| Literature DB >> 31135720 |
Alina Tvina1, Ryan Spellecy, Anna Palatnik.
Abstract
Peer review is the major method used by the scientific community to evaluate manuscripts and decide what is suitable for publication. However, this process in its current design is not bulletproof and is prone to reviewer and editorial bias. Its lack of objectivity and transparency raise concerns that manuscripts might be judged based on interests irrelevant to the content itself and not on merit alone. This commentary reviews some of the most common biases that could potentially affect objective evaluation of a manuscript and proposes alternatives to the current single-blind peer review process that is being used by most scientific journals, including Obstetrics & Gynecology. By rethinking and tackling the shortcomings of the current methodology for peer review, we hope to create a discussion that will eventually lead to improving research and, ultimately, patient care.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31135720 DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003260
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Obstet Gynecol ISSN: 0029-7844 Impact factor: 7.661