Peer review practices in biomedical literature: a time for change?
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to collect the opinions of a cross section of published authors on current practices concerning peer review in biomedical publishing.


METHODS
A questionnaire on various aspects of peer review was emailed to authors, whose manuscripts were published in Gut or the British Journal of Surgery between 2001 and 2006. Authors were asked to base their responses on their overall experience with peer review in biomedical literature and not with that one particular journal.


RESULTS
Most respondents felt that peer review is an effective quality control mechanism and does help improve manuscripts. Although some felt that it may cause delays in publication, lead to some research being lost and may not prevent all research-related fraud, most authors felt that there was still a strong role for the peer review process as it exists today.


CONCLUSIONS
An overwhelming majority of authors in our study approved of the current peer review practices in biomedical literature. A minority did however seem concerned. We discuss here the surrounding issues.
Mahawar
Kamal Kumar
KK
Department of Surgery, Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland, UK.
Kejariwal
Deepak
D
Malviya
Ajay
A
Birla
Rashmi
R
Viswanath
Y K S
YK
D001290:Attitude; D035843:Biomedical Research; D017712:Peer Review, Research; D010506:Periodicals as Topic; D011643:Publishing / Q000592:standards; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires