One of the reviewer asked me to split results and discussion section, since I still want to continue the the article submission with combined results and discussion... please share your knowledge in this context. Thanks in advance.
If a reviewer suggests splitting the sections, it could be because they feel it would enhance the clarity or flow of your paper. It might be worth considering their perspective. Since the goal is to communicate your research as clearly and effectively as possible to your audience. The structure of your paper plays a crucial role in achieving this. Personally, if I were to be in your shoes, I would consider obeying the reviewer's suggestion. Thanks.
Dear Abdul Rehman , you have to check the author's instructions of the concerned journal and you can go ahead if the two formats are permitted (separated or merged). If only a separate one is allowed, you have to follow the reviewers' recommendations. Normally, such feedback comes from the editor-in-chief. Good luck.
some journals prefer to split the two sections, which can be sometimes hard for the writer. When you split, it is expected that in the "results" section you just illustrate data in a plain way without commenting about their implications, while in the "discussion" section you can explain and speculate about your findings. In some cases, results and discussion are so interlaced that it is hard to separate the sections. If the journal admits a unique section you can try to justify your choice to the referee, provided that you have strong and understandable motivation to do so. Good luck!