AG-R08: Responding to Peer Review — Rebuttal Letters, Revision Strategy, and Reviewer Response Standards for GMJ

How to Write Point-by-Point Responses and Revise Your Manuscript After Reviewer Comments

Abstract

The GMJ Author Toolkit (AG-R08) provides a structured, self-contained guide to responding to peer review in accordance with the Georgian Medical Journal’s editorial standards. The guide ensures clear, respectful, and effective communication with reviewers and editors during the revision process.

The document is organized into three components: (1) theoretical foundations explaining editorial decision types, the structure of a rebuttal letter, and the principles for addressing different types of reviewer comments; (2) a comprehensive pre-submission checklist ensuring that all comments are addressed systematically and revisions are clearly documented; and (3) a complete worked example demonstrating a point-by-point response to reviewer comments, including accepted corrections, additional analyses, and respectful disagreement.

Particular emphasis is placed on the requirement that every reviewer comment must receive an explicit response, that all changes must be traceable in a tracked-changes manuscript, and that responses must include precise references to page and line numbers. The guide also highlights common errors such as incomplete responses, vague statements, and inappropriate tone.

This resource supports authors in producing clear, professional, and publication-ready revision responses for submission to the Georgian Medical Journal.