Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

A systematic guide to reviewing a manuscript.

James M Provenzale1, Robert J Stanley

  • 1Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3808, Durham, NC 27710, USA. prove001@mc.duke.edu

AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology
|September 24, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Stark absorption spectroscopy of flavin mononucleotide and derivatives of pyrene, xanthene, phenoxazine, and thienotetracene.

Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP·2026
Same author

Retrospective Cohort Study: Five-Thread Guideline for Predicting Dental Implant Stability in Fresh Extraction Sites.

The Journal of oral implantology·2025
Same author

Time-resolved THz Stark spectroscopy of molecules in solution.

Nature communications·2024
Same author

Severe CNS involvement in a subset of long-term treated children with infantile-onset Pompe disease.

Molecular genetics and metabolism·2024
Same author

The Discussion section: An important means to convince reviewers and editors of the worth of a scientific manuscript.

Clinical imaging·2023
Same author

Screening for Novel Fluorescent Nucleobase Analogues Using Computational and Experimental Methods: 2-Amino-6-chloro-8-vinylpurine (2A6Cl8VP) as a Case Study.

The journal of physical chemistry. B·2023

This guide offers a step-by-step process for manuscript review to enhance the quality of peer reviews. It includes a checklist for reviewers and a guide for authors to improve manuscript preparation.

Area of Science:

  • Scientific Publishing
  • Peer Review Process
  • Manuscript Quality

Background:

  • Manuscript review is crucial for scientific integrity.
  • Improving the quality of peer reviews benefits scientific journals.
  • Authors need guidance on manuscript preparation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide a comprehensive guide for manuscript review.
  • To enhance the quality of reviews submitted to the AJR.
  • To offer a checklist for effective manuscript evaluation.

Main Methods:

  • A detailed, step-by-step guide for reviewers.
  • A template checklist for manuscript review.
  • Guidelines for authors on manuscript preparation.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Improved quality of peer reviews.
  • A structured approach to manuscript evaluation.
  • Enhanced manuscript preparation by authors.

Conclusions:

  • A detailed guideline and template for manuscript review are provided.
  • The guidelines serve as a checklist for reviewers.
  • The principles assist authors in manuscript preparation to address reviewer expectations.