title: Improving your journal article using feedback from peer review.
abstract: While preparation of a journal article for submission may often include informal review by colleagues, an article is not accepted for publication until it has been formally peer reviewed. Peer review is the process whereby journal editors ask expert reviewers to examine the work submitted and prepare a report on its suitability for publication. Two or more revisions of the article may be required following peer review, with the author reworking the article in the light of feedback received on each occasion. This can be challenging for some authors, but used well, it offers a chance to improve the work to the required standard of the journal, and help the author present a more precise and coherent account of the arguments. The extent to which the author responds to the critical commentary of peer reviewers is important, because this may determine whether or not the article is published. This article explores the aims of peer reviewers and recommends ways in which authors can respond to the feedback provided.
authors.forename: Bob
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Price
mesh_terms: D001319:Authorship / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D007721:Knowledge of Results, Psychological; D015399:Nursing Research / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D010379:Peer Group; D018024:Peer Review, Health Care / Q000639:trends*; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D006113:United Kingdom
keywords: Journal articles; peer review; review process; writing for publication