• Peer review is the critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to journals by experts who are usually not part of the editorial staff. • “The investigator’s final manuscript of a peer-reviewed article accepted for journal publication, including all modifications from the peer review process.” Reference : https://pubrica.com/services/publication-support/peer-review-pre-submission/ Continue Reading : http://bit.ly/3bg2YwA Why Pubrica? When you order our services, Plagiarism free|onTime|outstanding customer support|Unlimited Revisions support|High-quality Subject Matter Experts. Contact us : Web: https://pubrica.com/ Blog: https://pubrica.com/academy/ Email: sales@pubrica.com WhatsApp : +91 9884350006 United Kingdom: +44- 74248 10299

1. Copyright © 2020 pubrica. All rights reserved 1
What is Peer-Review of a Manuscript. List Out the Benefits of Peer-
Reviewing a Manuscript
Dr. Nancy Agnes, Head,
Technical Operations, Pubrica
sales@pubrica.com
In-Brief
Peer review is the critical assessment of
manuscripts submitted to journals by
experts who are usually not part of the
editorial staff. “The investigator’s final
manuscript of a peer-reviewed article
accepted for journal publication, including
all modifications from the peer review
process.”
Keywords:
Peer review services:
Medical manuscript peer reviewing
services, pre peer review, peer review
service, pre-submission peer review, peer
review report, and medical peer review
services, peer-reviewed articles, peer-
reviewed publication,
I. INTRODUCTION
Peer review can be described as a process in
which a person reads, checks and gives his
or her opinion on a piece of work written by
another scientist or expert working in the
same field. Generally speaking, two forms
of peer review can be distinguished: „in-
class peer review‟ for undergraduate
students and academic peer review‟ for
research scholars.
During an in-class peer review,
undergraduate students read articles written
by fellow classmates and offer input on their
work as part of the teaching aspects of the
program. Academic peer review (hereafter
“peers review”) is, on the contrary, a more
complicated process.
Peer review is a central aspect of academic
study. In general, the scientific publication
process consists of three main participants:
Authors were submitting a manuscript
outlining their findings, editors determining
whether the paper will be offered for peer
review and eventually accepted for
publication, and peer reviewers performing
evaluations that will allow the editor to
make a better-informed decision on
suitability. These reviewers play an
understated yet crucial role in the process,
utilizing their capability to constructively
critique a piece of work for the benefit of the
broader scientific community.
II. MANUSCRIPT SHOULD ALSO
INCLUDE
 Figures, charts, tables and images
 Supplemental materials associated
with the work
 Title page
 Names and affiliations of the authors
 The corresponding author‟s name
and email address
 Grant award acknowledgements

2. Copyright © 2020 pubrica. All rights reserved 2
III. METHODOLOGY
To gain insight into the attitudes towards the
participation of ecrs in peer review, we have
distributed a survey to academics in ten
countries across the globe. The survey
covered numerous aspects of the peer review
process, including how many peer-review
invites are commonly accepted by
academics, if they included ecrs
(postgraduate researchers only in their
evaluations, and if so, what was their
motivation to involve ecrs. We requested
that academics determine the effect of peer
review on the essential skills of their
students based on their previous experience.
Besides, a separate survey was distributed to
the ecrs (student survey) to assess their
attitudes towards peer review participation.
Complete details of survey questions for
both the academic and the ecr surveys can
be found in the supplementary materials
section. For the survey, terminology
graduate students (pgrs) is used instead of
ecrs (supplementary materials). It was to be
differentiated explicitly from undergraduate
researchers who were not the subject of our
study.
IV. BENEFITS OF PEER-REVIEWING A
MANUSCRIPT
Corrects vague terms
While i use an online thesaurus every time i
write to find the right word to describe a
concept, in some cases, some words seem to
be incorrect or vague. Having input from
peers lets me determine whether i have to
adhere to my terms or consider what they
say. I do not hesitate to alter the words in
question if the idea sounds fine.
Provides feedback as to the effectiveness
of your communication
Oh, it is. If grasped the points you advanced
in your manuscript, you can readily see from
the reactions of your peer group. Suppose
that after a page has been displayed to
provide their input, it takes them a little
longer than expected, which will possibly
mean that something is wrong with the flow
of thinking or conversation. Questions for
clarity will most likely come next. And yes,
they have.
Prevents you from committing serious
blunders in your arguments
You may have made points that may be
based on incorrect assumptions. Once the
beliefs are false, then everything you‟ve
published is wrong. This result observes the
laws of logic. If the premises are defective,
so it is unreliable with anything that goes
beyond it.
Facilitates concise writing
More than what is required, you might have
written. The elimination here and there of
needless paragraphs or phrases gives rise to
a short, adequately written manuscript.
Some people are fond of focusing on
spelling and grammatical mistakes. While
attention should be given to the substance or

3. Copyright © 2020 pubrica. All rights reserved 2
claims of your research paper, your
grammar matters a lot. As the reading flow
is made more efficient, good grammar
encourages reading.
Allows you to expound on your points
Perhaps you felt you had written sufficiently
to clarify the matter at hand. Then you know
that you have brought your peers halfway to
the expected ideas you want to project. This
situation requires clarification on the
questions you have raised to understand and
illustrate concepts.
Encourages you to perform better next
time
The next time you are on the watch for the
possible comments, suggestions, or criticism
of your book, if the peer review exercise has
shown you any positive feedback. When you
add all the terms and recommendations of
colleagues, you will then compose better
than ever. Thus in your previous article, you
stop making the same errors. There are
tremendous advantages to peer-review.
V. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the method of peer-review is
collegial at its best, not adversarial. Finally,
when guided by attentive, detailed,
insightful reviews, and they have the
privilege of seeing papers and journal
reputations improve as part of the process,
editors gain trust in their decisions to accept
an article.
REFERENCES
1. Wiley rano survey, principles of peer review, wiley
author services,
2013, https://authorservices.wiley.com/asset/principl
es_of_peer_review.pdf.
2. M. N. Ovando, “constructive feedback: a key to
successful teaching and learning,” international
journal of educational management, vol. 8, no. 6, pp.
19–22, 1994.view at publisher site | google scholar.
3. https://beckerguides.wustl.edu/nihpolicy.