Literature DB >> 34014958

A scoping review on biomedical journal peer review guides for reviewers.

Eunhye Song1, Lin Ang2,3, Ji-Yeun Park4, Eun-Young Jun5, Kyeong Han Kim6, Jihee Jun2, Sunju Park7, Myeong Soo Lee2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Peer review is widely used in academic fields to assess a manuscript's significance and to improve its quality for publication. This scoping review will assess existing peer review guidelines and/or checklists intended for reviewers of biomedical journals and provide an overview on the review guidelines.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) databases were searched for review guidelines from the date of inception until February 19, 2021. There was no date restriction nor article type restriction. In addition to the database search, websites of journal publishers and non-publishers were additionally hand-searched.
RESULTS: Of 14,633 database publication records and 24 website records, 65 publications and 14 websites met inclusion criteria for the review (78 records in total). From the included records, a total of 1,811 checklist items were identified. The items related to Methods, Results, and Discussion were found to be the highly discussed in reviewer guidelines.
CONCLUSION: This review identified existing literature on peer review guidelines and provided an overview of the current state of peer review guides. Review guidelines were varying by journals and publishers. This calls for more research to determine the need to use uniform review standards for transparent and standardized peer review. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this study has been registered at Research Registry (www.researchregistry.com): reviewregistry881.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 34014958     DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251440

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  2 in total

1.  Transparency in peer review: Exploring the content and tone of reviewers' confidential comments to editors.

Authors:  Bridget C O'Brien; Anthony R Artino; Joseph A Costello; Erik Driessen; Lauren A Maggio
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Can Peer Review Be Kinder? Supportive Peer Review: A Re-Commitment to Kindness and a Call to Action.

Authors:  Catherine M Clase; Elizabeth Dicks; Rachel Holden; Manish M Sood; Adeera Levin; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh; Linda W Moore; Susan J Bartlett; Aminu K Bello; Clara Bohm; Darren Bridgewater; Josee Bouchard; Dylan Burger; Juan Jesús Carrero; Maoliosa Donald; Meghan Elliott; Maya J Goldenberg; Meg Jardine; Ngan N Lam; W Joy Maddigan; François Madore; Thomas A Mavrakanas; Amber O Molnar; G V Ramesh Prasad; Claudio Rigatto; Karthik K Tennankore; Elena Torban; Laurel Trainor; Christine A White; Sunny Hartwig
Journal:  Can J Kidney Health Dis       Date:  2022-05-01
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.