Check your manuscript the way a reviewer will, before you submit
Most rejections repeat the same few comments. This free check asks the seven questions our mentors ask at the start of every Manuscript Audit, reads your abstract for the parts editors look for, and tells you how well your paper fits your target journal.
Novelty is not clear.
Please compare with recent work.
Results do not support the claim.
Comments reviewers write again and again. Find them in your own paper first.
Why manuscripts come back
What reviewers raised in the 667 reviewer comments researchers have shared with ScholarsColab. One comment often raises several points, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
What the check reads
Three parts. Only the first is required; the other two make the reading sharper.
Seven questions about your paper
- An Introduction with background, motivation, contributions and paper organisation
- One clear sentence stating what is new
- Research gaps linked to your contributions
- Results that close the gap, not only numbers
- A table of objectives against what you achieved
- Comparison with methods from the last three years
- Similarity below 15%, excluding references
Your title and abstract
- The six parts editors look for: the problem, the aim, the method, results with numbers, a comparison and a conclusion
- Length against what journals usually allow
- "Novel" claimed without saying how
- Sentences over 40 words and abbreviations never spelled out
- A title that says what the paper does
Your target journal
- How closely your topic matches what the journal publishes
- Its indexing, impact factor and quartile
- What its reviewers comment on most, when researchers have shared enough comments
- Up to three indexed journals that fit better, if the fit is weak
A sample reading
What you get
- A rejection-risk reading: low, medium or high
- Every gap you marked No or Not sure, why reviewers object to it, and how often they raise it
- Which parts of your abstract are present and which are missing
- Journal fit, and closer journals when the fit is weak
- The full report by email, if you want a copy for your co-authors
A self-check is not a review
This check reads what you tell it and your abstract. It cannot read your method, your experiments or your figures, which is where many reviewer comments come from.
| Readiness Check | Manuscript Audit | |
|---|---|---|
| Who checks | Fixed rules, from your answers | One of our 1,400+ PhD mentors, in your area |
| What is read | Your answers, title and abstract | The full manuscript, section by section |
| What you get | A risk reading and a list of gaps | Comments on each section and what to change before you submit |
| Cost | Free | Paid |
Questions
Is this check done by AI?
No. It runs on fixed rules: your seven answers, a set of checks on your title and abstract, and the journal data on ScholarsColab. Your title and abstract are never uploaded to any AI tool or service. The same input always gives the same result. Reading your manuscript is work our mentors do, in a Manuscript Audit.
Does a low rejection risk mean my paper will be accepted?
No. The check reads only your answers and your abstract. Editors and reviewers read the whole paper, so a low reading means you have covered the points that most often cause comments, not that the decision will go your way.
What happens to my abstract?
It is used for this check and kept privately with your result, so that we can email you the report if you ask for it. It is never published or shared.
Do I have to give my email?
No. Your result appears on this page. Your email is needed only if you want the full report sent to you.
Where do the reviewer numbers come from?
From reviewer comments that researchers have shared on ScholarsColab after their submissions. Names, titles and manuscript IDs are removed before anything is counted.
Where do the seven questions come from?
They are the self-check our mentors start every Manuscript Audit with, plus the two points reviewers raise at most journals: comparison with recent work and similarity.
Fix it before a reviewer has to write it.
Start the check