Addressing Reviewer Comments Recap: Key Takeaways and Additional Resources
So far this week, we’ve
shared tips for addressing reviewer comments that have come from the
literature, longtime Academic
Medicine authors, editorial board members, and the editorial staff.
If you missed any of these, you can find them here.
Today, we’d like to
close the series by highlighting some key takeaways from the advice and tips
we’ve shared this week and sharing some additional resources for authors.
Key
Takeaways
1. Getting a revise decision is good news! The reviewers and
editors believe in your paper.
2. Acknowledge and thank the reviewers for their efforts.
3. When working with co-authors, send everyone the reviews
immediately. Divide questions among the team and use track changes to ensure
version control.
4. Use a table to systematically respond to review comments and
explain any corresponding edits. (See below for an example and blank table.)
5. You can disagree with a reviewer, but make sure you’ve
considered their viewpoint and respectfully explain (and reference) your
reasons to the editor in your response table.
6. Be open to adding to your limitations section.
7. Write to the editor
or journal staff if you have questions or need clarification about a comment or
how to reconcile or prioritize different suggestions.
Additional Resources
We also encourage you to check out the
following resources for addressing reviewer comments. All are available to
access and download for free.
This example explanatio...
Source: Academic Medicine Blog - Category: Universities & Medical Training Authors: Journal Staff Tags: Addressing Reviewer Comments Series Archive Featured author resources peer review scholarship writing series Source Type: blogs