Baraa
Useful information
Jigisha Patel
Jigisha earned her first degree in Medicine and her PhD on postprandial physiology from Queen Mary, University of London. As well as spending several years in hospital clinical practice and a year at the National Institutes of Health for her PhD, Jigisha has taught on the Professional Development course for medical students at University College London Medical School and human biology at the Open University.
Jigisha joined BioMed Central in 2007 and had editorial responsibility for over 30 medical journals in the BMC Series. Jigisha leads the Research Integrity Group, with overall responsibility for BioMed Central’s strategy, standards and expertise in publication ethics and in high-quality, rigorous peer review.
Jigisha joined BioMed Central in 2007 and had editorial responsibility for over 30 medical journals in the BMC Series. Jigisha leads the Research Integrity Group, with overall responsibility for BioMed Central’s strategy, standards and expertise in publication ethics and in high-quality, rigorous peer review.
Latest posts by Jigisha Patel(see all)
- Do peer review models affect junior doctors’ trust in journals?- 4th July 2017
- Sharing peer review experiences and knowledge- 6th November 2015
- Quiz: How much of a specialist in peer review are you?- 6th November 2015
- Most read
- Most shared
I think a good review does not contain only flaws of the paper, but also what is good about the paper. I also think that asking yourself “Why should this paper be published?” before asking “Why this paper should NOT be published?” leads to a better view of the research. In any case, starting the review with the strong points of the paper is useful. At the very least it signals that you are not just a grumpy guy who takes joy in showing other people what they did wrong, which in turn makes the authors more open to your recommendations.