Skip to main content
Health E-Learning and Media Team

Academic Writing for Publication

Menu
70% Complete

9. Feedback, revisions, rejections and acceptance

Please remember that the publication process can be lengthy and sometimes frustrating. What is important for you to do, is to persevere and don't give up.

Feedback is important:

Look at any comments on your manuscript by peer reviewers, and consider them carefully. The peer review process should support you in ensuring your manuscript is going to be well-received when published in the journal you choose. Peer reviewers are typically experts (colleagues) in a similar area to yourself, who read a submission and give their thoughts on your manuscript, helping the editor to make a decision to publish, or not. These opinions should support you to ensure your manuscript is the best it can be, but it does not always feel like that.

Add any take-home messages to your notes.

Please see the checklist with suggestions on what to do after receiving:

A request for revision

  • Agree amongst co-authors who will rewrite which sections (including any new analyses)
  • Read Guide for authors and identify all content innovation supported by the journal. Include appropriate information in relevant formatting to enhance the content of your article if accepted.
  • Polish the language on revised paper
  • Write a ‘point by point’ response to the referees’ comments
  • Add a polite, convincing, rebuttal if need be and circulate the response to reviews and revised manuscript to research team for review
  • Ensure all co-authors agree with final submitted revision
  • Resubmit manuscript

A rejection

  • Get angry for short while
  • Revise paper following referees suggestions (may need additional analyses)
  • Rewrite/rearrange to match the Guide for Authors of second journal on list
  • Polish the language of revised manuscript and circulate out to research team for review
  • Write different covering letter to editor with different focus
  • Ensure all co-authors agree with final version
  • Submit manuscript [again]
OR

consider this recent humorous reaction posted on Twitter by a very senior colleague.

"Oh hello, manuscript I submitted months ago. Nice to have you back. Did you enjoy your time with Reviewer 2? Oh dear. Did they really? Oh yes, I can see the red marks. So deep. Come into my arms, my darling paper. There there. R2 can't hurt you any more. We'll go somewhere else."

OR

go with the suggestion of one of our contributors.

"We have all been rejected at some point or other, but often the rejection is accompanied by reasons as to why your application was not successful. I find that this feedback is so important! I always use it to improve what I have written and try to apply this feedback to all my writing (and applications), not only the application that was rejected."

An Acceptance

    Once accepted:
  • If journal allows, make short slide show/talk to ‘embed’ in your article online
  • Carefully check author proofs and approve or send corrections if needed
  • When article published use social media to spread the DOI of article
  • Promote publication and document achievement/publication. E.g. Update author’s online list of publications, ORCID, and CV with paper’s metadata ... and celebrate your success.

Add any take-home messages to your notes.


 
Document Top