Expert manuscript review from world-class researchers
Get rigorous, actionable feedback from reviewers who've published in Nature, Science, and Cell. Strengthen your manuscript before submission.
To preserve review quality, we limit the number of projects accepted each month.
Methodology Assessment
Statistical approach is sound, sample size adequate...
Literature Coverage
Key references included, suggest adding...
Suggested Improvement
Consider expanding discussion of limitations...
Review Complete
Detailed evaluation
How it works
We review a limited number of projects each month. Submissions are screened for scope, readiness, and reviewer fit.
Submit
Send your manuscript and describe your research area and goals
Match
We pair you with an expert reviewer suited to your manuscript
Review
Receive structured, actionable feedback within days
Improve
Receive reviewer-style critique before formal submission
What to Expect
Rigorous, actionable feedback
Our reviews go beyond surface-level comments. Reviewers assess novelty, experimental rigor, and translational potential — identifying risks and clarifying claims before peer review.
Novelty Assessment
While the broader connection between [system] and [phenotype] has been described previously, the present study provides substantially more mechanistic detail. The comprehensive description of this causal chain — linking [component A] to [component B] via a specific molecular pathway — enhances the novelty. The demonstration that [biomarker] levels can stratify patients into risk groups further strengthens originality.
This is an ambitious and potentially high-impact study. A major strength is the breadth of data and analyses presented — bringing together patient data, multiple in vivo models, and in vitro experiments to support a coherent causal mechanism.
- •Novel mechanistic insights with clear clinical relevance
- •Bridges multiple disciplines in a way not previously explored
- •Translational value demonstrated through patient stratification
With targeted refinements, the manuscript could be substantially strengthened:
- Statistical rigor: Explicitly test interaction terms using two-way ANOVA to support causal claims (detailed in figure comments)
- Demonstrate causality: Genetic knockout experiments to confirm the pathway is necessary for observed effects
- Refine claims: Several figure titles may be perceived as overclaiming — suggest more precise wording
Summary: The manuscript presents substantial strengths including breadth of experiments, novel mechanistic insights, and clear clinical relevance. Addressing the statistical analysis and demonstrating causality through genetic approaches would strengthen the work considerably.
“Figure 2A: The current title may be perceived as overclaiming. To evaluate whether [treatment] reduces [outcome] via [mechanism], I would test whether...”
Identifying details redacted. Full reviews include novelty assessment, strengths/weaknesses, journal fit, translational value, and detailed figure-by-figure comments with specific statistical recommendations.
From Our Authors
Researchers trust ManuSights
See how pre-submission review has helped researchers strengthen their manuscripts and refine their research presentation.
“The reviewer identified a critical flaw in our statistical analysis that we had overlooked. We strengthened the methodology before submission.”
Postdoctoral Fellow
Stanford University
Computational Biology
“The review didn't just improve the paper — it changed how we thought about the underlying assumptions in our analysis. That's rare.”
Assistant Professor
Johns Hopkins University
Immunology
“The pre-submission review caught methodological gaps I hadn't noticed. The feedback helped me strengthen weak points before submitting.”
PhD Candidate
MIT
Materials Science
“I've been a PI for 15 years. The structured feedback identified gaps in my experimental logic that I'd missed after months of working on this manuscript.”
Associate Professor
University of Cambridge
Neuroscience
Meet your reviewers
Your manuscript will be reviewed by researchers from the world's leading institutions — scientists who have published in Nature, Science, Cell, and other top-tier journals.
Each reviewer is carefully selected for their publication record and track record of insightful, constructive feedback.
Your reviewers come from institutions including
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions
Pricing depends on manuscript length, field complexity, and turnaround requirements. We offer flexible packages to fit different needs. Reach out to discuss your specific situation and receive a custom quote.
Most reviews are completed within 3-7 days, depending on manuscript length and field complexity. We prioritize thoroughness over speed, but can accommodate urgent requests when needed. You'll receive regular updates on progress.
Most manuscripts are reviewed by one expert reviewer, though you can request up to three reviewers for more comprehensive feedback. We'll discuss your needs during our initial conversation.
No. We accept projects based on scope, scientific readiness, and reviewer availability. If a project isn't a fit, we'll say so upfront — this ensures we can deliver the depth of feedback each manuscript deserves.
Absolutely. All reviewers operate under formal NDAs. Your manuscript is processed under strict zero-retention conditions — no content is stored, logged, or used for any purpose beyond your review. Only the assigned reviewers see your work.
Yes. When you submit, you can specify the expertise areas most important for your manuscript. We'll do our best to match you with a reviewer whose background aligns with your needs.
Our reviews are meant to strengthen your work, not dictate changes. You retain full control over your manuscript. If you have questions about specific feedback, we can facilitate clarification with reviewers or discuss alternative perspectives.
We use Anthropic's Claude to assist reviewers with structured analysis. All AI processing uses zero-retention infrastructure — your manuscript is never stored or used for training. Human experts make all final assessments and provide the scientific judgment that matters.
Who We Are
ManuSights was founded by researchers who believe every manuscript deserves rigorous feedback before submission. Our network includes CNS-published scientists across immunology, genomics, neuroscience, and metabolism.
Ready for reviewer-grade critique?
Tell us about your research and manuscript. We'll discuss how our expert reviewers can help you clarify and strengthen your work.
Typical improvement: Clearer methodology, stronger presentation