Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 30, 2026

TMT Sample Preparation for Proteomics Facility Submission and Subsequent Data Analysis
Published on: June 8, 2020
Reviewing scientific manuscripts
M E J Curzon1, P E Cleaton-Jones
1Dept. of Paediatric Dentistry, Leeds Dental Institute, Leeds, England. curzongalphay@aol.com
Aim:
To provide guidance on reviewing scientific manuscripts for publication.
Review:
Scientific peer review is possibly one of the most important tasks a scientist is asked to do. It carries a great responsibility and needs to be conscientiously and thoroughly carried out. It is most important that a reviewer decides very quickly whether to undertake a review and if so to complete the task. It must at all times be objective, as positive as possible and seen as contributing to the advancement of our knowledge. This review provides suggestions as to best practice in reviewing a scientific manuscript in dentistry. The various aspects of importance: accepting or declining a review, objectivity, approaches to reading and taking notes, assessment of methods, validity and reproducibility of results and evaluating a discussion, are covered in detail and the standards that are required considered. Suggestions are made as to how a review should be reported.
Related Concept Videos
The Scientific Method
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
Proofreading
CRISPR
Feedback Inhibition
MicroRNAs
Mismatch Repair
