Abstract
The evidence base in health professions education continues to accumulate at an unprecedented rate. Summaries of evidence in the form of scoping, systematic and narrative reviews are also increasingly common. Unfortunately, many submissions go unpublished and for reasons that may be irreversible post-peer review. The goal of this commentary is to offer insights to review authors for improving the likelihood of publication success. These tips will not guarantee success; however, insights address common errors authors make along the continuum of review production that result in either requests for major revision or rejection.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
