Navigating the Peer Review Process
11-9
Here is an example of a reviewer’s comments on a man uscript that was rejected. (Because reviewers’ comments are confidential, we have written sample reviewers’ comments based on actual comments rather than using actual comments.) The review follows a standard format for reviews of journal articles: an introductory paragraph summarizing the findings of the article followed by major and minor points. Most reviewers present their ideas objectively and constructively, but some do not. A rude or intimidating review reflects poorly on the reviewer rather than on t he paper. Even in these cases, however, the reviewer’s actual criticisms may be valid, in which case addressing them can improve the article. We have inserted comments in brackets about how to revise the article.
Review 1
The authors performed microarray analysis to compare gene expression in untreated Y cancer cells and Y cancer cells treated with agent Z. Z has been in clinical use for some time, although its mechanism of action is not known and it has substantial side effects. Presumably the authors’ go al is to determine that mechanism to reduce the side effects, but that is not stated in the paper. [Add the goal to your revised manuscript.]
Major points:
This paper is a mess. How the authors thought they could state that treatment with Z changed the levels of some genes but not name the genes absolutely escapes me! Haven’t these people ever read a microarray paper??? [The reviewer expected an article more like previously published ones. Try to model your article on those.] Unless the genes are named and shown to have a role in Y cancer, [Name the genes, and in the Discussion describe their possible or known roles in Y cancer. You probably have this information but may have left it out because you thought that the data were too preliminary or that the journal didn’t have the space to publish them.] , this paper is drivel. The English is barely understandable too. [This may be true, or it may simply reflect the reviewer’s disappointment in your omitting the names of the genes or his or her own incorrect grasp of English. Have your editor improve the language.] This is an excellent example of a carelessly written paper submitted too soon. There is no way I can recommend publication of this paper.
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software