The purpose of the revisions letter is to convince the editor that you have adequately revised the original manuscript to address all the comments made by its peer reviewers. This article shares pointers for writing an effective revisions letter after peer review.

There is no standard number of references for an article. However, the pointers in this article should help you work towards an optimal number.

Accidental plagiarism occurs when an author fails to cite their sources and/or unintentionally paraphrases from a source without attributing it. This article helps you understand how accidental plagiarism arises and how to avoid it.

When a translated version of an already published article is published, it is known as a ‘secondary publication’, and it is acceptable if conditions of transparency and disclosure, proper permission and appropriate attribution are met. This article discusses these conditions and also how to request making an acceptable secondary publication.

Writing a systematic review takes a lot of meticulous planning, in-depth research and rigour. Here, we go over a few things to consider when taking on a systematic review.

A meta-analysis is a quantitative (statistical) means by which to determine whether a particular effect reported in literature is real. This article explains when and how to perform a meta-analysis.

This article reviews some of the key research tools available for writing biomedical articles. Most of these tools take the form of content databases, which include peer-reviewed published articles, non-published manuscripts in article or data repositories and registered clinical trials.

A conflict of interest (COI) can be described as a situation in which a person is in a position to derive personal benefit from actions or decisions made in their official capacity. This article explores the various problems posed by COIs in scientific publishing and how authors and journals can handle them.

Scientific misconduct is a wilful violation of standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behaviour in the publication of professional scientific research. While misconduct can occur at any stage of the research, writing, peer review and publication processes, this post focuses on how journal editorial offices investigate and act upon allegations of scientific misconduct of authors.

Presenteeism is the practice of working through periods of physical or mental illness. Presenteeism and peer pressure go hand in hand. This article discusses the issues of presenteeism and peer pressure in research and academia and shares suggestions for dealing with them.

A lab notebook is an official record of your activities in the lab, to be used as a reference for a number of things. Here, we discuss some of the essential considerations for maintaining a paper-based lab notebook.

Digital lab books are beginning to become much more commonplace in labs. However, as with every new technology, the transition to using a digital lab notebook also comes with myriad things to consider. This article outlines some of the key things to think about.

Physical lab notebooks have been a staple in a scientist’s toolbelt for the longest time, but digital alternatives are catching on. Here, we weigh up each option to help you decide which to go with.

Determining authorship can be one of the most vexing tasks in scientific publishing, especially in certain scenarios. In this article, which is the first of a two-article series, we look at certain authorship types in scientific publishing that are considered largely unacceptable by the community, and which you should thus ideally avoid.

Determining authorship can be one of the most vexing tasks in scientific publishing. In the first article of this two-part series, we looked at certain issues of problematic authorship. In this second and concluding article in the series, we look at what constitutes legitimate authorship, including acknowledging the contribution by professional medical writers and editors.

Although there are many shared elements between the preparation of medical articles and those from other scientific fields, certain nuances apply for medical papers. This article offers several best practice ideas to help you develop and ultimately submit the best medical article possible.

As an author of research papers, targeting the right journal is very important. One of the best ways to determine the best journal for your work is to understand the scope (also known as aim or focus) of scientific journals.

A hidden key to success in academic publishing is learning how to understand and follow a journal’s Information for Authors (IFA). This article offers you a handful of very practical tips about following your target journal’s IFA.

Novelty in scientific publishing is crucial, because journal editors and peer reviewers greatly prize novel research over and above confirmatory papers or research with negative results. How can you as an academic author enhance the novelty effect with your research submissions? This article explores ideas that will help you maximise the novelty effect in your submissions.

Researching and then writing and submitting your research papers present a challenge at every turn. This article discusses common mistakes, collected into a few categories, which quickly lead to a manuscript’s rejection.