A scoping review on biomedical journal peer review guides for reviewers

PLoS ONE

Volumn 16, Issue 5 May, 2021, Pages

  Song, Eunhye ^a   Ang, Lin ^a,b   Park, Ji Yeun ^c   Jun, Eun Young ^c   Kim, Kyeong Han ^d   Jun, Jihee ^a   Park, Sunju ^c   Lee, Myeong Soo ^a,b  

^a Korea Institute of Oriental Medicine (KIOM)   (South Korea)

^b University of Science and Technology (UST)   (South Korea)

^c Daejeon University   (South Korea)

^d Woosuk University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHECKLIST; HUMAN; PEER REVIEW; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDLINE; PUBLICATION;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBMED;

EID: 85106347743     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251440     Document Type: Review

References (88)

1. Simera I, Altman DG. Reporting medical research. International journal of clinical practice. 2013; 67 (8):710–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12168 PMID: 23656235
2. Alam M. How to review a manuscript. Dermatologic surgery. 2015; 41(8):883–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/DSS.0000000000000421 PMID: 26218722
3. Hirst A, Altman DG. Are peer reviewers encouraged to use reporting guidelines? A survey of 116 health research journals. PloS one. 2012; 7(4):e35621. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0035621 PMID: 22558178
4. Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2018; 18(1):143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x PMID: 30453902
5. Lockwood C, dos Santos KB, Pap R. Practical Guidance for Knowledge Synthesis: Scoping Review Methods. Asian Nursing Research. 2019; 13(5):287–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anr.2019.11.002 PMID: 31756513
6. Peters MD, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, McInerney P, Parker D, Soares CB. Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. International journal of evidence-based healthcare. 2015; 13(3):141–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050 PMID: 26134548
7. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Annals of internal medicine. 2018; 169(7):467–73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 PMID: 30178033
8. Sucharew H, Macaluso M. Methods for Research Evidence Synthesis: The Scoping Review Approach. J Hosp Med. 2019; 7:3. https://doi.org/10.12788/jhm.3248 PMID: 31251164
9. Small HY, Eisner D. Writing a peer review: a primer for junior researchers. Cardiovascular Research. 2019; 115(10):e93–e5. https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvz174 PMID: 31334806
10. Araujo CGSd. Peer review: a constatntly-evolving scientific process. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2012; 98:e32–e5. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0066-782x2012000200017 PMID: 22378341
11. Hawker S, Payne S, Kerr C, Hardey M, Powell J. Appraising the Evidence: Reviewing Disparate Data Systematically. Qualitative health research. 2002; 12(9):1284–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1049732302238251 PMID: 12448672
12. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and metaanalyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009; 6(7):e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 PMID: 19621072
13. Ades AE, Caldwell DM, Reken S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, Dias S. Evidence synthesis for decision making 7: a reviewer’s checklist. Medical decision making. 2013; 33(5):679–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0272989X13485156 PMID: 23804511
14. Alexander GR. A guide to reviewing manuscripts. Maternal and child health journal. 2005; 9(1):113–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-005-2423-y PMID: 15880980
15. Alexandrov AV, Hennerici MG, Norrving B. Suggestions for reviewing manuscripts. Cerebrovascular diseases. 2009; 28(3):243–6. https://doi.org/10.1159/000228588 PMID: 19602875
16. Allen LA, Ho PM. Peer Review of a Manuscript Submission: A How-To Guide for Effective and Efficient Commentary. Circulation Cardiovascular quality and outcomes. 2017; 10(12).
17. Allen TW. Conducting Proper Peer Review for a Journal. Bariatric Surgical Practice and Patient Care. 2014; 9(1):18–20.
18. Altieri MS, Pawlik TM. Mentor of the Month Series: How to Review a Manuscript from an Editor’s Perspective? Journal of gastrointestinal surgery 2020; 24:1452–1454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-020-04567-w PMID: 32207076
19. Annesley TM. Writing an Effective Manuscript Review: The 6 “Be’s” to Success. Clinical chemistry. 2013; 59(7):1028–35. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2013.208280 PMID: 23741073
20. Benos DJ, Kirk KL, Hall JE. How to review a paper. Advances in physiology education. 2003; 27(1–4):47–52. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00057.2002 PMID: 12760840
