Build a complete response structure
Provide the editor's decision letter, all reviewer comments, the submitted manuscript and your proposed changes. Keep the numbering intact. Separate the comment, the author's answer and the location of the change so the editor can follow the response.
Explain changes and disagreements
Editing can improve tone, clarity and consistency. When you agree with a comment, state what changed. When you disagree, explain the reason and supporting evidence respectfully. We do not invent analyses, claim changes that were not made or supply unsupported scientific answers.
Keep the documents synchronized
Check that the response letter matches the revised manuscript, tables and supplementary files. Page or line references should be added from the final version. Confirm whether tracked changes, a clean manuscript and a document consistency check are included.
Agree the revision scope
The effort depends on the number and complexity of comments. Statistical work, new experiments or major re-analysis require separate decisions and support. The journal's revision deadline and acceptance decision remain outside the editing service's control.
Questions about response-to-reviewer support
- Will you decide the scientific response?
- No. You and your research team decide and substantiate the response. We help present it clearly and consistently.
- Can you help after a major revision decision?
- Yes. Share the full decision and proposed response so the editable work and any additional scientific tasks can be separated.