Nursing journals provide up-to-date research evidence and knowledge to enable registered nurses to practise effectively (Ali and Watson, 2016). Peer review is an essential element of quality assurance to ensure the publication is reliable and that methodological rigour is maintained (Shattell et al, 2010).
The peer review of a research article submitted to a journal is undertaken by experts in the topic (Polit and Beck, 2017). Crijns et al (2021) suggested that authors may not always take advantage of the feedback from peer review and may disregard it. However, feedback is intended to support the author to submit an article that allows dissemination of useful, accurate knowledge (Crijns et al, 2021).
I would like to share some tips on how to manage peer review feedback. This can be a time-consuming process, especially if the article requires major revision. However, the reward of having the article published is worth the time and effort required.
Read and discuss the feedback
The first point to consider is that unless the paper is rejected, the journal wants to publish the work. The feedback is aimed at enabling you to develop the article to the standard required by the journal. You need to pick the right time to read the feedback. This is because you need to time to process the feedback in an objective way. This will help you understand the points made. If you are busy or stressed you may regard the feedback in a negative way, rather than as a way to develop the article. It is advisable to read the feedback more than once. This can help you understand, more fully, the points made. Have the article submitted available when you read the feedback, so you can focus on each section the reviewer highlights. This can help you relate the feedback to what you have written. Many journals will ask two reviewers who provide feedback on the article and they may not comment on the same points.
The next step is to highlight the points made by both reviewers to ensure that you address all the areas identified in the feedback. The feedback may highlight mandatory and recommended amendments. You need to ensure you address all the mandatory ones. Creating a table with all the points highlighted and how you have responded is a useful way of ensuring you have addressed these.
The journal may also require you to submit a table of recommendations and changes made. You may need a separate table for each of the reviewers so do check whether this is necessary. Another option might be to submit the revisions with the changes made shown by highlighting these in a different colour. Alternatively, you may need to use the ‘track changes’ function in the Word document. Seeking guidance is advised if you are not familiar with this function.
I recommend you discuss the feedback and amendments with a trusted colleague or mentor. This provides an opportunity for you to discuss the feedback and seek guidance on how you can address the points made. Having someone who is not immersed in the research is helpful as they can provide you with objective and honest guidance. Remember that because you are immersed in the topic and the writing of the article you may not have clarified points or been specific in the way you presented the information.
Adhere to the journal's format
It is advisable to refer to the journal's Author Guidelines to ensure you conformed to the journal format for referencing requirements and table and figure annotations. The journal may require you to use a different format for referencing than one you are familiar with and accessing a referencing guide is advisable.
When you respond it is acceptable to challenge the feedback. However, you need to be able to justify this. The Author Guidelines can be useful if you do this. For example, a comment may be made relating to the use of ‘American English’ or ‘UK English’. If the Author Guidelines state either of these are acceptable, you can highlight this in your response. However, you will need to ensure you are consistent and do not switch between the two. Free grammar checking software tools can be useful in ensuring consistency.
Further research
You may need to undertake further reading and additional literature searches to develop the article, so be prepared to set time aside to do this. For example, the theoretical background and some elements of the discussion may need to be strengthened to highlight how the article adds to the existing body of knowledge. This will take time. There will be deadline for return of the revised paper. Some journals have a quick turnaround time for amendments to be submitted. However, it is acceptable to contact the editor to negotiate additional time if this is needed.
Don't give up
Finally, don't give up. You will develop your academic writing skills because of the feedback. The satisfaction of having your work published is worth the additional time and effort invested in the revisions required. Do also consider becoming a peer reviewer. This can support your development in writing for publication and increase your confidence.