You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 156 No. 2, February 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Commentary
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (3)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Journalology/ Peer Review/ Authorship
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Responding to Reviewers' Comments on Submitted Articles

Peter Cummings, MD, MPH; Frederick P. Rivara, MD, MPH

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2002;156:105-107.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Few authors receive any training in how to respond to the comments of editors and reviewers, although some advice on this topic has been published.1-3 In this article, we present our suggestions.

The letter from the editor generally comes in one of 4 flavors. First, a manuscript may be accepted without any changes. If this happens to you, count yourself lucky; such an editorial response is rare. In our experience, this has happened only once for each of us. Second, the manuscript may be accepted with suggestions for minor revisions. Again, count your blessings, quickly make the suggested changes (if you can), and return the revised manuscript; hopefully the paper will be accepted. Difficulties typically arise with the next 2 categories of response: outright rejection and provisional rejection with the opportunity to make major revisions.

DEALING WITH REJECTION

Getting a letter of outright rejection . . . [Full Text of this Article]


RESPONDING WHEN MAJOR REVISIONS ARE REQUESTED

CUTTING TEXT

THE ROLE OF REVIEWS
From the Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center (Drs Cummings and Rivara), the Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Community Medicine (Drs Cummings and Rivara), and the Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine (Dr Rivara), University of Washington, Seattle.



THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Dealing with reviewers' comments?
Millett
J. Orthod. 2006;33:69-70.
FULL TEXT  

Writing for Scientific Publication: Tips for Getting Started
Lin
CLIN PEDIATR 2006;45:295-300.
ABSTRACT  

Instructions for Authors
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2005;159:197-197.
FULL TEXT  

A New Editorial Team for Archives of Internal Medicine: The Choices We Make
Greenland
Arch Intern Med 2004;164:1480-1481.
FULL TEXT  

MANUSCRIPT CRITERIA AND INFORMATION
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2004;158:709-709.
FULL TEXT  

Editorial: A General Approach to Publication in the Journal of Pediatric Psychology: From the Process of Preparing Your Manuscript to Revisions and Resubmissions
Brown
J Pediatr Psychol 2004;29:1-5.
FULL TEXT  

MANUSCRIPT CRITERIA AND INFORMATION
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2004;158:92-92.
FULL TEXT  

MANUSCRIPT CRITERIA AND INFORMATION
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2003;157:832-832.
FULL TEXT  

MANUSCRIPT CRITERIA AND INFORMATION
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2003;157:308-308.
FULL TEXT  

MANUSCRIPT CRITERIA AND INFORMATION
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2003;157:212-212.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2002 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.