Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Croat Med J. 2012 Aug;53(4):386-9.

Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals.

Author information

  • 1Department of Rheumatology, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust, Clinical Research Unit, Russell's Hall Hospital, Dudley, United Kingdom. a.gasparyan@gmail.com

Abstract

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.

PMID:
22911533
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PMCID:
PMC3428827
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for University of Zagreb School of Medicine Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk