I am preparing a manuscript using Elsevier’s elsarticle class. According to the author guidelines, the review version should use a single-column layout (e.g., \documentclass[review,1p,times,authoryear]{elsarticle}), while the final version for publication is typically set in two columns, such as \documentclass[final,5p,times,twocolumn,authoryear]{elsarticle}
In my current single-column draft, all tables fit well. However, when I switch to the double-column layout (e.g., using \documentclass[final,5p,times,twocolumn]{elsarticle}), several tables slightly exceed the column width. For a few wide tables, I use the \begin{table*} and \end{table*} environment to make them span both columns, but for most tables, the overflow is moderate — and converting them to double-column tables feels like an inefficient use of space.
I have a few questions:
Should I revise the tables now (e.g., shorten variable names, adjust spacing, or use packages like
resizebox,tabularx, orthreeparttablex) so they fit within two column document?Or is this not necessary at the submission stage, since Elsevier will handle the formatting during typesetting after acceptance?
Any suggestions or experiences with balancing single- and double-column table formatting would be very helpful.
\resizeboxsledgehammer to reduce the widths of the tables. To reduce the table widths, usetabularxandtabular*environments instead. See the posting How to force a table into page width? for more information.