How to Overcome Journal Rejection?

Publishing Papers after rejection could be a long time-taking process that holds the ability to share our work with the Public. If you don’t succeed at first, revise and resubmit.

A Paper rejected doesn’t mean the research is always bad.

 Reasons for Rejection of Academic Papers from Journals

These mistakes are consistently made by different people. These mistakes are non-fatal which creates a bad impression about the paper Many non-fatal mistakes can lead to rejection of the Paper.

The submission of Paper takes almost 1 to 1.5 years, so avoid making these deadly mistakes.

  • Formatting Issues
  • Choosing the wrong Journal
  • Grammatical Errors
  • References (Many or Few)
  • Revealing the Author’s Identity
  • Missing Tables & Figures
  • Missing Abstract
  • Writing Style

In some cases, the Paper may be rejected even after major revisions. Most researchers believe that the data and assumptions will be accepted with minor revisions, but when they get a negative response, they become low.

What are the things that you should not do after Paper Rejection?

  • Complaining to the Editor
  • Posting the Reviews Online
  • Writing a letter with Anger
  • Discarding the Reviews
  • Giving up

 

Researchers Perspective after Rejection

  • Upset about the outcome – Give yourself time and go back to the feedback. Read the letter when the anger stage is off.
  • Look for Valuable Feedback – Review the Feedback in detail. The feedback can be helpful with a lot of clues as to how to improve the paper. Some feedback seems to be unhelpful but when looking it deeper, there will be a different perspective which turns out to be good.
  • Resubmit the same Journal – Some Journals reject the Paper but invite you to resubmit it later. If you do decide to submit on that Journal, you can choose this option.
  • Make Changes & Submit to a New Journal – The most common Chosen option is considering the comments, improving the manuscript, and submitting it to a New Journal. Must ensure the details of the Cover Letter, Reference Format. Deciding what to Change – Address all the comments. Minor comments are also needed to be addressed.
  • Make No Changes & Submit to Another Journal – This is an easy option but is not at all effective. Reviewers may identify the same feedback that you received earlier.
  • File the Manuscript & Never resubmit – Choosing a new paper for Advanced research so deciding not to submit the paper in any journal. Instead of posting it in a scientific community where your Research data might be useful to others. Making it as a Blog or Workshop for Practitioners. The outcomes might be surprisingly good. Have multiple projects, when something is messing up, you have another in hand which can lift you.

 

Conclusion

Rejection is a natural part of Academic life. Persistence and Willingness are the keys to Success in Paper Publication. Rejection as Redirection by looking at it as an opportunity redirected to something more suitable. Rejection makes us improve and strengthen our work before submitting it to another set of Audiences.

What are the barriers to post-publication peer review?

Post-publication peer review – doing peer review after the publication of the manuscript. When a paper is published. Everyone in the community starts to read it and comment on it either in conferences or Journal Clubs. It is an informal way of doing Peer Review.

F1000, OpenReview, PubMed Commons, TrueReview, Pubpeer are some of the Post-publication Peer Review Platforms.

 Challenges of Post-publication peer review

Lack of Motivation towards Scientific Researches

Editorial control will always be a vital feature of every open peer review method, including PPPR, as we’ve previously reported. Editors are expected to seek peer feedback promptly (and often submit several reminder emails), as well as provide a sense of “prestige” for being asked to review an article, as a clear acknowledgment of your expertise in that area.

Too many choices – Many platforms and alternative methods of use in communicating reviews. It’s likely that various comments appear on different pages but not on others when multiple copies of a paper exist across multiple platforms. It’s also likely that researchers would experience plagiarism. This mode of communication is possibly more suitable when significant theoretical or methodological shortcomings in published studies have been discovered.

Plagiarism

Allows unqualified referees to smear the Researcher’s original work with unfounded accusations, claims, and lies in the name of free speech.

Risk of non-constructive criticism

Some people may use PPPR to be intentionally confrontational in public, talking down to or intimidating their junior peers. As a result, any alternative or complementary system must mitigate or minimize this negative dynamic, ensure that an accountability process is built into and maintained, and ensure that marginalized groups are encouraged to participate.

