Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 18, 2025

Ole Isacson: Development of New Therapies for Parkinson's Disease
Published on: April 29, 2007
Do's and Don'ts for a Good Reviewer of Scientific Papers: A Beginner's Brief Decalogue
Miltos K Lazarides1, George S Georgiadis1, Nikolaos Papanas1
1Democritus University Medical School, Alexandroupolis, Greece.
Abstract:
Peer review has been the principal way of evaluating scientific articles, ensuring that publications meet standards of methodology, integrity, and ethics. Occasionally, however, reviews are suboptimal, especially those by inexperienced reviewers. Therefore, this article offers suggestions on how to review a scientific article. Some of the most important suggestions include submitting the review in a timely fashion without undue delay, not breeching confidentiality, focusing mainly on the methodology, following specific format, and avoiding embarrassing comments to the authors.
Related Concept Videos
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
The Scientific Method
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
The Scientific Method
Scientific Nature of Social Psychology
Proofreading
Review and Preview

