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

Legal Guidelines for Documentation

Legal Guidelines for Documentation

The legal guidelines for nursing documentation are essential for ensuring accurate, professional, and ethical recording of patient care. The guidelines are discussed here:

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!

Ethics in Research

Ethics in Research

Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.

Guidelines for Writing Outcome

Guidelines for Writing Outcome

When developing expected outcomes for a patient care plan, the nurse should adhere to the following recommendations:
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

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.

Guidelines for Nursing Documentation I

Guidelines for Nursing Documentation I

Quality documentation and reporting share essential characteristics that ensure they are practical and valuable resources for those who use them. These characteristics are:
Factual:
The following points emphasize the significance of upholding accurate and unbiased documentation in healthcare.

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Application of Artificial Intelligence for Predicting Sports Injuries and Customizing Personalized Prevention Strategies: A Scoping Review.

Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)·2026

Same author

Phytotherapy in Sports Performance and Recovery: A Bibliometric Mapping of Research Themes and Trends.

Sports (Basel, Switzerland)·2026

Same author

Toward Precision Cardiac Rehabilitation: Current Limitations and Future Opportunities of Omics and Artificial Intelligence.

Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)·2026

Same author

Sleep under fire: towards a tripartite circadian-neuroendocrine framework for conflict-zone athletes.

British journal of sports medicine·2026

Same author

Fitness under fire: a sports and exercise medicine framework to maintain fitness in the context of modern global conflict, enforced confinement and possible radiation exposure.

British journal of sports medicine·2026

Same author

Directional Asymmetry of Crossover Neuromuscular Fatigue Following Unilateral Handgrip Exercise in Adults and Prepubertal Children.

Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)·2026

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 13, 2025

Scanning Skeletal Remains for Bone Mineral Density in Forensic Contexts

Scanning Skeletal Remains for Bone Mineral Density in Forensic Contexts

Published on: January 29, 2018

Key Guidelines for Responding to Reviewers.

Saida Hidouri¹, Hela Kamoun², Sana Salah³

¹Department of Pediatric surgery, Zaghouan Hospital, Research Laboratory LR12SP13, University of Monastir Faculty de Medicine of Monastir, Monastir, Monastir, Tunisia.

|September 9, 2024

Summary

Authors can improve manuscript acceptance by viewing peer review as constructive feedback and systematically addressing reviewer comments. Crafting a detailed response to reviews enhances collaboration and scholarly advancement.

Keywords:

Academic publishing Manuscript evaluation Manuscript review process Peer assessment Peer review Research quality Review Reviewer comments Revision guidelines manuscript assessment

More Related Videos

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

A Metadata Extraction Approach for Clinical Case Reports to Enable Advanced Understanding of Biomedical Concepts

A Metadata Extraction Approach for Clinical Case Reports to Enable Advanced Understanding of Biomedical Concepts

Published on: September 20, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 13, 2025

Scanning Skeletal Remains for Bone Mineral Density in Forensic Contexts

Scanning Skeletal Remains for Bone Mineral Density in Forensic Contexts

Published on: January 29, 2018

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

A Metadata Extraction Approach for Clinical Case Reports to Enable Advanced Understanding of Biomedical Concepts

A Metadata Extraction Approach for Clinical Case Reports to Enable Advanced Understanding of Biomedical Concepts

Published on: September 20, 2018

Area of Science:

Scientific publishing
Scholarly communication

Background:

Manuscript preparation involves multiple stages, with peer review being critical for quality assessment.
Effective collaboration between authors, reviewers, and editors is essential during the peer review process (PRP).
Authors should view reviewer feedback as an opportunity for manuscript improvement rather than criticism.

Purpose of the Study:

To provide authors with strategies for effective engagement in the PRP.
To enhance publication acceptance rates through improved manuscript revision.

Main Methods:

This article presents an opinion on best practices for navigating the peer review process.
Strategies include understanding and prioritizing feedback, maintaining professionalism, and systematically addressing comments.

Main Results:

A well-structured "response to reviews" significantly increases manuscript acceptance likelihood.
Key practices include expressing gratitude, prioritizing major revisions, and adhering to journal guidelines.
Thoroughly documenting changes and conducting a final review are crucial for successful revisions.

Conclusions:

Following recommended guidelines improves manuscript quality and author-reviewer relationships.
Effective engagement with peer review contributes to overall scholarly advancement.