Your manuscript,
submission-ready.
Improve your chances of journal acceptance. Catch reporting gaps, statistical issues, and structural problems before reviewers do.
Supported Journals
Three tools. One workflow.
Desk rejections start with reporting gaps. We surface them before editors do.
Checklist Compliance
Item-level audit against CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, CARE, STARD, ARRIVE, and TRIPOD with evidence from your paper.
Simulated Peer Review
Three reviewer personas — clinical, statistical, and domain expert — each applying real journal standards.
Statistical Verification
P-value checks, GRIM/SPRITE consistency, sample size adequacy, and effect size plausibility.
Red Flag Detection
Critical, major, and minor issues ranked by severity. Catch deal-breakers before reviewers do.
Resubmission Reshaper
Switching venues? Get a gap analysis between your current format and the new journal’s requirements, with concrete rewrite suggestions.
Response Workbench
Upload reviewer comments and get structured point-by-point response drafts with suggested manuscript edits for each point.
From researchers using our tools
“It scored our CONSORT compliance at 71% and flagged the gaps by section — allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors, exactly what comes back in the first round of review for stroke trials. We had the manuscript ready to resubmit within 48 hours.”
Assistant Professor, Stroke Neurology
“The statistical check caught a mismatch between our degrees of freedom and sample size in the primary endpoint table — a multivariate model for cognitive outcomes in our MS cohort. Six co-authors, three revisions, none of us caught it.”
Senior Research Fellow, Multiple Sclerosis
“Ran our Parkinson’s systematic review through the PRISMA audit and it flagged 4 gaps in the methods section and 2 in the flow diagram. Submitted to Movement Disorders two weeks later. First round was clean.”
Postdoctoral Researcher, Movement Disorders
FAQ
Is this free?
Yes, it is free during the beta. We’ll keep a generous free tier for individual researchers when we introduce pricing.
How does this improve my chances of acceptance?
We catch the reporting gaps, statistical inconsistencies, and structural issues that most commonly trigger desk rejections and major revision requests. Fixing these before submission means editors and reviewers focus on your science, not formatting problems. Our tools cover pre-submission review, resubmission reshaping after rejection, and structured responses to peer review.
Is my paper text stored?
No. Your text is permanently deleted as soon as analysis finishes. We only keep the results (never your original paper).
Could providers use my paper to train their models?
No. We use API-tier access to Anthropic and OpenAI, which contractually excludes API inputs from model training. This is different from the free consumer chatbots.
Can this replace actual peer review?
No, and it’s not trying to. This is a structural pre-check. It catches common issues before submission. Think of it as a first pass that catches what you’d kick yourself for missing.
What tools are included?
Three tools: Paper Pre-Review (checklist compliance, simulated reviewers, statistical checks), Resubmission Reshaper (reformat your paper for a different journal), and Response Workbench (draft point-by-point reviewer responses).
How long does analysis take?
1–3 minutes depending on length. Results stream in as they’re ready.
Which reporting guidelines are supported?
CONSORT 2025, PRISMA 2020, STROBE, CARE, STARD 2015, ARRIVE 2.0, TRIPOD, and SRQR.