scientific publishing in biomedicine: revising a peer-reviewed manuscript

Getting feedback from the journals’ editorial office upon the peer-review process, revising the manuscript, and responding to reviewers’ comments are the essential parts of scientific publishing. the process of revising seems cumbersome and time-consuming as authors must be engaged probably with many comments and requested changes. authors are advised to approach the reviewer as a consultant rather than an adversary. they should carefully read and understand comments and then decide how to proceed with each requested change/suggestion. in the case of serious disagreement with reviewer comments or misunderstanding, authors can defer the issue to the editor. preparing a scientific and well-organized response to reviews and the revised version of the manuscript can increase the chance of acceptance. here, we provide a practical guide on dealing with different types of comments (i.e., minor or major revisions, conflicting comments, or those that authors disagree with or cannot adhere to) and how to craft a response to reviews. we also provide the dos and don’ts for making a successful revision