 Solutions to Post-publication peer review

  • Offers Opportunities for Corrections Authors receive more Feedback from peers by posting papers online. This should lessen the agony of revise and re-submit.
  • Increases engagement of the Scientific Community for more recognition & career development.
  • Ensures openness by making the analysis publicly accessible to those involved in the study.
  • The technology has made it possible for Scientific Research Papers to be accessible always.
  • After reading the Research Paper, review comments can be posted immediately and shared on social media platforms.
  • Strength & Weakness of Scientific Papers is done real-time globally.

 

Conclusion

Peer review was established to ensure that research papers are well-documented and meet the scientific community’s general standards. However, another aim of peer review has always been to stimulate scientific debate. Post-Publication Peer review allows the broader community to discuss the article in greater depth, providing the open forum that peer review is designed to provide. Using this method would undoubtedly result in a conflict of interest. Peer review often prohibits discussion of a mainstream theory against a competing mainstream theory, and theoretical scientists are often denied the opportunity to do so. PPPR aims to make aspects of the daily research process more accessible to the public. It’s about bringing meaning to published research papers by using the evaluations and criticisms that researchers and others conduct.

What To Do When Your Journal Paper Is Rejected?

Rejection is a Certainty in Academic Journals. Acknowledge your feelings as Normal & Legitimate (Anger, Frustration, Disappointment, Worry). Remember it is the end of your paper not for your research or career.

Reasons for Rejection of Journal Paper

  • Plagiarism– Should be less than 10%
  • Ethics in Publication– Should acknowledge proper sources of support, permission to use data, images
  • The theme of the Journal– Should fall within the Aim & Scope of the Journal
  • Paper is under review at another journal – a single revision process must be done
  • Usage of Poor English– Avoid Grammar or spelling errors
  • Journal Formatting Guidelines– Types of Font, Font Size, Margins, Reference & Styles

 

Technical Reasons

  • Poor Validation– Results will be compared with the Standard Results. Carry out Experimental Analysis
  • Wrong Research Methodology
  • Inconclusive Results – Questions are unanswered
  • Lack of Proper Citations

 

What are the various Criteria in Journal Rejection?

There are multiple criteria checked by individual journals.

  • Always approach a journal that publishes your line of work.
  • A good paper published in the wrong journal leads to rejection.
  • Once you have chosen the appropriate journal, check whether you have chosen a strong problem statement in your article. The objective of your research must be identifiable in the Abstract and must be concluded in your work.
  • Your research and its conclusion must be backed up with scientific experiments.
  • Always use the correct statistical method for analysis and mention the methods in detail.
  • Never edit any real-time images which leads to plagiarism.
  • Cross-check images, graphs, tabulations.
  • Your presentation must be simple and easily understandable.
  • Proofread your manuscript to avoid grammatical errors.
  • Always have sufficient data and test samples to establish & support each statement that you claim in the article. If the data size is small, there is always bias in the results which leads to rejection.
  • The conclusion can be generalized only when there is sufficient sampling done.
  • Carefully scrutinize your article and take expert opinions before submitting the research for publishing.
  • Search for a High-Impact Journal.
  • The cover letter must clearly state the details & purpose.
  • If the research quality does not meet the standards of the scientific society, the research will be rejected.
  • The Published Work must apply to all scenarios, if it is for a special purpose, it must be explicitly mentioned in the aim of the work applies to certain scenarios.
  • Insufficient Citation also leads to rejection.
  • The Scientific manuscript must have a catchy aim and a novel technique that attracts viewers.

 

How to Respond after Rejection of Journal Paper?

  • Show the comments to others.
  • Read the comments carefully.
  • Figure out the underlying reasons for Rejection.
  • Re-evaluate and learn.

 

Conclusion

There is nothing to be ashamed of if your paper is rejected. It is a basic process in Journal Publication and not to take it personally. If rejected, do the following things

  • Do something else to distract yourself & most importantly sleep on it one night.
  • Give yourself 3 days’ time and analyze the Rejection Letter more logically.
  • Consider the other Options
  • Proceed with the next Journal Publication

The Benefits Of Peer-Reviewing A Manuscript

What Is The Peer-Review Of A Manuscript?

  • Peer-Review is a process in which the Manuscript proposed for the Publication of the Journal is assessed by a group of experts in the appropriate field.
  • It can be said as a sign of recognition in one’s field.

 

Who is involved in the Process of Peer-Review?

  • Experts in the appropriate field.
  • Editorial Board Members.

 

Evaluation Stages

Initial Evaluation

  • Read the Abstract & Conclusion.
  • Skip the Figures, Data, Tables.