21. Brand RA. Reviewing for clinical orthopaedics and related research. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 2012; 470(9):2622–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-012-2447-8 PMID: 22752799
22. Brown LM, David EA, Karamlou T, Nason KS. Reviewing scientific manuscripts: A comprehensive guide for peer reviewers. The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. 2017; 153(6):1609–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.12.067 PMID: 28526112
23. Cantor GH, Caswell JL, Crissman JW, Gillette DM, Gunson DE, Hogenesch H, et al. Veterinary Pathology and Peer Review. Veterinary Pathology. 2009; 46(2):173–5. https://doi.org/10.1354/vp.46-2-173 PMID: 19261628
24. Christenbery TL. Manuscript peer review: a guide for advanced practice nurses. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners. 2011; 23(1):15–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-7599.2010.00572.x PMID: 21208330
25. Crigger NJ. What We Owe The Author: rethinking editorial peer review. Nursing ethics. 1998; 5(5):451–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/096973309800500508 PMID: 9782929
26. Currie G, McCuaig C, Di Prospero L. Systematically Reviewing a Journal Manuscript: A Guideline for Health Reviewers. Journal of medical imaging and radiation sciences. 2016; 47(2):129–38.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmir.2016.01.005 PMID: 31047176
27. Del Mar C, Hoffmann TC. A guide to performing a peer review of randomised controlled trials. BMC Med. 2015; 13:248. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0471-8 PMID: 26521647
28. Dhillon P. How to be a good peer reviewer of scientific manuscripts. The FEBS journal. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/febs.15705 PMID: 33486891
29. Duchesne S, Jannin P. Proposing a manuscript peer-review checklist. NeuroImage. 2008; 39(4):1783–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.09.065 PMID: 18053748
30. Duff K, O’Bryant SE, Westervelt HJ, Sweet JJ, Reynolds CR, van Gorp WG, et al. On becoming a peer reviewer for a neuropsychology journal. Archives of clinical neuropsychology. 2009; 24(3):201–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acp031 PMID: 19640873
31. Einarson TR, Koren G. To accept or reject? A guide to peer reviewing of medical journal papers. Journal of population therapeutics and clinical pharmacology. 2012; 19(2):e328–33. PMID: 22885272
32. England JR, Cheng PM. Artificial Intelligence for Medical Image Analysis: A Guide for Authors and Reviewers. American journal of roentgenology. 2019; 212(3):513–9. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.18. 20490 PMID: 30557049
33. Estrada C, Kalet A, Smith W, Chin MH. How to be an outstanding reviewer for the Journal of General Internal Medicine . . . and other journals. Journal of general internal medicine. 2006; 21(3):281.
34. Genter MB. How to Review a Manuscript: Tips and Suggestions. International journal of toxicology. 2020; 39(3):263. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091581820911280 PMID: 32153218
35. Halder N, Ramsay R, Tyrer P, Casey P. Peer reviewing made easy. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment. 2011; 17(2):150–7. https://doi.org/10.1192/apt.bp.109.007294
36. Heddle NM, Ness PM. Reviewing manuscripts: tips and responsibilities. Transfusion. 2009; 49 (11):2265–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1537-2995.2009.02390.x PMID: 19761546
37. Hill JA. How to Review a Manuscript. Journal of electrocardiology. 2016; 49(2):109–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2016.01.001 PMID: 26850498
38. Hunter J. Rapid Peer Reviewer Checklist for Rapid Reviews—RAPeer (DRAFT). Adv Integr Med. 2020; 7(4):183–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aimed.2020.07.003 PMID: 32837897
39. Kelly J, Sadeghieh T, Adeli K. Peer Review in Scientific Publications: Benefits, Critiques, & A Survival Guide. Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Chemistry. 2014; 25(3):227–43.
40. Kocak B, Kus EA, Kilickesmez O. How to read and review papers on machine learning and artificial intelligence in radiology: a survival guide to key methodological concepts. Eur Radiol. 2020.
41. Kotsis SV, Chung KC. Manuscript rejection: how to submit a revision and tips on being a good peer reviewer. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. 2014; 133(4):958–64. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS. 0000000000000002 PMID: 24675196
42. Kottner J, Norman I. How to peer review and revise manuscripts submitted for publication in academic nursing journals. International journal of nursing studies. 2016; 64:A1–a3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.09.011 PMID: 27692443
43. Kyrgidis A, Triaridis S. Methods and Biostatistics: a concise guide for peer reviewers. Hippokratia. 2010; 14(Suppl 1):13–22. PMID: 21487486
