About Ayurveda Pulse
Ayurveda Pulse is an evidence-oriented digital publication and newsletter set up with a single purpose: to bring classical Ayurvedic knowledge into honest conversation with modern scientific research. We are not attempting to replace either tradition. Our aim is to build a platform where a BAMS physician, a research scholar, and a curious lay reader can all trust what they are reading, because the claims are traceable back to a source — whether that source is Charaka Samhita or a peer-reviewed journal.
It is worth being upfront about what we are and what we are not. Ayurveda Pulse maintains editorial standards that we hold to a high bar, comparable in rigour to academic publishing, but we are an informational platform, not a peer-reviewed journal in the formal sense. Every article that goes live has been read, questioned, and signed off by our editorial team, which is made up of qualified BAMS and MD professionals who look specifically at clinical accuracy, structural clarity, and how well the classical and modern material has actually been integrated, rather than simply placed side by side.
At present, the publication reaches upward of 3,000 subscribers, with individual articles typically drawing more than 2,500 views within their first month. We mention these numbers not to boast, but because contributors deserve to know where their work is going and who is likely to read it.
Why Write for Ayurveda Pulse
It genuinely helps your professional profile. Every contributor whose article is published receives a formal certificate of contribution. Several of our authors have used this, alongside the published piece itself, to strengthen applications for further study, clinical positions, or academic recognition. Being published under an editorial process that scrutinises both classical fidelity and modern evidence carries a different kind of weight than a self-published blog post.
You are not left to figure it out alone. A first-time author and a practitioner with fifteen years of clinical experience will need different kinds of support, and we try to give each what they actually need. Students and newer writers, in particular, receive additional mentorship through the revision process — not generic comments, but specific notes on what needs strengthening and why.
Your work will actually be read. With a subscriber base in the thousands and consistent monthly traffic to individual articles, your contribution does not disappear into an archive. We also encourage existing contributors to recommend other writers they respect, which has organically grown our community of practitioners, students, and researchers who share an interest in evidence-based Ayurveda.
Getting Started
If you are new to Ayurveda Pulse, we would suggest reading a handful of published articles before drafting your own. This is not a formality — it will save you a revision cycle. Pay attention to how a piece is structured, how much space is given to classical material versus modern research, and how citations are woven into the argument rather than dropped in as an afterthought.
Once you have a topic in mind and are ready to proceed, you may submit through our official form:
Who May Contribute
We deliberately keep our contributor base wide, because useful insight in this field does not correlate neatly with years of practice or formal qualification alone.
Qualified practitioners — licensed Ayurvedic doctors, BAMS graduates, and MD (Ayurveda) professionals with clinical experience treating patients — are naturally well placed to write case studies and treatment-focused pieces.
Students pursuing BAMS or MD, at any stage of their education, including those currently completing internship or postgraduate study, are actively encouraged to write. Students often bring a familiarity with recent research literature that busy clinicians sometimes lack the time to keep up with, and this is a genuine asset rather than a limitation.
Researchers working in Ayurveda, traditional medicine, or related interdisciplinary areas are welcome to contribute analytical or review-style pieces drawing on their own work.
Writers without formal Ayurvedic credentials may also contribute, provided the article demonstrates substantial and genuine knowledge of the subject, is properly referenced, and does not overstate claims that the writer is not qualified to make. We assess the quality of the work itself rather than gatekeeping purely on the basis of degree.
Experience is not a barrier to publication. Our editorial process exists precisely to take a promising but rough draft and work with the author until it meets our standard — this applies equally to a first-time contributor and a senior clinician.
Submission Categories
Every submission must be original and unpublished work, grounded in research, and supported by credible references drawn from both classical Ayurvedic sources and contemporary literature. Please choose whichever category below most closely matches your article, as this also determines which section of the site it will be filed under.
Clinical Case Studies
Filed under: Clinical Case Studies
A well-documented case study remains one of the most valuable things a practitioner can contribute, because it shows classical principles being applied to an actual patient rather than discussed in the abstract. We ask that authors structure their case studies with the following in mind.
The title should make the primary condition and the distinctive aspect of the case immediately clear, and any Sanskrit terminology used should carry an English translation alongside it so the piece remains accessible to readers unfamiliar with classical vocabulary. The summary, kept under 250 characters, should capture the condition treated, the therapeutic approach, and the principal outcome — this is often the only part of your article a reader sees before deciding whether to open it, so it deserves real care.
