In 2021, in partnership with Cactus Communications, Wolters Kluwer launched Paperpal Preflight, an AI-driven tool that was able to check a manuscript for grammar and language issues, as well as whether or not the manuscript contained elements required based on a journal's custom configuration - for example, the length of an abstract, the number of references, or whether the manuscript contains a data availability statement. In the roughly 2 years since launch, over 100,000 manuscripts have been uploaded to Paperpal Preflight by authors prior to submitting to Lippincott journals.

Immediately following launch, the question we sought to answer was "Does the use of Paperpal Preflight have an impact on journal decision making?" In 2022, we presented our findings at the 10th International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication. The results are summarized below.

Methods

In a study of original research manuscripts submitted to a single open access multidisciplinary medical journal for a 7-month period from June 2021 to January 2022, 7,904 articles were submitted to the journal and subjected to a technical check carried out by the editorial office prior to the assignment of editors or reviewers. Prior to submission, authors were encouraged to upload their manuscript to an online preflight tool (ie, Paperpal Preflight). The tool is configured to check submissions for language and grammar quality, as well as 26 item checks, including the presence of ethics statements, conflicts of interest declarations, and adherence to word count limits. The preflight tool offers two levels of feedback: a free preliminary report that summarizes issues that the system suggests should be addressed prior to submission and a premium check that provides the author with a Word document containing all suggested changes in detail.

Articles that were uploaded to the preflight tool platform were then crosschecked against all articles submitted to the journal’s submission platform, allowing the journal to compare initial rejection rates (ie, decisions made prior to undergoing peer review) amongst the 3 distinct groups.

Results

Initial rejection rates for the 3 groups of manuscripts (no preflight, basic preflight, premium preflight) are detailed in Table 1. Amongst articles that did not undergo any preflight check, 34.2% (2073/6062) were rejected following technical check, compared to 20.1% (333/1661) for articles that received the basic preflight report and 7.3% (13/181) of articles that received the detailed premium report.

Table 1. Comparison of initial rejection rates according to the use of preflight tool prior to submission.

Conclusions

The use of the Paperpal Preflight tool to assist authors in identifying language errors and missing manuscript elements prior to submission significantly decreased initial rejection rates. Overall, manuscripts that were uploaded to the preflight platform had an initial rejection rate 41% lower than manuscripts that were submitted without a preflight check.

How can you use Lippincott's Paperpal Preflight?

Move than 75 journals in the Lippincott portfolio currently have custom configured Paperpal Preflight sites, which are usually linked from the journal web site, submissions site or Instructions for Authors. In addition, authors can access a generically configured version of the Paperpal Preflight tool (link below). Lippincott's Paperpal Preflight provides a free preliminary report that identifies issues that may warrant attention before submission. Authors will also get the opportunity to purchase a Paperpal Edited Word file which includes all the fixes and suggestions.

For more information on using Lippincott's Paperpal Preflight, and the opportunity upload your manuscript for a free preliminary report, visit https://preflight.paperpal.com/partner/lww/lippincott.