44. Lapin BR. Considerations for Reporting and Reviewing Studies Including Health-Related Quality of Life. Chest. 2020; 158(1, Supplement):S49–S56.
45. Lazarides MK, Georgiadis GS, Papanas N. Do’s and Don’ts for a Good Reviewer of Scientific Papers: A Beginner’s Brief Decalogue. The International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds. 2020; 19(3):227–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534734620924349 PMID: 32525721
46. Lippi G. How do I peer-review a scientific article?-a personal perspective. Annals of translational medicine. 2018; 6(3):68. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2017.12.15 PMID: 29610756
47. Marusić M, Sambunjak D, Marusić A. Guide for peer reviewers of scientific articles in the Croatian Medical Journal. Croat Med J. 2005; 46(2):326–32. PMID: 15849858
48. Moher D. Optimal strategies to consider when peer reviewing a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Medicine. 2015; 13(1):274. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0509-y PMID: 26521692
49. Oerther S, Watson R. Emerging nursing scholars guide to peer reviewing an academic manuscript. Nursing open. 2019; 6(4):1284–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.368 PMID: 31660154
50. Pai SA. How to referee a paper—and save the world. Indian journal of cancer. 2020; 57(1):110–4. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijc.IJC_12_20 PMID: 32129302
51. Paice E. How to write a peer review. Hospital medicine. 2001; 62(3):172–5. https://doi.org/10.12968/hosp.2001.62.3.2392 PMID: 11291469
52. Pietrzak WS. A practical guide to effective journal peer reviewing. The Journal of craniofacial surgery. 2010; 21(3):631–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181d8403c PMID: 20485095
53. Provenzale JM, Stanley RJ. A systematic guide to reviewing a manuscript. AJR American journal of roentgenology. 2005; 185(4):848–54. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.0782 PMID: 16177399
54. Rosenfeld RM. How to review journal manuscripts. Otolaryngology—head and neck surgery. 2010; 142 (4):472–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2010.02.010 PMID: 20304264
55. Rostami K, Khadjooi K, Abasaeed-Elhag R, Ishaq S. How to evaluate a manuscript for publication? Gastroenterology and hepatology from bed to bench. 2011; 4(2):58–62. PMID: 24834158
56. Rutkowski JL, Cairone JV. How to review scientific manuscripts and clinical case reports for Journal of Oral Implantology. The Journal of oral implantology. 2009; 35(6):310–4. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAIDJOI-D-09-00053R1.1 PMID: 20017649
57. Salasche SJ. How to "peer review" a medical journal manuscript. Dermatologic surgery. 1997; 23 (6):423–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4725.1997.tb00081.x PMID: 9217794
58. Sasson A, Okojie O, Verano R, Moshiri M, Patlas MN, Hoffmann JC, et al. How to Read, Write, and Review the Imaging Literature. Current problems in diagnostic radiology. 2021; 50(2):109–14. https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2020.01.002 PMID: 32024599
59. Schüttpelz-Brauns K, Stosch C, Matthes J, Himmelbauer M, Herrler A, Bachmann C, et al. Recommendations for reviewing a manuscript for the GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung. GMS Zeitschrift fur medizinische Ausbildung. 2010; 27(5):Doc75. https://doi.org/10.3205/zma000712 PMID: 21818220
60. Seals DR, Tanaka H. Manuscript peer review: a helpful checklist for students and novice referees. Advances in physiology education. 2000; 23(1):52–8. https://doi.org/10.1152/advances.2000.23.1.S52 PMID: 10902527
61. Simpson KJ. Reviewing an Original Research Manuscript for the International Journal of Exercise Science: A Guide for Students and Professionals. International journal of exercise science. 2008; 1(2):43–9. PMID: 27182294
62. Smith DV, Stokes LB, Marx K, Aitken SL. Navigating manuscript assessment: The new practitioner’s guide to primary literature peer review. Journal of oncology pharmacy practice. 2019; 25(1):94–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078155218761222 PMID: 29498322
63. Smolčić V, Simundić AM. Peer-review policy and guidelines for Biochemia Medica Journal. Biochemia medica. 2014; 24(3):321–8. https://doi.org/10.11613/BM.2014.034 PMID: 25351350
64. Son AR, Kim BG. Guidelines for reviewing manuscripts submitted to Animal Bioscience. Animal bioscience. 2021; 34(2):161–2. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.20.0361 PMID: 33152211
65. Stahel PF, Moore EE. How to review a surgical paper: a guide for junior referees. BMC Med. 2016; 14:29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0578-6 PMID: 26874834
66. Stenfors T, Kajamaa A, Bennett D. How to . . . assess the quality of qualitative research. The clinical teacher. 2020; 17(6):596–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13242 PMID: 32790137