The body of the case study should cover the patient’s background and presentation, including relevant demographics and lifestyle factors, a constitutional assessment (Prakriti and current Vikriti), the chief complaints in both the patient’s own words and clinical terminology, and a chronological history of the presenting illness. This should be followed by a systematic account of the clinical assessment, including Nadi Pariksha, Jihva Pariksha, and any other Ayurvedic diagnostic methods used, integrated where relevant with modern investigations such as laboratory results or imaging.
The treatment section should set out the therapeutic strategy with clear reasoning grounded in classical principles, along with the exact formulations used — ingredients, dosages, duration, and route of administration — and proper citation of the classical texts that support the approach taken. Outcomes should be reported honestly, covering both objective measurements and the patient’s own account of improvement, any adverse effects observed, and follow-up timelines. We would also ask authors to close with a discussion section situating the case within existing classical theory and, where available, comparable published cases, along with an honest account of the case’s limitations.
Evidence-Based Plant (Dravyaguna) Reviews
Filed under: Medicinal Plants
These are comprehensive monographs on individual plants, intended to serve as genuine reference material rather than a general overview. We expect complete taxonomical detail (scientific name, family, common names), a description of morphology and habitat, and classical references citing the specific chapter and verse where the plant appears in major texts.
The traditional properties section should cover Rasa, Guna, Virya, and Prabhava, correlated where possible with modern phytochemical and pharmacological findings. The evidentiary core of the article should present peer-reviewed research systematically, moving from preclinical studies through to human clinical trials, with methodology, sample size, and outcomes described rather than merely asserted, and every claim backed by a properly formatted APA citation with a working link.
We also expect a safety section covering documented contraindications and potential drug interactions, a comparison of traditional use against current clinical application, and an honest note on where the evidence remains thin. A short section on quality control — identification markers, common adulterants, and standardisation parameters — rounds out a strong plant review.
Classical and Proprietary Formulation Studies
Filed under: Classical Formulations
These articles examine a specific preparation — a churna, kashayam, ghrita, bhasma, or rasayana — in depth. We look for the formulation’s historical background and its origin in classical texts or established practice, a complete composition list with botanical names and proportions, the traditional method of preparation, and citations back to the original source text.
Beyond this, we want to see genuine ingredient-level analysis: what role each component plays within the formulation, how the ingredients are understood to work synergistically according to classical reasoning, and any modern modifications that have been made to the traditional recipe, along with the rationale behind them. The clinical evidence section should cover research into the formulation’s efficacy, including both favourable and unfavourable findings, since a balanced account is far more useful to a practising clinician than a one-sided one. We would also ask authors to touch on manufacturing and quality considerations — standardisation challenges, storage, shelf life, and current regulatory status.
Disease Insights and Ayurvedic Treatment Plans
Filed under: Disease Management
A strong disease-focused article gives the reader a genuinely integrated understanding of a condition, rather than a classical description followed by a modern one with no attempt to connect them. We look for the condition’s definition according to classical texts alongside modern diagnostic criteria, relevant epidemiological data, and an honest account of how classical disease categories map — or fail to map cleanly — onto contemporary classification.
The pathophysiology section should describe the Samprapti (disease process) in terms of Dosha involvement, tissue-level (Dhatu) effects, and disturbance of the channels (Srotas), correlated with modern pathophysiological understanding where a genuine correlation exists. Clinical presentation should cover both the classical description (Purvarupa and Rupa) and how the condition typically presents in a modern clinical setting, along with relevant investigations. The treatment section is where most of the article’s value lies for a practising reader: specific protocols, medications, dosages, and duration, integrated with current research evidence, and a realistic account of expected outcomes based on published findings rather than optimistic generalisation.
Treatment Protocols
Filed under: Disease Management, or Ayurvedic Procedures where the protocol is centred on an in-clinic procedure
These articles set out a detailed, structured treatment approach for a defined condition and patient population. We expect a clear step-by-step methodology with reasoning grounded in classical principles at each stage, supported by both classical text references and contemporary research, along with a realistic account of expected therapeutic response and timelines. Practical implementation detail matters here more than in most other categories — dosage protocols, administration method, duration, how the patient should be monitored, and how the protocol should be modified based on how the patient actually responds.
Ayurvedic Procedures
Filed under: Ayurvedic Procedures
This category covers procedures administered under practitioner supervision — Panchakarma therapies, para-surgical techniques such as Agnikarma or Ksharakarma, and other in-clinic treatments including Nasya, Basti, Vamana, Virechana, Raktamokshana, Shirodhara, Swedana, and localised procedures such as Kati Basti or Janu Basti. We ask authors to cover indications and contraindications clearly, the procedural technique itself, the therapeutic mechanism as understood both classically and physiologically, safety considerations, appropriate post-procedure care, and current evidence for the procedure’s role in managing the relevant condition.