 

In-Depth Evaluation

  • Read the entire script
  • Note the details
  • Getting Answer to these Questions
  • Is the quality of the manuscript good for a conclusion?
  • Is the experimental design appropriate?
  • Is there any non-relevant data?

 

How does Peer-Review Work?

  • The Research Scholars writes a Paper & Submits the Manuscript to the Academic Journal that publishes similar or related types of works.
  • The Journal Editor reads the Manuscript and decides whether it meets the criteria for Publication or not. If it is rejected, the manuscript goes back to the Researcher with a polite rejection letter. If it meets the criteria, then the Manuscript is accepted and is sent to the scientific community who will read it as well.
  • The reviewers read the manuscript to evaluate in terms of its purpose, scope, thesis, outcome and ask questions such as
  • Is the topic worth investigating?
  • Are relevant sources being used?
  • Does the evidence support the thesis?
  • Is the thesis clearly and convincingly argued?
  • Is the work original?
  • Once the reviewers have finished reading the manuscript, they send their comments to the editor, who in turn, sends it to the writer another letter that will either accept the paper without revisions or will provide comments and ask for revisions based on the peer reviewers’ evaluation of the work.
  • Once the paper is revised to the satisfaction of the editor and the reviewers take several revisions, the article is published.
  • When using Peer-reviewed articles for research papers and assignments, can use the best data or information available upon which to base your work.

 

Peer Review Methodology

 What are the Questions to be focused on while Peer-Reviewing?

Title

  • Is the title match with the Manuscript?
  • Are the major findings mentioned in the Manuscript?
  • Is the conclusion overstated?

 

Abstract

  • Can the abstract stand alone?

 

Intro

  • Is the Intro brief?
  • Does the intro have the aim or objective of the Research?

 

Methods

  • Are the methods appropriate?
  • Is the statistical analysis provided?

 

Results

  • Is the paper within the scope of the Research?
  • Does the paper address the important & interesting question?
  • Is the Manuscript readable?

 

Over-view of Peer-Review

  • The manuscript should be kept confidential.
  • Feedback should be constructive and must include reasons to support the comments.

 

How is Peer-Review beneficial in Academic Writing?

  • Improves Writing & Critical Thinking Skills
  • Develops Collaborative Learning
  • Encourages the writer to perform better
  • Saves time for Researchers
  • Ensure Quality Research is Published

 

The Peer-Reviewer needs to pay attention to evaluate the Manuscript Readability such as

  • Is the manuscript readable?
  • Are the sentences easy to read?
  • Are the sentences grammatically correct?

 

Conclusion

Peer-Review is a crucial learning process. A Good Peer-Review should be

  • Focused – Main areas should be addressed
  • Constructive – Identification of the Problems clearly
  • Structured – Systematic Approach to the Manuscript
  • Polite & Professional Feedback
  • Listing major strength & weakness
  • Recommend changes to improve

Roles & Responsibilities of Peer-Reviewers

Peer-Review Process

Peer Review is an influential process of academic journal publication. All Manuscripts are Peer Reviewed by the subject experts.

Before a scholarly work is published or approved, it is reviewed by a group of experts in the same field to ensure that it meets the appropriate criteria.

Stages of Peer-Review

Did you know the Process of Peer-Review?

Initial Check

It is done by the Editor who reads & approves the manuscript for Peer Review Process. The manuscript may be rejected at this level.

Editor-in-chief Review

Experts evaluate the manuscript and see if the scope of the journal is well defined and interesting.

Assigned to Editor With Subject Expertise

Experts who have subject knowledge related to the manuscript evaluate the manuscript.

Peers / Referees

The experts who check the manuscripts are known as Peers or Referees. They check the following things:

  • Quality & Significance of the Manuscript
  • About the Research topic – if it is Interesting and Important
  • Sound Methodology
  • Arriving at Logical Conclusions
  • Checking the Findings are original

Review Return

The Peers give a high-quality review after evaluation of the manuscript.

Editor’s Final Decision

Editors decide if the manuscript is worthy of publishing or not. If approved, they may recommend revisions to the Authors.

Responsibilities of Journal Editors 

Have you ever wondered what Journal Editors do in Peer-Review?

