Peer review exists to ensure that journals publish good science. This benefits the entire scientific community. Sometimes scientists find the peer review process intimidating because it can lead to the rejection of their manuscript. Keep in mind that revisions and improvement are part of the publication process and actually help raise the quality of your manuscript. Peer review is an integral part of scientific publishing that confirms the validity of the science reported. Peer reviewers are experts who volunteer their time to help improve the journal manuscripts they review-they offer authors free advice. So through our peer review process, manuscripts should become More robust, Easier to read, and More useful. Of course, in addition to offering authors advice, another important purpose of our peer review is to make sure that the manuscripts the journal eventually publishes are of high quality. If we publish too many low-quality manuscripts, our reputation and number of readers will decline.

Editorial rejection

Your manuscript can be rejected if it lacks proper structure, Lacks the necessary detail for readers to fully understand the authors' analysis, has no new science, does not clearly explain which parts of the findings are new science, versus what was already known, lacks up-to-date references, contains conclusions that are not fully supported by its data and arguments, does not provide enough details about materials and methods to allow other scientists to repeat the experiment, lacks clear descriptions or explanations of hypotheses tested and the experimental design, or as poor language quality.

Publication is a difficult process, and you must be prepared to defend your submission against rejection from both editors and peer reviewers. However, do not be too persistent. Generally, only one letter defending your submission will be accepted for each of the review stages (editorial review and peer review). If you are unsuccessful after sending a response letter, then you should strongly consider selecting another journal.


When revising your manuscript and responding to peer review comments:

  • 1- Address all points raised by the editor and reviewers
  • 2- Describe the revisions to your manuscript in your response letter
  • 3- Perform any additional experiments or analyses the reviewers recommend (unless you feel that they would not make your paper better; if this is the case, explain why in your response letter)
  • 4- Provide a polite and scientific rebuttal to any points or comments you disagree with.
  • 5- Differentiate between reviewer comments and your responses in your letter.
  • 6- Clearly show the major revisions in the text, with a different color text or highlighting the changes.
  • 7- Return the revised manuscript and response letter within the time period the editor tells you