. All entries must be reviewed quarterly for accuracy, with mandatory updates triggered by:
- Major guideline revisions (e.g., new diagnostic classifications)
- High-impact publications overturning established mechanisms
- FDA/EMA approvals or withdrawals of neurotherapeutics
Version history is publicly accessible. Deprecated content is archived and linked to current standards to preserve scholarly context.
Contributors are encouraged to submit revision requests via the Aevum Platform. Prioritized updates are coordinated through the discipline's editorial calendar.