Roles towards Authors 

  • Providing constructive feedback promptly on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work.
  • Providing specific suggestions for improvement and stating the details of the journal in a Cover Letter.
  • Maintaining the confidentiality of the review process.

Roles towards Editors

  • Informing the editor immediately if unable to review.
  • Following the editor’s comments and creating an abstract if required.
  • Determining scientific merit, originality, importance & clarity of the hypothesis and scope of the work and indicating ways to improve it.
  • Providing Critical Assessment – Strength & Weakness of Introduction, Methodology, Data Analysis, Results, Discussion & Conclusion.
  • Checking the formatting of the Manuscript and instructing if it is not in proper order.
  • Looking into Internal Consistency of the Manuscript, Writing Style & Figure/ Table Presentation.
  • Checking the Appropriateness of References, Title, Abstracts, and Conclusions.
  • Ensuring that the manuscript adheres to the journal’s guidelines.

Roles towards Readers

  • Assuring that the methodology and results of the review are easily accessible to the readers.
  • Citing sources to assist readers in gathering knowledge about the journal.

Conclusion

The Editor’s decision is crucial in the publication of a journal. The Author, Editor, and Readers are all subjected to peer review. Academic journals rely heavily on peer review for publication.

To conclude, the purpose of Peer Reviewers is to

  • Select the manuscript for the journal
  • Determine the Originality of the manuscript
  • Improve the quality of the published paper
  • Ensures previous work is acknowledged
  • Determine the importance of findings

The best Peer Reviewers tend to view themselves as Mentors rather than Critics.

Common Reasons Why a Research Paper Gets Rejected by Journals

The publishing industry is enormous and authors are open to choose the appropriate journal for submission. Though there are thousands of journals to choose from, rejection is common in scholarly publishing. The rejection causes demotivation among researchers, who dedicate months to designing and writing a perfectly molded paper.

Here, we have focused on the common mistakes for which academic papers are rejected by journals.

Technical screening

Manuscripts submitted to a reputed high-impact academic journal undergo severe scrutiny even before they are screened by the editorial board members and reviewers.

The primary causes of their rejection at this stage are:

  • The paper is not relevant to the journal’s readers or are not under the aims and scope of the journal
  • Paper lacks novelty in the relevant field
  • Plagiarized content
  • Ethical concerns
  • Unavailability of Informed consent forms of subjects
  • If similar research papers are already under consideration
  • The paper has not been prepared based on the journal’s guidelines
  • Incomplete materials (If the author hasn’t provided the mandatory documents)

Peer review process

After the initial screening, the editors assign the reviewers to initiate the peer-review process. In the peer-review a comprehensive critical analysis of the high-quality papers takes place.

The primary causes of their rejection at this stage are:

  • The aim is unclear and the introduction part lacks clarity
  • Use of insignificant or outdated procedures or methodology
  • Statistical analysis of the data is inadequate and weak
  • Illogical or unstructured arguments
  • The data does not support the conclusions
  • Insufficient data failing to produce a significant result
  • Poor writing or contains too many jargons
  • Inconsistencies in the writing with grammatical and spelling errors

Quality of figures and other issues

  • If an author has failed to obtain written consent of the participants before/during the research.
  • Conflict of interest declaration, copyright issues, plagiarized data, and other ethical concerns associated with the research paper.
  • The journal may not have the space for the paper
  • The paper is incompetent with the high standards of other papers submitted to the journal
  • Non-archival data and of insignificant value to the journal
  • Poorly designed and irrelevant repetition tables or figures

Whatever the reasons, make sure that you read the feedback in depth and reflect on it. Even if you don’t agree with the feedback, it’s still important to understand why someone else might have thought that. Hence, knowing and accepting the reasons for rejection by the journal can significantly enhance the chance of publication in the next attempt.

What Types of Articles Are Published in Academic and Scientific journals?

 

All journals and periodicals publish varied types of content, all generally referred to as articles. However, there are certain technical differences that differentiate the type of publication.

It is important for aspiring authors to understand the different types of publications in order to prepare for one. While choosing a journal for publication, it is also important to understand what type of publication the journal prefers or is presently soliciting. The time period is also a major determinant of what type of publication you should try for.

Types of publication:

Original Research Article: Original research is the most sought after publication; both by authors and also scientific journals and are considered as primary literature. It may be called an Original Article, Research Article, Research, or just Article, depending on the journal. These publications are detailed reporting of original research being presently conducted and conveyed for the first time to the rest of the world. They include hypothesis, background study, methods, results, interpretation of findings, and a discussion of possible implications.

