Department of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, United States.
Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2023 Oct 1;325(4):R309-R326. doi: 10.1152/ajpregu.00112.2023. Epub 2023 Jul 31.
In part 1 of this Perspective, I discussed general principles of scientific peer review in the biomedical sciences aimed at early-stage investigators (i.e., graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, and junior faculty). Here in part 2, I share my thoughts specifically on the topic of peer review of manuscripts. I begin by defining manuscript peer review and discussing the goals and importance of the concept. I then describe the organizational structure of the process, including the two distinct stages involved. Next, I emphasize several important considerations for manuscript reviewers, both general points and key considerations when evaluating specific types of papers, including original research manuscripts, reviews, methods articles, and opinion pieces. I then advance some practical suggestions for developing the written critique document, offer advice for making an overall recommendation to the editor (i.e., accept, revise, reject), and describe the unique issues involved when assessing a revised manuscript. Finally, I comment on how best to gain experience in the essential academic research skill of manuscript peer review. In part 3 of the series, I will discuss the topic of reviewing grant applications submitted to research funding agencies.
在这篇观点文章的第一部分，我讨论了生物医学科学中针对早期阶段研究人员（即研究生、博士后研究员和初级教员）的科学同行评审的一般原则。在这第二部分中，我特别分享了关于稿件同行评审的想法。我首先定义了稿件同行评审，并讨论了这一概念的目标和重要性。然后，我描述了该过程的组织结构，包括涉及的两个不同阶段。接下来，我强调了稿件评审员的几个重要考虑因素，包括一般性要点以及评估特定类型论文（包括原始研究手稿、综述、方法文章和观点文章）时的关键考虑因素。然后，我提出了一些关于编写书面评审文件的实用建议，为向编辑提出整体建议（即接受、修改、拒绝）提供了建议，并描述了评估修改后的稿件时涉及的独特问题。最后，我评论了在稿件同行评审这一重要学术研究技能方面获得经验的最佳方法。在该系列的第三部分，我将讨论评审提交给研究资助机构的资助申请的主题。