67. Stone WJ, Navalta JW, Lyons TS, Schafer MA. From the Editors: A Guide for Peer Review in the Field of Exercise Science. International journal of exercise science. 2018; 11(1):1112–9. PMID: 30338014
68. Sucato GS, Holland-Hall C. Reviewing Manuscripts: A Systematic Approach. Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology. 2018; 31(5):441–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2018.06.005 PMID: 29936302
69. Sylvia LM, Herbel JL. Manuscript peer review—a guide for health care professionals. Pharmacotherapy. 2001; 21(4):395–404. https://doi.org/10.1592/phco.21.5.395.34493 PMID: 11310511
70. Talanow R. JRCR—updated author and reviewer guidelines for 2014. J Radiol Case Rep. 2014; 8 (6):39–40.
71. Tandon R. How to review a scientific paper. Asian journal of psychiatry. 2014; 11:124–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2014.08.007 PMID: 25248566
72. Tullu MS, Karande S. Peer reviewing an original research paper. Journal of postgraduate medicine. 2020; 66(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpgm.JPGM_492_19 PMID: 31898597
73. Venne V. Reviewing manuscripts for the Journal of Genetic Counseling: practical suggestions. Journal of genetic counseling. 2015; 24(2):189–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-014-9802-8 PMID: 25527418
74. Walker BF. How to critique an article on therapy. Australasian chiropractic & osteopathy: journal of the Chiropractic & Osteopathic College of Australasia. 1997; 6(2):52–7. PMID: 17987150
75. Wilson JR. Responsible authorship and peer review. Science and engineering ethics. 2002; 8(2):155–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-002-0016-3 PMID: 12092488
76. Vintzileos AM, Ananth CV, Odibo AO, Chauhan SP, Smulian JC, Oyelese Y. The relationship between a reviewer’s recommendation and editorial decision of manuscripts submitted for publication in obstetrics. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2014; 211(6):703.e1–.e5.
77. Glonti K, Cauchi D, Cobo E, Boutron I, Moher D, Hren D. A scoping review on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals. BMC Med. 2019; 17(1):118. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1347-0 PMID: 31217033
78. Davis CH, Bass BL, Behrns KE, Lillemoe KD, Garden OJ, Roh MS, et al. Reviewing the review: a qualitative assessment of the peer review process in surgical journals. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2018; 3:4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0048-0 PMID: 29850109
79. Gardner MJ, Machin D, Campbell MJ. Use of check lists in assessing the statistical content of medical studies. British medical journal (Clinical research ed). 1986; 292(6523):810–2. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.292.6523.810 PMID: 3082452
80. Strayhorn J, McDermott JF, Tanguay P. An intervention to improve the reliability of manuscript reviews for the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Am J Psychiatry. 1993; 150(6):947–52. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.150.6.947 PMID: 8494074
81. Coronel R, Opthof T. The role of the reviewer in editorial decision-making. Cardiovascular Research. 1999; 43(2):261–4.
82. Lee CJ, Sugimoto CR, Zhang G, Cronin B. Bias in peer review. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2013; 64(1):2–17.
83. Shattell MM, Chinn P, Thomas SP, Cowling WR 3rd. Authors’ and editors’ perspectives on peer review quality in three scholarly nursing journals. Journal of nursing scholarship. 2010; 42(1):58–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2009.01331.x PMID: 20487187
84. Kravitz RL, Franks P, Feldman MD, Gerrity M, Byrne C, Tierney WM. Editorial peer reviewers’ recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care? PloS one. 2010; 5(4): e10072. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010072 PMID: 20386704
85. Kwon JY, Gonzalez T, Miller C, Cook SP, Briceno J, Velasco BT, et al. Assessment of variables that influence agreement between reviewers for Foot & Ankle International. Foot and Ankle Surgery. 2020; 26(5):573–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fas.2019.07.007 PMID: 31416682
86. DiDomenico RJ, Baker WL, Haines ST. Improving peer review: What reviewers can do. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy. 2017; 74(24):2080–4. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp170190 PMID: 29074482
87. Speich B, Schroter S, Briel M, et al. Impact of a short version of the CONSORT checklist for peer reviewers to improve the reporting of randomised controlled trials published in biomedical journals: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2020; 10:e035114. https://doi.org/10.1136/ bmjopen-2019-035114 PMID: 32198306
88. Saxe JP. Opening the Black Box of Peer Review. Cell stem cell. 2019; 24(6):843–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2019.05.017 PMID: 31173714