Empirical research | Original research article | Journal article (1)

1
What are the suggestions given by peer reviewers
in the introduction section of the original
research article?
An Academic presentation by Dr. Nancy Agnes,
Head, Technical Operations, Pubrica Group 
www.pubrica.com Email sales_at_pubrica.com
2

• A paper's success in publishing is determined by
  several factors. First, the editor/subeditor
  checks the paper for completeness, adherence to
  the journal's style, and compliance with
  institutional ethics.
• The original research article is then circulated
  through the editorial board for an internal
  review of relevance, ethics, and methodology.
• The board members may reject the manuscript if it
  is unsuitable for the journal's readership or has
  significant ethical or methodological flaws.
  After passing the internal review process, the
  manuscript is sent for an external review by peer
  reviewers.

3
Introduction Section Review Suggestions
The introduction section of the research article
shows promise, but there are some suggestions to
enhance its impact.

• Firstly, consider framing the research problem
  more explicitly and engagingly, outlining its
  relevance from the outset.
• Secondly, provide a concise overview of the
  field's current state to contextualize the
  research objectives. Adding recent key references
  could support this.
• Thirdly, ensure a clear and gradual buildup to
  the research gap, highlighting its significance
  in addressing existing limitations.
• Lastly, streamline the articulation of
  qualitative and quantitative research questions
  to reflect their specific contribution. These
  suggestions aim to bolster the introduction's
  clarity, setting a strong foundation for the
  study and captivating readers' interest from the
  outset.

4
Some suggestions that a peer reviewer may provide
for the introduction section of a manuscript
include
1.Providing a clear and concise background The
peer reviewer may suggest adding more context to
the introduction to help readers understand the
research question and its importance. For
example, the reviewer may suggest providing a
more detailed description of the problem the
research aims to address. 2.Identifying the
research gap The reviewer may suggest that the
author identify the literature gap and explain
how their research will address it. For example,
the reviewer may suggest that the author provide
more context on why the research is needed and
how it will contribute to the field.
5
3.Clarifying the research question and
objectives The peer reviewer may suggest that
the author provide a clearer and more concise
research question and objectives directly related
to the research gap identified in the
literature. 4.Providing a clear outline The
reviewer may suggest that the author provide a
clear and concise outline of the manuscript's
structure, including what will be covered in each
section.
6
(No Transcript)
7
EXAMPLE

• A peer reviewer may comment, such as, "The
  introduction provides a good overview of the
  research topic but could benefit from more
  detailed background information to help readers
  understand the study context.
• Additionally, the research gap could be more
  clearly identified and linked to the research
  question and objectives.
• Finally, the author may want to consider
  providing a clearer outline of the manuscript
  structure to help readers navigate the paper more
  easily."
• Check out our sample Original research article
  examples to see how the original research article
  samples structured.

8
Recent concepts

• Some journals have begun utilizing a
  "postpublication" approach, in which the
  peer-reviewed and accepted article is uploaded on
  the internet before the paper's publication
  readers may then leave comments on the document,
  which can be published alongside the reader's
  remarks.
• The "light touch peer review" strategy, which
  focuses on the process, has become popular in
  many open-access journals.
• Useful guidance on ethics of publication and peer
  review is available on the COPE (Committee on
  Publication Ethics) website (https//publicationet
  hics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-gui
  delines-peer-reviewers), and authors, reviewers,
  and editors need to be acquainted with these.

9
ABOUT PUBRICA

• Pubrica Has Professional Experience In Medical
  Writing.
• Further The Team Of Medical Professionals From
  Pubrica, Offer Unique Medical Writing Services
  Includes Clinical Research, Pharmacology, Public
  Health, Regulatory Writing, Clinical Report Forms
  (Crf), Biostatistics, Psychology, Life Science,
  Dentistry, Radiology, Dermatology, Diabetology,
  Gynecology, Cardiology, Biochemistry, Forensics,
  Surgery, Neurology, Psychiatry, Genomics, Medical
  Device, Pharmaceutical, Nutraceutical, Fmcg
  Companies, Hospitals, Universities, Publishers,
  PhD, Students Pursuing Medicine, Physicians,
  Doctors, Authors And Provide Support In Writing
  Any Medical Stream Paper.

10
Contact Us
UNITED KINGDOM
44 1618186353
INDIA
91-9884350006
EMAIL
sales_at_pubrica.com