Navigating the Peer Review Process 11-11
states that publication is not guaranteed and that the manuscript may be rejected again.
Dear Dr. X:
Thank you for submitting your manuscript to [name of journal]. It has been reviewed, and we concur that the manuscript is unacceptable in its current form. We would, however, be willing to reconsider it after it has been revised in response to the reviewers’ comments, and we have enclosed the relevant reviewe rs’ comments. A revised manuscript would be thoroughly reviewed and could be rejected again. We are taking a particularly tough stance in our acceptance of papers, because of both the increasing number of manuscripts that are being submitted to the journal and our firm belief that we must publish manuscripts of only the highest priority. Your resubmission should be accompanied by a point-by- point response to the reviewer comments, as well as a copy of the revised manuscript on which you highlight the areas where revisions have been made. It is essential that authors consider and respond to the comments and recommendations. The updated Instructions to Contributors (which can also be found at [journal’s URL]) reflect guidelines and style from the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals and the American Medical Association Manual of Style , 9 th edition. Included in these Instructions are criteria for authorship. Any alteration of the byline after final acceptance of the manuscript can be expected to delay publication.
We appreciate your interest in [name of journal]. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact our editorial office.
Yours truly, Editor-in-Chief
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software