Peer Review Response Generator
A comprehensive peer review response generator designed to help researchers systematically organize and respond to reviewer comments for manuscript revisions. Document manuscript information including title, journal, manuscript ID, submission dates, and author details. Manage multiple reviewers (editor, associate editor, reviewers 1-4) with automatic comment tracking and completion statistics. Organize reviewer comments with 5 categories (major, minor, editorial, suggestion, clarification) and detailed location tracking (section, page, line). Create structured responses with original comment quotes, your response, action taken, changes made, and location of changes. Track comment status (pending, in-progress, completed) and priority levels. Filter and search across all comments by reviewer, category, status, or keywords. Generate professional response documents with formatted cover letter, point-by-point responses organized by reviewer, and summary of major changes. Export to formatted text for submission or JSON for backup. Import previously saved data. Perfect for journal article revisions, dissertation committee responses, grant resubmissions, and manuscript revision management.
Key Features
- Comprehensive manuscript information tracking
- Manuscript title and journal documentation
- Manuscript ID and submission date tracking
- Review received and response deadline dates
- Full author list management
- Corresponding author specification
- Multiple reviewer management
- Reviewer types: editor, associate editor, reviewers 1-4, other
- Automatic comment count per reviewer
- Completion tracking per reviewer
- Reviewer progress visualization
- Comprehensive comment organization
- 5 comment categories: major, minor, editorial, suggestion, clarification
- Comment numbering system
- Section specification
- Page number tracking
- Line number tracking
- Original comment documentation
- Response composition
- Action taken description
- Changes made documentation
- Location of change specification
- 3 status levels: pending, in-progress, completed
- 3 priority levels: high, medium, low
- Tag system for organization
- Notes field for additional context
- Advanced filtering system
- Filter by reviewer
- Filter by comment category
- Filter by completion status
- Search across all comment fields
- Comment editing and updates
- Delete with confirmation
- Response preview tab
- Professional cover letter generation
- Point-by-point response formatting
- Responses organized by reviewer
- Comment category badges
- Section and location display
- Changes summary for each comment
- Export to formatted text document
- Publication-ready response format
- Cover letter included
- Reviewer-organized responses
- Major changes summary
- Export to JSON for backup
- Import from JSON
- Browser localStorage persistence
- No login required
- Statistics dashboard
- Total comments count
- Completed comments tracking
- In-progress comments count
- Pending comments count
- Major comments count
- Minor comments count
- Completion percentage with progress bar
- Professional formatting for exports
- Responsive design for all devices
Share This Tool
This tool is 100% free and requires no login
Loading tool...
This may take a few seconds
Frequently Asked Questions
How should I organize my response to multiple reviewers with overlapping comments?
Respond to each reviewer separately in your response letter, even if comments overlap. When multiple reviewers raise the same concern, acknowledge this in your first response and cross-reference when addressing the same issue for other reviewers (e.g., "As noted in our response to Reviewer 1, Comment 3..."). This shows you recognize patterns while avoiding repetition. This tool helps track which reviewers mentioned similar issues so you can ensure consistent responses and reference earlier explanations.
What tone should I use when I disagree with a reviewer suggestion?
Always be respectful and professional, even when disagreeing. Start by thanking the reviewer and acknowledging their perspective (e.g., "We appreciate this thoughtful suggestion..."). Explain your reasoning with evidence or methodological justification. Phrase disagreements diplomatically: "While we see the merit in this approach, we respectfully maintain our original method because..." Provide citations or data supporting your position. Show you carefully considered their suggestion even if not implementing it.
Should I make every change reviewers suggest?
No, but you must respond to every comment. Major concerns flagged by the editor or multiple reviewers should typically be addressed with changes. For minor suggestions or points you disagree with, provide respectful explanation of why you are not making the change, supported by evidence or methodological reasoning. Document all responses in your letter - showing you addressed suggestions is as important as making changes. This tool tracks action taken for each comment (implemented, modified, explained, declined) with justification.
How detailed should my response letter be?
Very detailed. Include: (1) the original reviewer comment quoted verbatim, (2) your response explaining how you addressed it, (3) specific location of changes in the manuscript (page, line numbers, section), (4) brief excerpt of what changed if helpful. Response letters are typically 3-10+ pages for major revisions. Editors use response letters to verify you addressed concerns before sending back to reviewers. Thoroughness demonstrates professionalism and increases acceptance likelihood.