Ayurvedic Regimen
Filed under: Ayurvedic Regimen
This section covers Dinacharya (daily regimen), Ratricharya (night regimen), and Ritucharya (seasonal regimen). A strong regimen article does more than list practices — it explains the classical reasoning behind a given routine, correlates it with the relevant modern physiological mechanism, whether that is circadian biology, seasonal immune variation, or sleep science, and then translates it into something a reader can actually implement at home. Wherever the article makes a comparative or directional claim between classical reasoning and modern evidence, we would ask authors to be explicit about how strong that overlap actually is, rather than presenting a loose resemblance as if it were proof.
Nutritional Medicine
Filed under: Nutritional Medicine
Articles here explore therapeutic nutrition and the classical principle of Ahara as Aushadha — food as medicine — set against current nutritional science. This might cover therapeutic diets for specific conditions, macro- and micronutrient interactions, or constitution-based (Prakriti-informed) dietary strategy, provided the article is grounded in credible research rather than general wellness advice.
Traditional Texts
Filed under: Traditional Texts
This category is for close textual analysis of the Brihat Trayi — Charaka Samhita, Sushruta Samhita, and Ashtanga Hridaya — or other classical works such as Madhava Nidana, Sharangdhara Samhita, or Bhava Prakasha. We are looking for genuine engagement with specific chapters, verses, or concepts, their historical and philosophical context, and a clear account of their relevance to contemporary practice, rather than a general summary of a text’s contents.
Writing Standards
Length and structure. Main content should generally run between 1,500 and 2,500 words, though we allow flexibility where a topic genuinely warrants more or less space — a narrow plant monograph and a broad disease-management piece will not need the same length. The summary or meta description accompanying the article should stay under 250 characters. Section headers should guide the reader logically through the argument, and we would rather see a tightly written 1,800-word piece than a padded 2,500-word one.
Language. We publish in clear, professional English suitable for practitioners, students, and an educated lay readership alike. Sanskrit terms should be properly transliterated and accompanied by an English gloss the first time they appear. Please keep terminology consistent throughout the piece — if you introduce a term one way, do not switch to a different transliteration or translation midway through the article.
What makes an article work. Looking back at our strongest-performing pieces, a pattern emerges. They tend to open by naming a specific, recurring question the reader is likely to already be sitting with, rather than a generic introduction to the topic. They organise the article around one clear diagnostic or conceptual distinction — for instance, distinguishing two presentations of the same complaint through a specific classical lens — rather than presenting a flat list of facts. They are candid about where classical and modern frameworks genuinely align and where the connection is suggestive rather than proven; overstating the overlap tends to undermine the credibility of the whole piece rather than strengthen it. And they generally close with something the reader can act on, whether that is a set of red-flag symptoms warranting medical attention or a short, practical routine.
We would encourage authors to include a short FAQ section near the end of the article where it genuinely adds value — for instance, where readers commonly hold a misconception the article should correct, or where a related question keeps coming up that the main body does not directly address. This is not, however, a mandatory template element, and articles that do not need it should not force one in.
Citations and References
All references must follow APA 7th edition format, with author names given in bold and a functional, direct link provided to the original source. This is non-negotiable — a citation without a working link is, for our purposes, not a citation at all.
For a classical text, the citation should follow the pattern of author, translator, and publisher, along with the specific chapter and verse referenced, followed by a direct link to the translated text online. For a research paper, cite the authors, year, article title, journal name, volume and issue, page range, and the DOI link. Books should carry the author, year, full title and edition, publisher, and a link where the book can be accessed. Government or institutional guidelines should be cited by organisation name, year, document title, and a direct link to the guideline itself.
We ask for a minimum of ten to fifteen credible references in a comprehensive article, and every single link should be checked by the author before submission — links that have gone dead or redirect elsewhere are one of the most common reasons an otherwise strong draft is sent back for revision. We would also ask authors to aim for a genuine balance between classical sources and contemporary peer-reviewed research, rather than leaning heavily on one at the expense of the other.
Author Information
Please provide your full name and highest relevant degree (BAMS, MD, PhD, or equivalent), your current institutional affiliation or professional designation, and, if you are a student, your current year of study and institution.
