The ICMJE‘s “Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest” is the standardized document most biomedical journals use to collect author conflict-of-interest information at manuscript submission. ICMJE member journals require it; many other journals that follow ICMJE recommendations without being formal members adopt it as well or use a close variant. This guide walks through what to enter in each section, the reporting window that applies, and the mistakes that most often send a form back to an author for correction.
This is a companion to CASRAI’s guide on manuscript conflict-of-interest disclosure statement templates, which covers the short published paragraph readers see in a journal article. The ICMJE form is the longer, structured source document that statement is condensed from — the two are related but not interchangeable, and journals generally require both.
What the form is and who completes it
The ICMJE form asks each author to disclose, in a structured way, financial and non-financial relationships that could bias, or appear to bias, the submitted work. It is downloaded, filled out, and submitted directly to the journal handling the manuscript — it is not sent to or collected by ICMJE itself. As ICMJE’s own FAQ states plainly, the organization “does not receive or accept disclosure forms.”
Practice on who submits varies by journal. Many journals require a signed form from every listed author. Some allow the corresponding author to complete and submit a single form on behalf of all co-authors, provided each author has confirmed their own disclosures to the corresponding author first. Because this varies, always follow the specific submission instructions of the journal you are submitting to rather than assuming one pattern applies universally.
The form is organized into four sections: identifying information, the work under consideration for publication, relevant financial activities outside the submitted work, and other relationships.
Section 1: Identifying information
This section is straightforward but worth double-checking, since an error here is one of the most common reasons a form gets kicked back. It asks for:
- Your given (first) name and surname, entered exactly as they appear on the manuscript byline.
- Whether you are the corresponding author.
- The manuscript title.
- The manuscript identifying/tracking number, if one has already been assigned by the journal’s submission system.
Mismatches between the name entered here and the name on the author list, or an incorrect/outdated manuscript number after a resubmission, are a routine source of editorial-office follow-up requests. If you are completing this form after a revision, check that the manuscript number still matches the current submission record.
Section 2: The work under consideration for publication
This section asks a single underlying question: did you or your institution receive payment or services from a third party for any aspect of the specific work being submitted — including but not limited to grants, a data monitoring board, study design, manuscript preparation, or statistical analysis?
The time frame here is not a fixed lookback window like Section 3’s. It runs for the life of the work itself, from initial conception and planning through to the present. Checking “No” across the board means the work was funded entirely by the same institution that pays your salary, with no third-party funds involved. If a government agency, charitable foundation, or commercial sponsor provided funding or in-kind support, check “Yes” and complete the relevant row.
For each type of support you report, the form asks you to indicate whether the money was paid to you personally, to your institution on your behalf, or both, and to name the entity. The categories on the form are:
- Grant
- Consulting fee or honorarium
- Support for travel to meetings for the study or other purposes
- Fees for participation in review activities such as data monitoring boards, statistical analysis, or endpoint committees
- Payment for writing or reviewing the manuscript
- Provision of writing assistance, medicines, equipment, or administrative support
- Other
You can add rows for multiple relationships within a single category (for example, two separate grants from two different funders both supporting the study).
Section 3: Relevant financial activities outside the submitted work
This is usually the section that takes authors the longest, and where under-disclosure is most common. It asks about financial relationships with entities in the biomedical arena, outside the submitted work itself, that could be perceived to influence, or give the appearance of potentially influencing, what you wrote.
The reporting window is the 36 months prior to submission of the work. Report all sources of revenue paid, or promised to be paid, directly to you or to your institution on your behalf during that period, provided the source has relevance to the submitted work — not just revenue from whichever entity sponsored the research itself. Any interactions with the work’s sponsor that fall outside the submitted work should also be listed here, separately from what was already reported in Section 2.
ICMJE deliberately asks authors to interpret “relevant” broadly. Its own guidance gives the example of a manuscript on an EGFR antagonist in lung cancer: the author should disclose relationships with entities pursuing diagnostic or therapeutic strategies across cancer generally, not only those working specifically on EGFR or lung cancer. The form’s own instruction is unambiguous: “If there is any question, it is usually better to disclose a relationship than not to do so.”
There is one narrower carve-out, specific to research grants (as opposed to the other relationship types below): for grants received for work outside the submitted work, disclose only funders that could be perceived to have a financial stake in the published outcome — drug or device companies, or foundations backed by such entities. Public funding sources such as government agencies, charitable foundations, or academic institutions generally do not need to be listed here. If a government agency funded a study and a pharmaceutical company separately supplied the study drug, only the pharmaceutical company needs to be reported in this section.
The relationship types on the form, listed in the alphabetical order ICMJE uses, are:
- Board membership
- Consultancy
- Employment
- Expert testimony
- Grants/grants pending
- Payment for lectures, including service on speakers bureaus
- Payment for manuscript preparation
- Patents (planned, pending, or issued)
- Royalties
- Payment for development of educational presentations
- Stock/stock options
- Travel/accommodations/meeting expenses unrelated to activities already listed above
- Other — the form’s own instruction for this catch-all row is to “err on the side of full disclosure”
For each relationship you report, indicate whether payment went to you, to your institution, or both, name the entity, and use the comments field for any needed clarification (for example, noting that travel already reported under a consultancy line does not need a separate travel line for the same engagement).
