Copyright © 2020 pubrica. All rights reserved 1

What is Peer-Review of a Manuscript. List Out the Benefits of Peer-

Reviewing a Manuscript

Dr. Nancy Agnes, Head,

Technical Operations, Pubrica

sales@pubrica.com

In-Brief

Peer review is the critical assessment of

manuscripts submitted to journals by

experts who are usually not part of the

editorial staff. “The investigator’s final

manuscript of a peer-reviewed article

accepted for journal publication, including

all modifications from the peer review

process.”

Keywords:

Peer review services:

Medical manuscript peer reviewing

services, pre peer review, peer review

service, pre-submission peer review, peer

review report, and medical peer review

services, peer-reviewed articles, peer-

reviewed publication,

I. INTRODUCTION

Peer review can be described as a process in

which a person reads, checks and gives his

or her opinion on a piece of work written by

another scientist or expert working in the

same field. Generally speaking, two forms

of peer review can be distinguished: „in-

class peer review‟ for undergraduate

students and academic peer review‟ for

research scholars.

During an in-class peer review,

undergraduate students read articles written

by fellow classmates and offer input on their

work as part of the teaching aspects of the

program. Academic peer review (hereafter

“peers review”) is, on the contrary, a more

complicated process.

Peer review is a central aspect of academic

study. In general, the scientific publication

process consists of three main participants:

Authors were submitting a manuscript

outlining their findings, editors determining

whether the paper will be offered for peer

review and eventually accepted for

publication, and peer reviewers performing

evaluations that will allow the editor to

make a better-informed decision on

suitability. These reviewers play an

understated yet crucial role in the process,

utilizing their capability to constructively

critique a piece of work for the benefit of the

broader scientific community .

II. MANUSCRIPT SHOULD ALSO

INCLUDE

Figures, charts, tables and images

Supplemental materials associated

with the work

Title page

Names and affiliations of the authors

The corresponding author‟s name

and email address

Grant award acknowledgements

Copyright © 2020 pubrica. All rights reserved 2

III. METHODOLOGY

To gain insight into the attitudes towards the

participation of ecrs in peer review, we have

distributed a survey to academics in ten

countries across the globe. The survey

covered numerous aspects of the peer review

process, including how many peer-review

invites are commonly accepted by

academics, if they included ecrs

(postgraduate researchers only in their

evaluations, and if so, what was their

motivation to involve ecrs. We requested

that academics determine the effect of peer

review on the essential skills of their

students based on their previous experience.

Besides, a separate survey was distributed to

the ecrs (student survey) to assess their

attitudes towards peer review participation.

Complete details of survey questions for

both the academic and the ecr surveys can

be found in the supplementary materials

section. For the survey, terminology

graduate students (pgrs) is used instead of

ecrs (supplementary materials). It was to be

differentiated explicitly from undergraduate

researchers who were not the subject of our

study.

IV. BENEFITS OF PEER-REVIEWING A

MANUSCRIPT

Corrects vague terms

While i use an online thesaurus every time i

write to find the right word to describe a

concept, in some cases, some words seem to

be incorrect or vague. Having input from

peers lets me determine whether i have to

adhere to my terms or consider what they

say. I do not hesitate to alter the words in

question if the idea sounds fine.

Provides feedback as to the effectiveness

of your communication

Oh, it is. If grasped the points you advanced

in your manuscript, you can readily see from

the reactions of your peer group. Suppose

that after a page has been displayed to

provide their input, it takes them a little

longer than expected, which will possibly

mean that something is wrong with the flow

of thinking or conversation. Questions for

clarity will most likely come next. And yes,

they have.

Prevents you from committing serious

blunders in your arguments

You may have made points that may be

based on incorrect assumptions. Once the

beliefs are false, then everything you‟ve

published is wrong. This result observes the

laws of logic. If the premises are defective,

so it is unreliable with anything that goes

beyond it.

Facilitates concise writing More than what is required, you might have

written. The elimination here and there of

needless paragraphs or phrases gives rise to

a short, adequately written manuscript.

Some people are fond of focusing on

spelling and grammatical mistakes. While

attention should be given to the substance or

Copyright © 2020 pubrica. All rights reserved 2

claims of your research paper, your

grammar matters a lot. As the reading flow

is made more efficient, good grammar

encourages reading.

Allows you to expound on your points

Perhaps you felt you had written sufficiently

to clarify the matter at hand. Then you know

that you have brought your peers halfway to

the expected ideas you want to project. This

situation requires clarification on the

questions you have raised to understand and

illustrate concepts.

Encourages you to perform better next

time

The next time you are on the watch for the

possible comments, suggestions, or criticism

of your book, if the peer review exercise has

shown you any positive feedback. When you

add all the terms and recommendations of

colleagues, you will then compose better

than ever. Thus in your previous article, you

stop making the same errors. There are

tremendous advantages to peer-review.

V. CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the method of peer-review is

collegial at its best, not adversarial. Finally,

when guided by attentive, detailed,

insightful reviews, and they have the

privilege of seeing papers and journal

reputations improve as part of the process,

editors gain trust in their decisions to accept

an article.

REFERENCES

1. Wiley rano survey, principles of peer review, wiley

author services,

2013, https://authorservices.wiley.com/asset/principl

es_of_peer_review.pdf.

2. M. N. Ovando, “constructive feedback: a key to

successful teaching and learning,” international

journal of educational management, vol. 8, no. 6, pp.

19–22, 1994.view at publisher site | google scholar.

3. https://beckerguides.wustl.edu/nihpolicy.