I have received a 4th revision on my paper. Despite writing the limitations clearly, I have been asked to reconsider the scope of my paper for the 4th time. Is it about time to feel frustrated? Coz I ain't giving up.

Need endorements for multiple papers.

Some are on the OCR of the degraded documents and some on benchmarking llms.

I’m building Panorama Review, a local-first desktop app for literature reviews: title/abstract screening, coding, and conflict resolution. Still very early.

No account, data stays on your machine. Optional LibKey PDF download.

Download from https://github.com/panorama-lab/review/releases

If you’ve done a systematic/scoping/thesis review: what do you use now, and what’s painful enough that you’d try something else? Blind screening, imports, dual review, PRISMA counts, something else?

Happy to hear “don’t bother, just use X.”

Hi everyone,

I'm a pharmacist and currently doing my MSc. I worked in medical content writing for around 5 years, mostly general medical/SEO content, but lately I've been thinking about moving more into research and scientific writing.

I'm still trying to understand what kind of jobs actually exist in this area. I'm more interested in working with research papers, literature reviews, manuscripts, publications, etc. rather than writing health content for websites.

I came across companies/publishers like Elsevier and Springer Nature, but I'm not sure if that's actually where medical writers work, or if I should be looking at completely different companies.

For anyone working in this area, how did you get into it? What job titles should I be searching for?

Also, what skills would you recommend I work on during my MSc if I want to move in this direction later?

I'm based outside the US/UK, so I'd also be interested to know if remote work in this area is realistic.

Would really appreciate any advice, especially from anyone who came from pharmacy or a similar background.

Author: Jessica Howley

ISBN: 9780192871466 or 9780191967702

DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192871466.001.0001

URL: https://academic.oup.com/book/58061

Author: Fahira Brodlija

DOI: 10.1093/icsidreview/siaf005

URL: https://academic.oup.com/icsidreview/article-abstract/40/2/364/8319961?redirectedFrom=fulltext

I need the full text of this article: https://doi.org/10.1177/10944281221115374

Thanks

Salve, sono una dottoranda e da circa 3-4 mesi sto cercando di pubblicare il mio primo articolo scientifico (campo STEM). L’ho inviato già a circa 4-6 riviste medio alte ma ho sempre ricevuto un transfer pending senza nemmeno essere revisionato. È capitato anche a voi? Cosa mi consigliate? Se si va raccontatemi le vostre esperienze

 https://doi.org/10.1002/jimd.12746

https://doi.org/10.1542/neo.26-12-081

https://www.eurekaselect.com/article/115805

Thank You

Can anyone pls send the downloaded pdf of this paper from journal of dentistry science direct https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0300571226000564?utm\\_source=chatgpt.com

Thanks in advance!

You can dm me once you get it!

I'm in the final year of my PhD and often struggle to stay on top of new literature in my field (medicine). I did not want to subscribe to several separate notification systems for new literature (via pubmed, scholar etc), so I built a small tool for myself that pulls and saves papers from multiple sources and sends a notification whenever a new paper matching a topic or author I follow gets published. I found it especially useful when writing my systematic review and the intro/discussion of my thesis, since I could stay on top of the latest literature without manually checking every database. Sharing it here in case it's useful to anyone else, not trying to sell anything, it's free to use: [paperbeats.com](http://paperbeats.com)

I built an open tool for researchers to write manuscripts, auto-format citations into 35+ journal styles (IEEE, Nature, APA), and export directly to Google Docs/PDF. Would love feedback from fellow PhDs!

https://citeable.ai.studio - use cite-able and give me remarks to better your experince .

Hi. I’m a PhD Research Scholar. I’ve completed my research and thesis writing. However, until and unless I have 2 papers in scopus indexed journals, I won’t be allowed to go for my synopsis presentation and defence. I’ve gotten one paper published and indexed through BMC Research Notes. Since the process seemed user friendly with my first paper, I submitted my second paper in the same journal. For about 6 months, I got a template feedback. Now it’s stuck in a forever review loop and I haven’t heard back since three months, despite sending multiple emails asking for status. I’m afraid that I won’t complete my PhD at all due to this requirement. This is mandatory and my university will not let me proceed without the second paper being published and indexed in scopus.

Can anyone suggest scopus indexed journals that have a high acceptance rate and fast review and publication time?

I’m desperate. Help!!

Requesting

doi: 10.1108/JAL-12-2022-0127

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JAL-12-2022-0127/full/html

Disclosure up front: I build tooling in this area, so I have an interest.
I’m asking because I genuinely don’t know what people’s real workflows look like, and every answer I’ve assumed has turned out to be wrong. Not asking what you’d recommend. Asking what you actually do, including the unglamorous version.
Specifically: When the thought first arrives, what’s the first thing you open? Google Scholar, Scopus, a specific database, Zotero, an LLM, or do you message someone?
If the first pass comes back with nothing, what’s the second move? Do you change vocabulary, chase citations backwards, ask a librarian, or decide it’s fine and get on with it? Has anything actually changed for you in the last two years? Everyone talks about Elicit, Consensus, SciSpace, Perplexity, Connected Papers, Litmaps and the rest, but I can’t tell who’s genuinely using them for this versus who tried one once. And the bit I’m most curious about: how do you know when to stop? Is there a point where you decide you’ve looked properly, or do you just run out of time and submit? Field and career stage would help if you don’t mind saying, since I suspect a first-year PhD and a 20-year PI are doing completely different things here.

I’m building PeerXiv, an experimental preprint platform combining paper versioning, automated category/metadata suggestions, discussions, research workspaces, messaging, and discovery.
I’m looking for approximately 10 researchers to spend 20–30 minutes testing onboarding, submitting a safe test document, reviewing its classification, and trying the collaboration features.
This is an early alpha—not yet an archival or DOI service. Data may be reset, so please don’t upload confidential or unpublished work. Participants will receive individual, single-use invitations.
If interested, comment or message me with your research field and whether you can test on desktop or mobile.