By Sarina Schrager, MD, MS, Family Medicine editor-in-chief
It is exceedingly uncommon for a paper to get accepted when first submitted to a journal. The vast majority of papers are sent back to authors for revision. As editors, we depend on peer reviewers to provide feedback designed to make each paper better. We ask that you view the feedback that you receive from reviewers as a constructive way to improve your paper. As an author, you are asked to respond to every comment made by every reviewer, which can feel like a herculean task. The following suggestions from the editorial team are geared to help you organize and structure your responses whereby improving your chances of having your paper accepted the second time around.
- Don’t take it personally—remember that the reviewers are giving feedback on your paper, not on who you are as a person. Remember, by requesting a revision of your paper, the editors and the reviewers think it has potential. Creating space between yourself and the revision requests will help you move forward toward successful publication. Some people will put the revisions aside for a day or two before rereading them.
- Always, always respond respectfully to reviewer comments—there is nothing an editor dislikes more than an author being obstinate and dismissive about reviewer comments. The editors rely on peer reviewers volunteering their time. As such, we want to protect peer reviewers from abusive language coming from authors. It is actually common practice to thank the reviewers for their feedback (however unwelcome it may be). This is an important publishing convention because while you don’t know who the reviewers are, they see author names and they likely review for several publications.
- It’s okay to disagree—it is okay to disagree respectfully with a reviewer comment. However, we recommend that you prioritize the comments you disagree with and only include a few (2-3 at maximum) in your responses. Include a detailed explanation of why you disagree and include references if available. The editors will weigh your comments and decide if they still want you to make changes.
- Make it easy for the editors—editors and reviewers are busy people who are often volunteering their time to help you improve your paper. So, it is up to you to do everything you can to make that task easier. We recommend that you structure your response letter in table form or use different fonts or underlines so that it is easy for the editor to see that you addressed every single comment. Also, it is good practice to specifically state how you addressed the comment. Instead of just saying “this was changed”, provide details about how you changed the paper or even cut and paste the new sentence into your table of reviewer responses.
- What if reviewers give me conflicting feedback?—it is challenging when reviewers have differing opinions about your paper. Most of the time, the associate editor will provide guidance about which reviewer’s comments to follow. If you don’t think that you are getting clear guidance, feel free to e-mail the editorial team for help. It is perfectly appropriate to ask the associate editor what they think you should do.
Even if your revision does not get accepted, by following reviewer suggestions you have improved the quality of your work and are optimally positioned to submit the paper to a different journal. Happy writing and please consider signing up to be a reviewer to help make Family Medicine the best journal it can be.
STFM Blog 
Thank you for this insightful and encouraging post. The reminder to approach reviewer feedback with professionalism and an open mind is so valuable, especially for early-career authors. I particularly appreciated the practical advice on structuring responses and the reassurance that revisions are a sign of potential, not failure.