Publications by tag "Peer review"

A decision to send an article for revision is one of the most common outcomes of peer review, and it does not mean that the work is weak. Which revisions do reviewers request most often? How long does it usually take to prepare a response? We look at how to organise work on reviewers’ comments and what to bear in mind when resubmitting an article.

Peer review is a key stage of the publication process, since it determines the further fate of an article. This is why every author must have a thorough understanding of the particularities of manuscript evaluation. What types of peer review exist? What are the differences between them? Read on.

Preparing a response to a review is an important stage of the publication process. The final decision of the editorial board depends to a large extent on how accurately, calmly and clearly the author addresses the comments. In this article, we explain how to analyse a review, structure the logic of the response, present revisions to the manuscript properly, and avoid common mistakes in communication with the editor and reviewers.

Many researchers strive to publish an article in a scientific journal as quickly as possible, and hope that this can be done even within 2 months. Why is this not the case? How long does it actually take to publish in a prestigious journal? Read more about it below.

A new video has been released on our channel, in which we explain in detail the peculiarities of writing the “Discussion” section in a scientific article according to the IMRAD structure.

Writing and submitting a research article to a journal is just the beginning of the journey. Peer reviewing can take months or even years! How can you make this process faster and more efficient? We'll share in a new video!