AZRA RAZA, M.D.; HARVEY D. PREISLER, M.D.
To the editor: "These observations have already been made in the past, the paper presents no novel findings and contributes nothing to the scientific world, and therefore it should be rejected." Like ourselves, most physicians involved in academic medicine are all too familiar with this ambiguous and frequently unsubstantiated statement that often constitutes the sole critique of many a rejected manuscript.
Unfortunately, submitting a manuscript that represents years of hard labor for "fair" review is almost a fantastic thought in today's world of "publish or perish." Yet, most of us have had the frustrating experience of reading, in even the
Learn more about subscription options.
Register Now for a free account.
RAZA A, PREISLER HD. Peer Review. Ann Intern Med. 1985;103:470–471. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-103-3-470_2
Download citation file:
Published: Ann Intern Med. 1985;103(3):470-471.
Copyright © 2017 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.
Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704
Conditions of Use
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only