Literature DB >> 23449238

A systematic review of peer review for scientific manuscripts.

Bradley P Larson1, Kevin C Chung.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The usefulness of peer review has been expressed as a method to improve the quality of published work. However, there has been a lack of systematic reviews to date to highlight the essential themes of the peer-review process.
METHODS: We performed a search of the English language literature published prior to October 2011 using PubMed to identify articles regarding peer review. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed a priori. Data were extracted and then analyzed for the prevalence of peer-review themes contained within the literature.
RESULTS: Of the 941 articles found during our original literature search, 37 were selected for review. The majority were commentary/editorial articles. The themes in our search included the structure and process of the peer-review system, the criteria for papers, ethics, and the different forms of the peer-review process.
CONCLUSIONS: The criteria for submission will vary, but our systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of what reviewers expect from authors. Our systematic review also highlighted ethical considerations for both authors and reviewers during the peer-review process. Although the topic of peer review is expansive and its process may vary from journal to journal, the understanding of the themes outlined in this paper will help authors recognize how to write a more successful paper. Also, more research must be carried out to establish the efficacy of the different styles of peer review, and it would be presumptuous to draw conclusions until further research is established.

Keywords:  Ethics; Peer review; Research methods; Systematic review

Year:  2012        PMID: 23449238      PMCID: PMC3280371          DOI: 10.1007/s11552-012-9392-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hand (N Y)        ISSN: 1558-9447


  47 in total

1.  How to peer review.

Authors:  Neil Blair Christensen; Akira Yokomizo
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.369

2.  Editors and publishing: integrity, trust and faith.

Authors:  Dawn Freshwater
Journal:  J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.952

3.  Ethics of guidelines for reviewers of medical manuscripts.

Authors:  David Minion; Ehab Sorial; Eric Endean
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 4.268

4.  Ethical authorship and publishing.

Authors:  Andrew J S Coats
Journal:  Int J Cardiol       Date:  2008-11-28       Impact factor: 4.164

5.  Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism.

Authors:  D A Kronick
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Promoting ethical conduct in the publication of research.

Authors:  Jane E Freedman
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ther       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.023

7.  Blinded manuscript review: an idea whose time has come?

Authors:  R M Pitkin
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Susan van Rooyen; Tony Delamothe; Stephen J W Evans
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-11-16

9.  Best Practice Guidelines on Publication Ethics: a publisher's perspective.

Authors:  Chris Graf; Elizabeth Wager; Alyson Bowman; Suzan Fiack; Diane Scott-Lichter; Andrew Robinson
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract Suppl       Date:  2007-01

10.  Making sense of non-financial competing interests.

Authors: 
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  A scoping review protocol on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals.

Authors:  Ketevan Glonti; Daniel Cauchi; Erik Cobo; Isabelle Boutron; David Moher; Darko Hren
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-10-22       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  Process of peer review continues.

Authors:  Ish Kumar Dhammi; Sudhir Kumar
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 1.251

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.