Original aggregate data
What Do Peer Reviewers Criticize Most? 548 Findings Analysed (2026)
Published: 2026-09-17 · Version 2026-09-17-findings-v1 · Data window: 2026-07-26 – 2026-09-14 · Prof. Dr. Alp Özgün Börcek
Methods and Results attract the most criticism. Across 548 findings in 72 pre-submission review reports, 33.8% of findings name the Methods section and 32.8% name Results. 85.4% of findings point to a specific location or quotation in the manuscript rather than a general impression.
Which sections draw criticism
Share of the 548 findings that name each section. A finding can name more than one section, so the column sums above 100%.
| Section | Findings | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Methods | 185 | %33.8 |
| Results | 180 | %32.8 |
| Discussion / Conclusion | 142 | %25.9 |
| Spanning several sections | 118 | %21.5 |
| Figures and tables | 72 | %13.1 |
| Statistical analysis | 68 | %12.4 |
| Abstract | 38 | %6.9 |
| Case presentation | 15 | %2.7 |
| References | 13 | %2.4 |
| Introduction | 13 | %2.4 |
How findings are evidenced
Each finding records what it rests on. This is the measure that separates a specific criticism from a generic one.
| Evidence status | Findings | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Anchored to a location or quotation in the manuscript | 468 | %85.4 |
| Reviewer inference from the manuscript | 70 | %12.8 |
| Supported by an external source | 6 | %1.1 |
| Explicitly marked uncertain | 4 | %0.7 |
How serious the findings are
%45.3
Medium · 248 findings
%40.5
High · 222 findings
%14.2
Low · 78 findings
Median 7 findings per report (mean 7.61).
Method
Structural aggregate over completed V6 pre-review reports. Only categorical fields are read: finding severity, the manuscript section a finding names, and the evidence status the reviewer assigned. No manuscript text, title, author, institution, DOI, file name, or user identifier is read or exported.
Limitations
- This is operational aggregate data, not peer-reviewed research.
- It describes what our pre-review reports flag, not what journal peer reviewers decide.
- A finding may name more than one section, so section shares sum above 100%.
- The submitted-manuscript population is self-selected and not representative of all research.
- Manuscript study type is free text in the underlying reports and is therefore not broken out.
FAQ
What exactly was counted?
Every finding in 72 completed pre-submission review reports generated between 2026-07-26 and 2026-09-14 — 548 findings in total. Only categorical fields were read: severity, the manuscript section a finding names, and the evidence status the reviewer assigned.
Why do the section percentages add up to more than 100%?
A single finding often concerns more than one section, for example a statistical choice described in Methods but reported in Results. Such a finding is counted under both sections, so the shares deliberately overlap.
Is this the same as journal peer review?
No. This describes what a pre-submission review flags before a manuscript is sent to a journal. It does not describe what journal reviewers decide, and it is not evidence about acceptance or rejection.
Can I cite this page?
Yes. Börcek AO. What Do Peer Reviewers Criticize Most? 548 Findings Analysed (2026). Review My Manuscript; 2026. Version 2026-09-17-findings-v1. URL: https://reviewmymanuscript.com/what-do-peer-reviewers-criticize-most. Cite it as operational aggregate data, not as peer-reviewed research.