Section 4: Other relationships
The final section is a catch-all for anything not already captured by the financial categories above: relationships, conditions, or circumstances that readers could perceive as having influenced, or appearing to influence, what you wrote. This is where non-financial conflicts belong — for example, a close personal relationship with someone whose work is discussed in the manuscript, an unpaid advisory or leadership role with direct relevance to the subject matter, or academic rivalry or competition, if genuinely pertinent.
Authors check either “No other relationships/conditions/circumstances that present a potential conflict of interest,” or “Yes,” with an explanation entered below. Note that this section is not a fixed checklist the way Sections 2 and 3 are — it depends on the author’s own judgment about what a reader would consider relevant, which is exactly why erring toward disclosure is the safer default throughout the form.
Certification, updates, and what happens after submission
The form is signed (electronically or by hand, depending on how the journal collects it) by the individual author or, where the journal permits it, by the corresponding author submitting on behalf of the full author group. ICMJE notes that at the time of manuscript acceptance, journals will typically ask authors to confirm their disclosure statements are still accurate and, if circumstances have changed since initial submission, to update them. A new consulting agreement, grant award, or board appointment that begins during peer review can mean the original form is no longer current by the time a paper is accepted.
Common mistakes
- Reporting only relationships tied to the direct subject of the paper. ICMJE’s own guidance explicitly asks for broadly relevant relationships, not just narrowly on-topic ones.
- Applying the 36-month window inconsistently. The window applies to Section 3 (relationships outside the submitted work). Section 2 covers the life of the work itself and is not bounded by 36 months.
- Omitting public funding sources from Section 3’s grant row when they should be excluded, or excluding a commercial funder that should be included. The carve-out for public/academic/charitable funders applies specifically to unrelated grants in Section 3, not to funding of the submitted work itself, which belongs in Section 2 regardless of the funder type.
- Treating “No” answers as the safe default when unsure. The form’s own instruction is the opposite: when in doubt, disclose.
- Not updating the form between submission and acceptance. A relationship that began mid-review is still reportable if it existed before the paper was accepted for publication.
- Submitting a stale or wrong manuscript identifying number after a major revision or resubmission under a new manuscript ID.
- Confusing the ICMJE form with the published disclosure statement. The form is the structured source record; the manuscript’s disclosure paragraph is a condensed summary drawn from it. See CASRAI’s guide to manuscript disclosure statement templates for how that shorter statement is typically worded and placed.
Guidance for research administrators and institutions
Research administration offices frequently field author questions about this form, particularly around Section 3’s 36-month window and what counts as “broadly relevant.” A few practical points worth building into institutional guidance:
- The ICMJE form and an institutional or federal financial conflict-of-interest disclosure (for example, under a funder’s own COI policy) are separate documents serving different purposes and audiences, even though they often ask about overlapping relationships. Completing one does not substitute for the other. See CASRAI’s coverage of the NIH Financial Conflict of Interest (FCOI) Policy for how that distinction plays out on the funder side.
- Trainees and non-corresponding co-authors are still required to disclose their own relationships to whoever is compiling the form, even when they are not the ones submitting it. CASRAI’s guide on whether a stipend counts as a conflict of interest addresses a question that comes up often at this stage.
- Because the form asks authors to self-assess what is “broadly relevant,” institutions that maintain a running list of investigator relationships (as many do for federal FCOI compliance) can help authors complete Section 3 more completely and consistently than relying on memory alone.
- For background on how COI categories are typically classified before they reach a disclosure form, see CASRAI’s guide to the types of conflict of interest (actual, potential, perceived, financial, personal, and institutional).
Frequently asked questions
Do all authors need to complete a separate ICMJE form?
It depends on the journal. Many require an individually signed form from every author; others permit the corresponding author to submit one form covering the full author group, provided each co-author has confirmed their disclosures. Check the specific journal’s instructions for authors rather than assuming.
What is the time window for Section 3’s financial activities?
36 months prior to submission of the work. This applies to relationships outside the submitted work (Section 3). Section 2, covering support for the submitted work itself, is not bounded by a fixed time window — it runs for the life of the work.
Do I submit the completed form to ICMJE?
No. ICMJE does not collect or accept disclosure forms. The completed form goes directly to the journal handling your manuscript, following that journal’s specific submission instructions.
Does a public research grant need to be disclosed in Section 3?
Generally no, if it is unrelated to the submitted work and the funder (a government agency, charitable foundation, or academic institution) has no financial stake in the outcome. Grants from commercial entities, or from foundations backed by entities with a financial interest in the outcome, should be disclosed even if unrelated to the submitted work.
How is this different from the conflict-of-interest statement published in the article?
The ICMJE form is the structured source document authors complete for the journal’s records. The published statement is a short, condensed summary drawn from it, usually a sentence or short paragraph placed near the end of the article. See CASRAI’s disclosure statement template guide for examples of how that published version is typically worded.
What if a conflict arises after I submit the form but before the paper is accepted?
Report it. ICMJE notes that journals will ask authors to confirm and, where necessary, update their disclosures at the time of manuscript acceptance, so relationships that begin during peer review are still expected to be captured before publication.
