Skip to Main Content  

Writing Your Manuscript: Peer Review

It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Peer Review

Researchers may be involved in Peer Review from two different perspectives:

  1. As a subject expert:  Researchers with strong subject expertise are asked to critically examine, evaluate and provide feedback on materials being considered for publication.  Their "peer review" comments are quite specific and intended to alert authors to errors or inconsistencies so that corrections may be made in order to improve the quality of their paper submission;
  2. As an author:  You receive, evaluate, and respond to all of the peer reviewers' comments and criticisms and resubmit an edited version of the manuscript.  This iterative process will continue until the manuscript is finally accepted or rejected for publication.  

Peer Reviews - Providing a Peer Review

A process of evaluation of scientific or professional work by experts in the same field (reviewers) to assess whether the work meets the necessary methodological and ethical standards before it is accepted or published. The critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to journals by experts who are not part of the editorial staff.  The term may also refer to review of clinical performance in a medical audit.


Drubin DG. Any jackass can trash a manuscript, but it takes good scholarship to create one (how MBoC promotes civil and constructive peer review). Molecular biology of the cell. 2011;22(5):525-7.  

Dutta MJ. The ten commandments of reviewing: the promise of a kinder, gentler discipline! Health communication. 2006;20(2):197-200.  

Spigt M, Arts IC. How to review a manuscript. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2010;63(12):1385-90.  

Stiller-Reeve M. How to write a thorough peer review. Nature Careers Community [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2019 April 26].

Peer Reviews - Responding to Peer Reviewers

Coping with peer rejection. Nature. 2003;425(6959):645.   

Noble WS. Ten simple rules for writing a response to reviewers. PLoS computational biology. 2017;13(10):e1005730.   

Woolley KL, Barron JP. Handling manuscript rejection: insights from evidence and experience. Chest. 2009;135(2):573-7.    

de Vries F. Effective writing and dealing with reviewers. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2014;67(7):830.    

Kotsis SV, Chung KC. Manuscript rejection: how to submit a revision and tips on being a good peer reviewer. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2014;133(4):958-64.