Your author biography should run to no more than 200 words and should focus specifically on the expertise or experience that gives you the authority to write on your chosen topic, rather than a general career summary. Please also provide a valid email address for editorial correspondence, and note that where an article has more than one author, all co-authors must approve the final submitted version before it is sent for review.
Ethical Standards
Patient privacy. Case studies must fully anonymise patient information. This means removing or altering names, locations, dates, and any distinctive circumstance that could allow a reader to identify the individual concerned, with particular care taken around unusually specific or rare presentations. Where identifiable information or images are used, written informed consent is mandatory, and authors should retain this documentation in case it is requested during editorial review.
Originality. Every submission must be entirely original work that has not been published elsewhere in any language or format, and simultaneous submission to another publication is not permitted while your article is under review with us. If your submission builds upon or overlaps with earlier work, including your own previously published material, this must be disclosed and properly cited rather than presented as entirely new. Authors retain copyright over their own work, while granting Ayurveda Pulse exclusive rights to publish it. By submitting, you are confirming that your article does not infringe on anyone else’s copyright, trademark, or intellectual property, and that written permission has been obtained for any figures, tables, or text drawn from another source.
Academic integrity. We maintain a zero-tolerance policy toward plagiarism in any form, and all submissions are screened before publication. This extends to self-plagiarism — reusing substantial portions of your own previously published work without proper citation is treated the same way as using someone else’s. We also expect authors to report their findings honestly, including negative or inconclusive results, and to be upfront about the limitations of whatever case, research, or protocol they are describing.
Conflicts of interest. Please disclose any financial interest connected to the topic, relevant employment relationships, funding sources, or product endorsements that could reasonably be seen as influencing how the content is presented.
What a Published Article Typically Includes
Based on how our articles are currently structured on the site, a published piece generally carries the following elements. Understanding these in advance will help your draft move through review faster.
A featured image accompanies each article, along with descriptive alt text that should incorporate relevant keywords naturally rather than as a keyword list. Each piece opens with a short deck line summarising what the article covers, which also does double duty as the meta description used for search visibility. Toward the end of the review process, our editorial board adds a short note confirming what was specifically checked — classical textual fidelity, cross-verification of cited modern research, and a review of safety considerations where the topic warrants it. Authors do not need to draft this themselves.
Every article closes with a standard disclaimer explaining that the content is educational rather than a substitute for professional medical advice, along with guidance on when a reader should seek prompt medical attention rather than relying on the article’s suggestions. A disclosure statement follows, covering conflicts of interest and funding, and a copyright notice closes out the piece. Authors are welcome to flag any topic-specific safety concerns — particular drug interactions, red-flag symptoms, or populations who should avoid a given herb or protocol — so that we can tailor this section appropriately rather than relying on generic boilerplate.
Editorial Process
Once submitted through our form, your article is reviewed by our editorial team of BAMS and MD professionals, who assess clinical accuracy, structural clarity, reference quality, and how well the classical and modern material has been brought together. This typically takes ten to fifteen days.
Most articles go through at least one round of revision. The feedback we send back is specific rather than generic — we would rather tell you exactly which section needs strengthening and why than send a vague note asking for “more detail.” The most common revision requests concern the depth of the reference base, the clarity of clinical reasoning in a case study, the structural flow of the piece, and the strength of the discussion section. Once revisions are complete and both sides are satisfied, the article is scheduled for publication, distributed to the newsletter, and the author’s certificate of contribution is issued.
Before You Submit
A few checks worth running through before you send your draft across: confirm that all sections required for your chosen category are present, that your word count sits within the expected range, that every reference is correctly formatted and every link actually works, and that the piece has been read through carefully for grammar and overall clarity. If your submission is a case study, double check that patient information has been fully anonymised and that consent documentation is in order. And if your topic touches on anything with a genuine safety dimension — herb-drug interactions, contraindications in pregnancy, or conditions requiring urgent medical attention — make sure this has been addressed rather than left implicit.
If you are unsure whether your topic or draft is a good fit before investing the time to write the full piece, do reach out to the editorial team first. A short conversation about topic selection early on tends to save everyone a revision cycle later.
Contact and Resources
The most current version of these guidelines is always available at ayurvedapulse.in/editorial-publishing-guidelines.
To submit your completed article, please use our submission form. To join our wider contributor community, visit ayurvedapulse.in/publish, and for answers to common questions, see our FAQ page.
Publishing with Ayurveda Pulse means becoming part of a community that takes the documentation of evidence-based Ayurveda seriously — researched thoroughly, evaluated honestly, and written in a way that is genuinely useful to the practitioners, students, and patients who end up reading it.