It is also the most difficult to produce as it requires tenacious background research work, and is often a by-product of the actual exercise.

Review article: Academic and scientific journals usually publish two kinds of reviews; literature reviews, often called review articles, and book reviews, which are frequently referred to as reviews. Book reviews are usually solicited by journals from field experts whom they often commission for the review.

Literature reviews are bird’s-eye perspective on the published scholarship in a field of study or narrower area of specialization that provides a critical and constructive analysis of existing published literature in a field, through summary, analysis, and comparison. Scientific journals encourage a specific types of reviews like literature reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses as they are extremely popular with readers. However, one expects a certain level of experience and authority from the author to write such reviews and journals only entertain such entries from select authors.

Brief communications: Brief communications can take the form of short notes, news analysis, letters to editors, Opinions. These publications are marked by their brevity in terms of length, often restricted to 1200-2000 words. Such content has to be also extremely focused on a certain specific aspect with very little scope of theoretical exploration. These types of content are also referred to as ‘Perspectives’and are scholarly reviews or commentaries that present a personal point on widespread notions of ongoing discourse.

Brief communications can be very engaging, especially when directed to an author on a previously published article and if the latter chooses to respond to it. They are also very good sources for references for readers and hence their popularity.

Whatever type of content you choose to write, scientific journals will only publish them if they see value in it for readers. Thus, the quality of the content is critical irrespective of the format and it must enrich the present discourse in the field.

What Are The Major Reasons For Scientific Manuscript Rejection?

Research paper writing is a specialized skill that all academicians have to learn. While publication is an essential part of the profession, the rates of rejection by journals are too high. Estimates suggest that for highly regarded journals like Cell, Nature, and Science, the rejection rate is as high as 97%! That is to say, of all the 100 submissions, only 3 make it through editorial and peer review scrutiny, and this is for top professionals of their fields! Therefore, it is critical that authors are aware of the reasons for rejection in order to avoid the same.

Top reasons for rejection:

Editorial reasons for Rejection

Mismatched scope: Each journal has a well-defined aim and scope, focusing on some specific area of the field. Often, authors share manuscripts with reputed journals for publication without actually checking if their article matches the journal objectives. It is best to check the scope of the journal before sharing the original manuscript; you may simply write to the editor to enquire if they are interested in an article on the topic you have written on.

Quality of writing: Many times, editors reject articles at the initial screening simply because of poor language. Journals have their own set of writing guidelines, including referencing style, font, etc. Any submission not fulfilling these conditions are automatically rejected. Poor language is another pet peeve of most editors, as is plagiarized content.

Value addition: Editors look for articles that add value to their journals. Often editors will reject articles that they find to be extensions of an earlier publication by the same author, the article has no archival value or adds little to the ongoing discourse.

Technical Reasons for Rejection

The structure: Most articles need to have a basic structure, starting with an introduction, followed by a literature review, methodology, etc. For empirical studies, the methodology, data reporting, etc. have to follow well-established protocols. Failure to adhere to accepted structures will lead to rejection.

Poor data work: Poor or insufficient data work is often the biggest bane. Journals will reject articles if they feel the hypothesis is unclear, data collection and analysis is insufficient or does not measure up to industry standards, poor or insufficient analytical tools, inconclusive data leading to speculation, especially in the conclusion. You need to have clarity on whether you need to undertake parametric or non-parametric tests for your data, whether the sample size is good enough to draw conclusions, whether the proper statistical checks and measures are adhered to, etc.

Poor referencing: Referencing is critical for an original submission, as it is directly linked to the problem of plagiarism. You must ensure that all your sources are duly referred to, and that too in the format specified by the journal. Often, journals will also reject articles if your references have dated articles and they feel you are not updated on the subject, or you are referring to the same article multiple times over the article.

It is advised to be acutely aware of these factors in advance before even drafting the original manuscript for submission.

Importance Of Meta-analysis In Medical research

Writing articles related to medical research today has to follow certain well-accepted forms of research in order to be accepted. Of the various types of medical research articles, studies based on metadata analysis is one of the most well-accepted forms.

