HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Provenzale, J. M. Articles by Stanley, R. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Provenzale, J. M. Articles by Stanley, R. J.

A Systematic Guide to Reviewing a Manuscript^*

¹ Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC; and ² Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL

Correspondence: For correspondence or reprints contact: J. M. Provenzale (prove001{at}mc.duke.edu). Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE. In this article, we provide a step-by-step guide to reviewing a manuscript that we hope will improve the quality of reviews for the AJR. CONCLUSION. We have provided a detailed series of guidelines for providing excellent reviews of manuscripts. The template we have provided can be used to serve as a checklist for important questions to ask about manuscripts during the review process. Finally, the principles presented here also can be used as a guide for authors by providing a list of important features to include during manuscript preparation and thereby prospectively address questions that good reviewers are likely to ask.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. J. Benos, E. Bashari, J. M. Chaves, A. Gaggar, N. Kapoor, M. LaFrance, R. Mans, D. Mayhew, S. McGowan, A. Polter, et al. The ups and downs of peer review Advan Physiol Educ, June 1, 2007; 31(2): 145 - 152. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]