Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals.
Current scholarly publications heavily rely on high quality peer review. Peer review, albeit imperfect, is aimed at improving science writing and editing. Evidence supporting peer review as a guarantor of the quality of biomedical publications is currently lacking. Its outcomes are largely dependent on the credentials of the reviewers. Several lines of evidence suggest that predictors of the best contributors to the process include affiliation to a good University and proper research training. Though the options to further improve peer review are currently limited, experts are in favor of formal education and courses on peer review for all contributors to this process. Long-term studies are warranted to assess the strengths and weaknesses of this approach.
Department of Rheumatology, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust, Clinical Research Unit, Russell's Hall Hospital, Dudley, United Kingdom. a.gasparyan@gmail.com
Armen Yuri
AY
Gasparyan
George D
GD
Kitas
D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000193:education; D006801:Humans; D017712:Peer Review, Research / Q000592:standards*; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D011786:Quality Control