For researchers: Manuscript-Centric Peer Review
A clearer way to navigate peer review
Manuscript-Centric Peer Review is a new platform designed to make peer review clearer, more collaborative, and easier to navigate.
Instead of managing feedback across multiple files, reviewer reports, and discussion threads, researchers can engage with comments and discussions through a shared manuscript workspace.
The peer review process, editorial standards, and publication criteria remain the same. The platform simply provides a more intuitive way to review feedback, respond to comments, and improve your manuscript.
Part of a broader platform rebuild
The platform is one of the first improvements being introduced as part of an ongoing effort to improve publishing workflows for researchers, reviewers, and editors.
Rather than making one large change all at once, improvements are being introduced in stages. This approach allows us to learn from real user experiences, make iterative improvements, and continue supporting a rigorous and constructive peer review process throughout the transition.
Traditional peer review often requires researchers to switch between multiple documents, reviewer reports, response files, and discussion threads.
The platform brings feedback, discussions, and revisions together in a shared workspace, helping participants:
understand feedback in context
reduce confusion between document versions
keep discussions linked to the relevant text
follow the progress of revisions more easily
collaborate more effectively with reviewers and editors
The goal is to help researchers spend less time managing review logistics and more time strengthening their research.
The platform keeps comments, discussions, and revisions connected to the text being reviewed.
Depending on the stage of review and your journal’s workflow, you may be able to view and manage feedback within the manuscript workspace.
Within the platform, you can:
view reviewer comments alongside your manuscript
follow discussions linked to specific sections of text
see exactly what reviewers are referring to
collaborate with reviewers and editors in a shared workspace
keep feedback and revisions connected in one place
By keeping discussions tied to the manuscript, feedback becomes easier to understand, track, and address.
If options to reply, upload revisions, or take other actions are not available when expected, contact your journal’s Editorial Office for support.
What stays the same?
While the platform looks different, the foundations of peer review remain unchanged.
You will continue to:
receive feedback from expert reviewers
revise your manuscript in response to comments
work with editors throughout the review process
meet the same publication and ethical requirements
receive editorial decisions based on the quality and rigor of the research
During rollout, you may encounter both the existing review platform and the new manuscript workspace. Depending on your journal, manuscript, or stage of review, some activities may take place in different environments while improvements continue to be introduced.
Regardless of where you access feedback or complete review tasks, the peer review process, editorial oversight, and publication criteria remain the same.
The platform changes how feedback is presented and discussed, not how publication decisions are made.
The platform is currently being introduced in phases.
As we continue to improve it, you may occasionally encounter features that behave unexpectedly or instructions that do not match what you see on screen.
If you cannot view comments, respond to feedback, or submit a revised manuscript, please contact your journal’s Editorial Office. Your manuscript record remains safe, and the Editorial Office can help you continue the review process.
1. Review feedback in context
When reviewer feedback becomes available, you’ll be able to view comments alongside your manuscript.
Because comments are linked to specific sections of text, it’s easier to understand what reviewers are referring to and why changes have been requested.
You can:
review comments in context
identify areas requiring revision
follow discussions linked to specific passages
view feedback from reviewers and editors in one place
If reviewer comments do not appear, contact your journal’s Editorial Office for support.
2. Work through reviewer feedback
As part of the review process, you’ll be asked to address reviewer comments and respond to feedback.
Depending on your journal’s workflow and the stage of review, feedback and responses may be managed through the manuscript workspace or with guidance from the Editorial Office.
This allows you to:
answer reviewer questions
explain revisions
provide clarification where needed
discuss specific points raised during review
If response options are unavailable, contact your journal’s Editorial Office for assistance.
3. Revise and resubmit your manuscript
As you address reviewer feedback, you’ll prepare and submit a revised version of your manuscript.
Depending on your journal’s requirements, this may include:
a revised manuscript
a response to reviewers
tracked changes or supporting files
Keeping discussions connected to the manuscript can make it easier to track which issues have been resolved and which may require further attention.
If the option to submit revised files is unavailable or you encounter an error, contact your journal’s Editorial Office for support.
4. Continue the conversation
Peer review is often an iterative process.
If additional clarification is needed, reviewers and editors can continue discussions throughout the review process, helping everyone stay aligned on the changes being made.
This collaborative approach supports constructive scientific dialogue and helps ensure feedback is fully addressed.
5. Track progress toward a decision
Throughout the review process, feedback, responses, and discussions are brought together in one place.
This makes it easier to follow the progress of your manuscript and understand what is needed at each stage of review.
Once the review process is complete, the editor will make a final decision based on reviewer recommendations, manuscript revisions, and editorial assessment.
Making the most of peer review
Review feedback carefully
Take time to understand reviewer comments before preparing your responses. Feedback is intended to strengthen the quality and communication of your research.
Be specific in your responses
When responding to comments, explain clearly what changes have been made or provide a rationale when changes are not possible.
Keep discussions constructive
Professional, respectful communication helps reviewers and editors understand your perspective and supports productive dialogue.
Focus on improving your manuscript
Peer review is an opportunity to strengthen your research and make your findings clearer for readers.
The platform will continue to evolve as we learn from researchers, reviewers, and editors.
Feedback gathered during rollout helps shape future improvements and ensures the platform supports the needs of the research community.
Have you recently used the platform during peer review? We’d love to hear about your experience.
Complete our short survey to share your feedback and help us improve the platform for researchers across the research community.
[Take the feedback survey]
Is the peer review process changing?
No. The peer review process, editorial standards, and publication criteria remain the same. The platform changes how feedback is presented and discussed, not how publication decisions are made.
Why is the platform being introduced?
The platform is designed to make peer review clearer, more collaborative, and easier to navigate by keeping feedback, discussions, and revisions connected to the manuscript.
Can I respond to reviewer comments?
Depending on your journal’s workflow and the stage of review, responses may be managed through the manuscript workspace or with support from the Editorial Office.
Can I see where feedback applies in the manuscript?
Yes. Comments are linked to specific sections of text, helping you understand feedback in context.
Will I still need to revise my manuscript?
Yes. Researchers continue to revise manuscripts and respond to reviewer and editor feedback as part of the peer review process.
What should I do if I can’t see reviewer comments?
If reviewer comments do not appear, contact your journal’s Editorial Office. They can help verify the status of your manuscript and provide guidance on the next steps.
What should I do if I can’t respond to comments or submit my revision?
If response or resubmission options are unavailable, contact your journal’s Editorial Office. The team can help ensure your review continues without delay.
How can I provide feedback?
You can share your experience through the feedback survey. Feedback from researchers helps guide future improvements and development.
What if I need help?
If you have questions about the review process or encounter technical issues, contact your journal’s Editorial Office or support team for assistance.