Independent medical research review
Expert review of medical and biomedical manuscripts, methods, statistics, reporting, and submission readiness—with clear priorities and no publication promises.
International online service · Every project screened before acceptance
Three clear services
Each service has a distinct purpose. Additional reference, originality, responsible AI-use, reproducibility, or reporting-guideline checks are included only when relevant to the agreed scope.
Best for: a complete or near-complete manuscript before submission.
Best for: a protocol, analysis plan, dataset, or manuscript requiring focused technical review.
Best for: a scientifically settled manuscript being prepared, submitted, or revised.
See the output
The seven-page example shows how findings are prioritized, explained, located, and converted into an action plan. All manuscript details are fictional.
How it works
No work begins automatically. Suitability, expertise, scope, timing, conflicts, and file safety are reviewed before acceptance.
Describe the project and optionally upload permitted de-identified research files.
We confirm fit, deliverables, exclusions, timeline, fee, confidentiality terms, and follow-up.
The accepted material undergoes the agreed expert review and quality-control checks.
You receive prioritized findings, transparent limitations, and an opportunity for clarification.
Why MedRigor
MedRigor is designed for research-quality review—not generic academic writing or promises about journal outcomes.
Read the integrity commitments →Projects are screened for subject fit, research stage, review requirements, and available expertise before acceptance.
Methods, statistics, reporting, references, and conclusions are examined only within the confirmed written scope.
The quotation identifies accepted files, outputs, exclusions, turnaround, fee, confidentiality terms, and follow-up.
No ghostwriting, fabricated data or citations, detector-score manipulation, or guarantee of publication.
A disciplined review
MedRigor supports responsible research improvement. Authors remain accountable for the work and all submission decisions.
Deliverables remain subject to accountable professional review.
Material claims and sources are checked when included in scope.
Uploaded files remain non-public and quarantined for review.
Publication, peer-review outcomes, and detector scores are never promised.
Frequently asked
Choose Comprehensive Manuscript Review for a finished draft, Methods & Statistics for focused technical work, or Submission & Revision Support after the scientific content is settled. If uncertain, choose “Not sure” and we will advise after screening.
The quotation states the exact deliverable. It may be a prioritized manuscript report, focused technical report, journal checklist, or revision-response audit. See the synthetic sample for one report format.
They depend on manuscript length, study design, file set, review depth, journal requirements, urgency, and specialist availability. The fee and timeline are confirmed in writing before acceptance.
No. Editorial and peer-review decisions are outside our control.
Permitted de-identified research files may be uploaded: up to five files, 20 MB each, and 50 MB total. Never upload patient-identifiable or highly sensitive information.
Research-quality insights
Concise, evidence-aware guidance for medical and biomedical researchers. These resources are educational and do not replace a project-specific review.
Common weaknesses in design, analysis, reporting, and interpretation—and why language editing alone cannot resolve them.
Read the guide →A structured check for unsupported causal language, selective emphasis, imprecision, and conclusions that exceed the data.
Read the guide →Organize every comment, identify the exact revision, and explain justified disagreements professionally and transparently.
Read the guide →Project inquiry
Provide a concise description and, if helpful, upload permitted de-identified files. The inquiry is used only to assess suitability and prepare a scope.