Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 12, 2025

Scanning Skeletal Remains for Bone Mineral Density in Forensic Contexts
Published on: January 29, 2018
Surviving peer review
1Department of Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract:
The process of publishing original work in a peer review journal is not complete at the point where the manuscript is first submitted. The journal editors will submit the manuscript to peer review whereby outside experts are asked to vet the manuscript for scientific merit, originality and quality. Reviewers' comments are meant to help authors strengthen their manuscripts for potential publication. Authors benefit from this feedback and should approach the reviewers as volunteer consultants rather than as critics. Authors should respond to all reviewers' comments, completely and politely addressing the points raised. This article is meant to assist junior or inexperienced authors to understand the process of peer review and to function effectively within the process in order to succeed in having their manuscripts published.
Related Concept Videos
Proofreading
Proofreading
Errors During Replication are Corrected by the DNA Polymerase...
Review and Preview
Review and Preview
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...
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...
Feedback Loops

