Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Review and Preview

Review and Preview

Data are individual items of information obtained from a population or sample. Data may be classified as qualitative (categorical), quantitative continuous, or quantitative discrete. Because it is not practical to measure the entire population in a study, researchers use samples to represent the population. A random sample is a representative group from the population chosen by using a method that gives each individual in the population an equal chance of being included in the sample. Random...

Review and Preview

Review and Preview

In statistics, several tools are used to interpret the data. Measures of central tendency represent the characteristics of the data, such as mean, median, and mode. Additionally, measures of variance like standard deviation and range are used to find the spread of data from the mean. Relative standing measures the distance between data locations. Commonly used measures of relative standings are percentile, z score, and quartiles.
Percentiles are a type of fractile that partition data into...

Feedback Loops

Feedback Loops

In most cases, excessive hormone production is prevented by negative feedback—a loop that starts with a stimulus inducing the release of a particular substance, like a hormone, to maintain a certain level before triggering a signal that results in a decrease in further release of the hormone.

Feedback Inhibition

Feedback Inhibition

Biochemical reactions are occurring constantly in cells, converting starting substances to different products, usually with the help of enzymes that speed the reactions. Without enzymes, it would take far too long for most reactions to occur to be useful to the cell!

Proofreading

Proofreading

Proofreading

Proofreading

Synthesis of new DNA molecules is carried out by the enzyme DNA polymerase, which adds nucleotides on the daughter strand complementary to the template DNA strand. DNA polymerase has a higher affinity to add the correct base and ensures fidelity during DNA replication. Furthermore, it exhibits proofreading activity during replication, using an exonuclease domain that cuts off incorrect nucleotides from the nascent DNA strand.
Errors During Replication are Corrected by the DNA Polymerase...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

National Trends in the Use of Palliative Therapy in Stage IV Rectal Cancer in the United States.

Journal of surgical oncology·2026

Same author

Survival Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation in Rectosigmoid Junction Adenocarcinoma: SEER Analysis.

The Journal of surgical research·2026

Same author

Short-term surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Surgical endoscopy·2026

Same author

Predictors of a Long Hospital Stay After Abdominoperineal Resection of Rectal Cancer: Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

The American surgeon·2026

Same author

Survival predictors in early onset stage IV colorectal mucinous adenocarcinoma: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-based analysis.

Surgery·2026

Same author

Characteristics, Treatments, and Outcomes of Early-Onset Appendiceal Cancer: NCDB Analysis.

Journal of gastrointestinal cancer·2026

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 16, 2025

Interactive and Visualized Online Experimentation System for Engineering Education and Research

Interactive and Visualized Online Experimentation System for Engineering Education and Research

Published on: November 24, 2021

Interactive platform for peer review: A proposal to improve the current peer review system.

Sameh Hany Emile¹

¹General Surgery Department, Mansoura University Hospitals, Mansoura University, Mansoura 35516, Egypt. dr_sameh81@mans.edu.eg.

World Journal of Clinical Cases

|March 1, 2021

Summary

This study introduces an interactive platform to enhance scientific peer review. It enables anonymous, real-time communication between authors and reviewers, aiming to improve clarity and efficiency in scholarly publishing.

Keywords:

Improve Interactive Peer Proposal Review System

More Related Videos

Establishing an Octopus Ecosystem for Biomedical and Bioengineering Research

Establishing an Octopus Ecosystem for Biomedical and Bioengineering Research

Published on: September 22, 2021

An Experimental Platform to Study the Closed-loop Performance of Brain-machine Interfaces

An Experimental Platform to Study the Closed-loop Performance of Brain-machine Interfaces

Published on: March 10, 2011

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 16, 2025

Interactive and Visualized Online Experimentation System for Engineering Education and Research

Interactive and Visualized Online Experimentation System for Engineering Education and Research

Published on: November 24, 2021

Establishing an Octopus Ecosystem for Biomedical and Bioengineering Research

Establishing an Octopus Ecosystem for Biomedical and Bioengineering Research

Published on: September 22, 2021

An Experimental Platform to Study the Closed-loop Performance of Brain-machine Interfaces

An Experimental Platform to Study the Closed-loop Performance of Brain-machine Interfaces

Published on: March 10, 2011

Area of Science:

Scholarly Communication
Scientific Publishing
Research Integrity

Background:

Peer review is critical for scientific publication quality.
Current peer review systems have notable limitations.
Misinterpretation of comments can hinder the process.

Discussion:

Proposes an interactive, dynamic platform for scientific peer review.
Facilitates direct, anonymous interaction between authors and reviewers.
Addresses issues of misunderstanding and misinterpretation in feedback.

Key Insights:

Real-time interaction can resolve ambiguities in reviewer comments.
Anonymity is maintained for both authors and reviewers.
The proposed system aims to increase efficiency in the publication process.

Outlook:

Potential to significantly improve the scientific peer review process.
Could lead to faster and more accurate scientific publications.
Further development may enhance research integrity and collaboration.