Related Experiment Videos
[Quality of manuscript evaluation in Gaceta Sanitaria]
A M García1, A Plasència, E Fernández
1Departamento de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Bromatología, Toxicología y Medicina Legal, Universitat de Valencia, Spain. anagar@uv.es
Objective:
To describe strengths and weaknesses of peer reviews of manuscripts received in Gaceta Sanitaria in order to guide reviewers selection, to improve quality of peer reviews and to establish an internal system to be incorporated to the editorial process of handling manuscripts.
Methods:
100 peer reviews of 55 manuscripts received during 2000 and 2001 were included. A questionnaire containing closed questions assessing specific and general components of reviews' quality was applied (answers Yes/No or on a 5-points scale). Descriptive and correlation analyses were performed for the different items in the questionnaire. An Index of Quality was obtained by adding the ratings on the items in the questionnaire measuring specific quality components.
Results:
Peer reviews were rated high regarding completeness of the forms for reviewers (84%), constructiveness of the comments (reviews over 3: 63%), identification of the strengths and weaknesses of the method (reviews over 3: 59%) and substantiation of the reviewer comments (reviews over 3: 58%). Assessment of the manuscript's relevance (reviews over 3: 40%) or originality (reviews over 3: 35%) were less frequent.
Conclusions:
Quality of peer reviews in Gaceta Sanitaria is good. Some weaknesses in the reviews have been pointed out. It is possible to establish a systematic process for assessing peer reviewers using simple indicators such as general utility of the review for the editorial decision and general quality of the review.