Contribute to the Atlas: Author Guide

What a contributed article is

A contributed article is a focused synthesis — a few well-referenced sections in which a physician or scientist distills their area and, crucially, connects it back to the atlas. It is not a textbook chapter and not an opinion piece: it is a compact, evidence-graded argument that updates specific atlas pages. The system is built so that authorship and provenance are fully derived — you declare who wrote it and what it informs, and the build wires the credit, the back-links, and the author profile automatically. Nothing is hand-maintained.

The provenance loop

When your article names the pages it informs:, the build creates a bidirectional link: your article lists the sections it updates at the bottom, and each of those atlas pages gains an "Informed by contributed research" banner linking back to your article. Your article also aggregates onto your author profile. The effect is that a reader on a clinical page sees the scholarship behind it, and a reader of your article can jump straight to the sections it touches — a citation graph that maintains itself.

Front-matter — the part that wires everything

Every article begins with a YAML front-matter block. The fields that drive the system:

A matching author profile (a short bio page with credentials, role, affiliation, and orcid) lives in the contributors section; the ORCID renders as a verifiable outbound link.

Editorial standards

Every entry — contributed or core — meets the same bar:

• Evidence-graded claims. Significant assertions carry a grade: A (high-quality/RCT), B (guideline/cohort), C (limited), or INFERENCE (reasoned from mechanism, labeled as such). Never present inference as data.
• Verified references only. Cite primary literature and society guidelines. Do not fabricate DOIs or citations — every DOI must resolve to the stated article. When in doubt, cite the guideline body and title without a URL rather than guess one.
• Accurate, current, and honest about uncertainty. State what is established, what is emerging, and what is debated. Present the counter-argument where one exists.
• Physician-reviewed before review_status is set — the review confirms clinical accuracy and that claims match their grade.

House style

Match the atlas voice so contributions read as one work:

• Yield tokens at the start of a paragraph or bullet mark emphasis: {K} → a key-point callout, {H} → a high-yield bold line, {D} → a small detail note. They must sit at the very start of the line with a blank line before them.
• Prose over lists for explanation; tables for structured comparisons; a short Self-Check (<details> Q&A) where the content supports it.
• Link internally with [text](#/page-id) so readers can follow the thread.
• Keep it focused — one clear argument, a handful of sections, and the pages it informs.

How to submit

Send your draft as a Markdown file with the front-matter above (or an outline plus your references and we'll format it), along with your author-profile details (name, credentials, role, affiliation, ORCID) and the list of atlas pages you believe your work informs. On acceptance and physician review, your article and profile join the Scholarship & Community section and the provenance banners appear on the pages you updated — with your name on the work.

See it in practice

• The worked example: Dual-Tracer Selection for PSMA Radioligand Therapy — a real, referenced article that demonstrates the authors:/informs: loop end to end.
• A template profile: the example contributor page in the Contributors section.