For Reviewers: A clearer way to navigate peer review

We're introducing a new manuscript-centered review experience that brings reviewer feedback, discussions, and revisions together in a shared manuscript workspace.

Rather than switching between multiple files, reports, and discussion threads, you'll be able to review comments in context, collaborate through manuscript-linked discussions, and follow the progress of the review more easily.

The rigor of peer review, editorial standards, and publication criteria remain the same. The manuscript workspace simply provides a clearer way to navigate the process.

Traditional peer review often means switching between multiple documents, reviewer reports, and response files.

The manuscript workspace brings everything together in one place, helping you:

• understand feedback in context

• keep discussions linked to the relevant text

• follow revisions more easily

• collaborate more effectively with reviewers and editors

• focus on improving your research

As part of our wider publishing platform rebuild, the manuscript workspace is being introduced in phases so we can continue improving it through user feedback.

Comments, discussions, and revisions remain connected to the manuscript, making it easier to understand reviewer feedback and keep track of changes.

Depending on your journal and the stage of review, you'll be able to:

• view reviewer comments alongside your manuscript

• respond to feedback in context

• follow discussions linked to specific passages

• keep revisions and discussions together

If options to reply, upload revisions, or take other actions aren't available, contact your journal's editorial office for support.

What stays the same?

While the workspace looks different, the peer review process remains the same.

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 your research

During rollout, you may move between the existing review system and the manuscript workspace depending on your journal and the stage of review.

1. Review the manuscript

When reviewer feedback becomes available, you'll see comments alongside the relevant sections of your manuscript, making it easier to understand what's being discussed.

You can:

• review comments in context

• identify areas requiring revision

• follow discussions linked to specific passages

• view reviewer and editor feedback together

2. Submit your review

Once you've completed your assessment, submit your review report and recommendation.

Use your review to:

• assess the scientific quality of the manuscript

• highlight strengths and areas for improvement

• provide clear, constructive feedback

• recommend the appropriate next step

3. Review researcher responses

If revisions are requested, researchers may respond to your comments and revise their manuscript.

You'll be able to:

• review researcher responses

• revisit annotated sections

• assess whether your comments have been addressed

• continue the discussion where clarification is needed

If researcher responses or discussion options aren't available when expected, contact your journal's editorial office.

4. Collaborate through interactive review

Peer review is often an iterative process.

If further clarification is needed, reviewers and editors can continue discussing your manuscript through linked comments, helping everyone stay aligned as revisions progress.

5. Make your final recommendation

Once your comments have been addressed, you can update your recommendation.

Depending on the outcome, you may:

• endorse the manuscript for publication

• request additional revisions

• raise remaining concerns with the editor

Your recommendation contributes to the editor's final decision.

We're continuing to develop the manuscript workspace based on feedback from researchers, reviewers, and editors.

Have you recently used it during peer review? Complete our short survey to tell us what worked well and where we can improve.

What is the new workspace?

The new platform provides a review experience that allows reviewers, editors, and authors to work directly on the manuscript through inline annotations and connected discussions.

Does the new platform change the peer review process?

No, it changes the review experience, not the review process. Editorial standards, reviewer responsibilities, and publication decisions remain the same.

How is the new workspace different from traditional review systems?

The new peer review experience keeps manuscript content, feedback, discussions, and revisions together in a shared workspace, reducing the need to switch between files and tools.

Can I comment directly on the manuscript?

Yes. You can provide feedback through inline highlights and annotations by highlighting the desired text.

Will I still submit a review report?

Yes. Reviewers continue to submit formal review reports and recommendations as part of the evaluation process.

What if I need help using MCPR?

If you have questions about the review process or encounter technical issues, contact your journal's editorial office for assistance.