PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 20, 2025Medical Journal0 citations

Peer review and revieving in a scientific journal

View Full Paper
YAYu. K. Abayev

Key Points

  • Peer review serves as a critical mechanism for improving manuscript quality and scientific integrity.
  • Recommendations for writing a recension and common reviewer remarks are thoroughly discussed.
  • The review process aims to provide an objective assessment of scientific contributions.
  • Ethical considerations in peer review are essential to maintain fairness and integrity in scientific publishing.

Abstract

The article is devoted to reviewing manuscripts in the context of modern scientific communication. Attention is paid to the requirements for the reviewer, the process and types of review. Recommendations for writing a recension and the most common remarks of reviewer are given. Emphasis is placed on the ethics of peer review. The main conclusion: peer review is not punitive, but a helping, pursuing positional goals mechanism for improving the scientific level and quality of publications, a necessary and important component of an objective assessment of the activities of each scientist.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Yu. K. Abayev (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68d46aa631b076d99fa67412https://doi.org/10.51922/1818-426x.2025.2.5
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper