It can be concluded that numerous internal as well as external factors influence a mother in making infant feeding decisions, and a greater fraction of these is socio-economic in nature. Is it aimed at new post graduate students who are just getting into the field and need somewhere to start? Even if a manuscript is rejected for publication, most authors can benefit from suggestions. This is not always easy, especially if I discover what I think is a serious flaw in the manuscript. My tone is very formal, scientific, and in third person. Like any other paper, this will need to have an Introduction, which explains what has been done before for example, in previous reviews and what has motivated your review paper i. I also consider the journal.
I will turn down requests if the paper is too far removed from my own research areas, since I may not be able to provide an informed review. It creates an understanding of the topic for the reader by discussing the findings presented in recent research papers. That makes things a lot harder for editors of the less prestigious journals, and that's why I am more inclined to take on reviews from them. Then, right in the Introduction, you can often recognize whether the authors considered the full context of their topic. Is there an angle the authors have overlooked? I also think it is our duty as researchers to write good reviews.
It will also provide you with an overview of the new advances in the field and help you when writing and submitting your own articles. What do you consider when deciding whether to accept an invitation to review a paper? Occasionally, there are difficulties with a potentially publishable article that I think I can't properly assess in half a day, in which case I will return the paper to the journal with an explanation and a suggestion for an expert who might be closer to that aspect of the research. Besides this, the researcher will also examine the phenomenon through observations in numerical representations and through statistical analysis. If there are any aspects of the manuscript that I am not familiar with, I try to read up on those topics or consult other colleagues. I usually pay close attention to the use—and misuse—of frequentist statistics.
Qualitative researchers aim to gather an in-depth understanding of human behavior and the reasons that govern such behavior. In my experience, they are unlikely to write a poor quality review; they might be more likely to accept the invitation, as senior scientists are typically overwhelmed with review requests; and the opportunity to review a manuscript can help support their professional development. Finally, there are occasions where you get extremely exciting papers that you might be tempted to share with your colleagues, but you have to resist the urge and maintain strict confidentiality. I always ask myself what makes this paper relevant and what new advance or contribution the paper represents. You will not be citing everything that you read for your review, but it is a good idea to keep track of everything that you have read that matched your search criteria, and what you learned from it. Before submitting a review, I ask myself whether I would be comfortable if my identity as a reviewer was known to the authors. The responses have been edited for clarity and brevity.
The health care facilities and institutions will be contacted to obtain a verbal consent to administer the questionnaire to mothers at their places. And if you identify a paper that you think has a substantial error that is not easily fixed, then the authors of this paper will find it hard to not hold a grudge. After I have finished reading the manuscript, I let it sink in for a day or so and then I try to decide which aspects really matter. After all, even though you were selected as an expert, for each review the editor has to decide how much they believe in your assessment. Are the reported analyses appropriate? Majority of the mothers that served as respondents in this study fall under the age range of 17-30 years old.
Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, vol. Health care professionals influence mothers the most when it comes to infant feeding decisions. Often, good review papers will include figures that combine results from the literature that you have searched through to tell readers something new, either through new, collated representations of data that show new, emergent relationships, or through new conceptual models that will help others to think about the topic in a new way and structure future research. Before I became an editor, I used to be fairly eclectic in the journals I reviewed for, but now I tend to be more discerning, since my editing duties take up much of my reviewing time. Is it aimed at people in related fields who may be venturing into a new cross-disciplinary area? I often refer back to my annotated version of the online paper.
The parts of the Discussion I focus on most are context and whether the authors make claims that overreach the data. Once you have this done and have asked a friendly colleague to look over it and give you feedback, you will be ready to submit the review to a good journal in your field. Plan what these figures will be in your paper. Once I have the notes, writing the review itself generally takes less than an hour. Those with higher educational attainment resort more to formula feeding and mixed feeding than those with lower educational attainment. The emphasis of a review paper is interpreting the primary literature on the subject.
Mothers were overall not concerned about the possible side effects of breastfeeding as a few were only worried as shown in the data presented. When diving in deeper, first I try to assess whether all the important papers are cited in the references, as that also often correlates with the quality of the manuscript itself. Special care on the maximum definition of the photographs is required. If the paper has horrendous difficulties or a confused concept, I will specify that but will not do a lot of work to try to suggest fixes for every flaw. I make a decision after drafting my review. You can better highlight the major issues that need to be dealt with by restructuring the review, summarizing the important issues upfront, or adding asterisks.
Besides that, I make notes on an extra sheet. A list of all health care facilities maternity and lying-in clinics, public and private hospitals, health centers was acquired from the Las Piñas City Hall. . Is it aimed at your fellow expert researchers in the field, whose thinking you would like to influence? After that, I check whether all the experiments and data make sense, paying particular attention to whether the authors carefully designed and performed the experiments and whether they analyzed and interpreted the results in a comprehensible way. In case of two authors, both should be mentioned.