For a full discussion of how to select an appropriate journal see Knight and Steinbach The first is the revised manuscript highlighting all the modifications made following the recommendations received from the reviewers. Simon Oxenham 17 June, The rise of the Internet has worked wonders for the public's access to science, but this has come with the side effect of a toxic combination of confirmation bias and Google, enabling us to easily find a study to support whatever it is that we already believe, without bothering to so much as look at research that might challenge our position — or the research that supports our position for that matter.
Applications like the spelling and grammar checker in Microsoft Word or Grammarly are certainly worth applying to your article, but the benefits of proper editing are undeniable.
The authors of the manuscript can agree or disagree with the comments of the reviewers typically agreement is encouraged and are not always obliged to implement their recommendations, but they should in all cases provide a well-argued justification for their course of action.
The hotter a scientific field, the less likely the findings are to be true.
Once you have read and re-read your manuscript carefully several times, received feedback from your colleagues, and identified a target journal, the next important step is to read the aims and scope of the journals in your target research area. For non-randomized trials that number rises to an astonishing five out of six.