Submission of scholarly work to an academic journal can seem daunting and subjective to investigators. Yet there are standard processes for both initial manuscript preparation as well as responses to reviewer critique that will increased the likelihood of manuscript acceptance. The session will begin with a brief introduction to the peer review process and will address common questions and challenges of that process. Topics will include common pitfalls of manuscript preparation, how editors screen and review manuscripts, and methods for effectively responding to peer review to maximize manuscript acceptance. In this talk, editors from multiple journals will provide insight into their methods for screening and reviewing manuscript submissions to give attendees a better understanding of how to prepare a submission. They will address the following specific questions regarding the peer review process, including: What do I say, if anything, in the cover letter? Is it ever advantageous to request (or decline) specific editors or reviewers? What is the best approach to structure my response to reviewer critiques? Do I always have to be responsive to a reviewer’s request? What is the best approach to dealing with responses that I don’t agree with? Is there ever a time when it is appropriate to appeal a review decision? The panelists will take turns answering each of the pre-determined questions regarding the peer review process. The final portion of the talk will be left for questions from the audience and group discussion. This session is part of a multi-year longitudinal research curriculum organized by the research committee.