The concept of meta-analysis stems from the field of statistics. Meta-analysis is a process of combining the results of multiple scientific research related to the same field. Statistically, if there are multiple experiments on the same lines, the results of each are prone to certain degrees of error (for example, the most commonly occurring errors are Type 1 errors related to false-positives or Type 2 errors of false-negatives). However, if all those studies are pooled together, the net derivative result is less likely to have any of such errors and will yield a more definitive result. The key to the aggregation of data is higher statistical power and thereby more robust point estimates than any individual scientific research.

Meta-analysis based medical research started in the 70s and has gained immense popularity ever since. In fact, statistics suggest that meta-analysis based medical articles are the most cited articles in the field.

While meta-analysis generally refers to quantitative studies, there exists another form of studies called statistical meta-synthesis pertaining to integrating results from multiple but related qualitative studies. The approach to statistical meta-synthesis is more interpretive than aggregative and thereby have a different approach altogether. Before embarking on your work, you need to first determine whether you want to go for meta-analysis or statistical meta-synthesis, based on the type of field you are working on.

How to Approach Writing a meta-analysis medical research paper?

Meta-analysis is conducted to assess the strength of evidence, usually on the efficacy of any specific disease or particular treatment. Meta-analysis seeks to collate multiple pieces of evidence to arrive at a conclusion; whether any direct or indirect effect exists, and/or whether such effect is positive or negative (particularly pertaining to a specific type of treatment). This assumes importance as heterogeneity is vital for the development of any new hypothesis.

Key to such study is developing the metadata pool, based on a thorough filing and coding system, proper categorization of data, and thereby identifying the key analytical data- crunching exercise that is expected to yield the best results.

The key to a good meta-analysis exercise is proper identification of the different methods adopted in each exercise and thereby identifying how they may have affected the findings of those exercises. Identifying and mapping methods is also critical given not all methods are comparable and therefore all data may not be compatible.

Tools for meta-analysis

Needless to say, the main tools for such analysis are hardcore statistical tools, mostly software like SAS, STRATA, R. The data is usually pooled from recognized medical research sources like PubMed, Embase, or CENTRAL.

Reporting of results is usually done via the form of Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-analysis or PRISMA.

MY TARGET JOURNAL REJECTED MY RESEARCH PAPER: WHAT SHOULD I DO?

A journal rejecting a submission is an unfortunate reality in the life of an academician. This is especially true for young scholars who rightly feel dejected given the hard work and high expectations hinged in their submissions.

However, a journal rejection is not the end of the world and there are still various options before a young scholar, depending on the exact type of rejection. Here are some quick tips on how to react to a journal rejection.

What type of rejection: Read the communication carefully to understand what type or stage of rejection has been made by the journal. In some cases, rejections are desk rejections, where the editors reject an article in the first stage of sorting. This may be due to poorly written or structured articles, failure to follow formatting instructions of the journals, lack of proper English, improper referencing, etc. These can be easily rectified and you can share it back after revision with the same journal.

Poor fit with the journal: Often journals reject articles because it does not fit their exact focus area or the interests of its readership. In such cases, you may either try to rework the research paper, but perhaps it makes more sense to try some other journal perhaps better suited for your research paper. Sometimes, journals also suggest ‘insignificant advancement to current knowledge’ as a reason, which basically means your article is not adding much value to the present discourse. This is where you have to think about how to improve upon your work to make it more relevant.

Reviewer Comments: Reviewers often share detailed comments and suggest resubmission post revision. This is not a total rejection but an ask to improve upon your paper. You can revise your research paper and resubmit it with a detailed response to the review comments.

Technical issues: Sometimes journals reject submissions because of technical factors. There may be complaints of plagiarism, insufficient data work, reviewers finding flaws with the methodology or data collection, challenges to the hypothesis, etc. For plagiarism, often unintentional due to improper referencing, it is best to engage professional editorial help for a plagiarism proof manuscript.

Critiques of data work, methodology, etc are serious concerns that require not just a relook at the research paper but the entire research exercise. In such a case, you may either choose to revisit your entire work, or you may choose to share a revised version with some other journal, as the one who has rejected it on these grounds is unlikely to entertain even a revised version.

Change journals: This is always an option, often a tempting one, especially an emotional one in wake of rejection. except for some specific reasons, trying to resubmit to a new journal means only going through the entire submission process all over again. This means delays as well as extra work. Therefore, such a decision, if taken, must be done judiciously considering all factors of rejection.