Skill UI

This comprehensive guide details the multi-stage review process for submitting manuscripts to the Population and Development Review (PDR). It covers the initial editorial screening, double-anonymized peer review by experts, and key criteria for acceptance. Use this resource to stress-test your paper, anticipate potential failure modes, and structure your work for maximum scholarly impact before submission.

Provides a comprehensive guide to the entire academic publication review lifecycle, from initial submission to acceptance. It models the key stages—including editorial screening, expert review, revision, and final check—identifying critical decision criteria, common rejection reasons, and actionable leverage points for authors to significantly improve manuscript quality and navigate the publishing process.

This guide provides a comprehensive framework for screening research topics to ensure they meet the high theoretical standards of major academic journals. It teaches researchers how to differentiate between valuable empirical data and genuinely generalizable theoretical mechanisms, helping to scope the problem, identify necessary theoretical tension, and formalize the proposed model. Use this when unsure if a rich empirical finding qualifies as a theory-driven review paper.

A comprehensive guide detailing the rigorous standards and evaluation process for submissions to Public Administration Review (PAR). It covers double-blind peer review, initial desk screening criteria (fit, scope, practice-relevance), the decision spectrum (reject to accept), and the crucial requirement of Evidence for Practice. Use this guide to stress-test your manuscript and shape your paper to meet high academic and practical scholarly expectations.

This comprehensive guide details the entire editorial review process for quantitative economics publications, covering stages from initial desk screening through to pre-acceptance reproducibility checks. It provides critical insights into expected timelines (4-5 months), desk-reject risks, the Econometrica transfer option, and mandatory data/code preparation requirements. It is designed to set clear professional expectations for authors throughout the academic publishing cycle.

This comprehensive guide details the rigorous methodology for conducting systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses, particularly in educational research. It ensures the reproducibility and defensibility of the evidence corpus by documenting the entire PRISMA flow, from exhaustive multi-database searching and dual screening to structured data extraction and subsequent synthesis of findings.

A comprehensive guide for developing a rigorous, a-priori protocol for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in educational research. This tool ensures methodological transparency by defining the scope (PICO), eligibility criteria, search strategies, screening procedures, and synthesis plans before any data is collected, protecting the integrity of the research findings.

A comprehensive guide detailing the multi-stage academic review pipeline for The RAND Journal of Economics (RJE). It explains the critical steps—from the initial editor screening and potential desk reject, through two anonymous peer reviews, to the final handling editor decision. This guide provides actionable strategies on structuring the manuscript, crafting the cover letter, and framing the Industrial Organization (IO) contribution to maximize acceptance chances.

Provides a comprehensive guide to the rigorous editorial standards and submission protocols for the Review of Finance. It covers double-blind review requirements, the two-round decision philosophy, common desk screening patterns, and critical timing expectations (Regular vs. Fast-Track). This resource is essential for authors aiming to publish in top-tier finance journals by adhering strictly to academic integrity and compliance rules.

This guide details the rigorous review process for Production and Operations Management (POM), covering departmental screening, double-blind peer review, and the strict evaluation standards. It explains the 'twin standard' (scholarly rigor and managerial relevance), how to interpret decision letters (R&R vs. Reject), and the critical rules governing resubmission, helping authors navigate the publishing journey.

Provides a comprehensive, step-by-step workflow for conducting rigorous literature reviews across academic, biomedical, and technical domains. It guides users through defining research questions (PICO), developing systematic search protocols, evidence logging, source screening, structured data extraction, and synthesizing findings to build high-quality, reproducible review reports.

This skill parses complex, free-text clinical trial eligibility criteria from sources like ClinicalTrials.gov into structured, machine-readable rules. It then evaluates these criteria against a comprehensive patient profile (derived from OpenMed data) to determine potential eligibility. The output provides an explainable verdict (eligible, ineligible, or unknown) for every criterion, serving as a critical decision support tool for clinicians and researchers.