Pre-Submission Peer Review Service and Plagiarism Check for Researchers

Pre-submission peer review is an independent evaluation of your manuscript conducted before you submit it to a journal. Unlike the review process that happens after submission — which is controlled by the journal and can result in desk rejection, major revisions, or outright rejection — our pre-submission review gives you full control over the feedback cycle.

A peer review example from our service looks like this: a qualified expert in your discipline reads your complete manuscript, evaluates the research design, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusions, then provides structured written feedback with specific, actionable suggestions. This mirrors what a peer reviewed journal's reviewers do — but you receive the feedback privately, before any editor sees the paper.

For researchers targeting high-competition journals, double blind peer review at the pre-submission stage is particularly valuable. Our reviewers evaluate your work without knowledge of your identity, simulating the exact conditions of the journal's own review process. This eliminates bias and ensures the feedback reflects the objective quality of your research.

Understanding what is a peer reviewed journal helps you see why our process is designed the way it is. A peer reviewed journal requires that every submission be evaluated independently by at least two subject-matter experts before acceptance. Our pre-submission service replicates this standard exactly — giving you the benefit of that rigorous scrutiny before the journal's clock starts ticking.

When you submit your manuscript to us, we assign two reviewers from our network of 300+ ISI and Scopus specialists. Both reviewers read your paper independently and submit structured evaluation reports covering research question clarity, methodology soundness, statistical appropriateness, literature coverage, result interpretation, and discussion quality. We then compile these reports into a single, prioritized feedback document with recommendations ranked by their likely impact on acceptance probability.

Our peer reviewed journal network spans Medicine, Life Sciences, Engineering, Social Sciences, Business, and more than 1,300 subject areas. Whatever your discipline, your manuscript is reviewed by someone who publishes in journals comparable to your target.

Most high-impact journals now run every submission through iThenticate before editorial review even begins. A similarity score that exceeds acceptable thresholds results in immediate desk rejection — before a single reviewer reads a word of your research. Our iThenticate check service removes this risk entirely.

We run your manuscript through a full iThenticate check and generate a detailed similarity report that shows exactly which sections are flagged and why. Our academic writing specialists then work through the report with you, explaining how to avoid plagiarism in research through proper paraphrasing, citation restructuring, and source attribution — not just rewording but genuinely improving how your ideas are expressed.

For researchers who are unfamiliar with similarity reduction for journal papers, common problem areas include self-citation of previous work, methodology sections that closely follow standard protocols, and literature review passages that summarize sources without sufficient transformation. We address each of these specifically, reducing your similarity score to levels that comfortably meet the requirements of your target journal. Our iThenticate check service is available as a standalone or as part of our full publication support package.