Peer Review Bias: A Critical Review

Area of Science:

• Biomedical research
• Scientific publishing
• Research integrity

Background:

• Bias and confounding factors can impact biomedical studies at various stages.
• The scientific peer review process itself can introduce bias, necessitating improvements.
• Ethical considerations demand a more robust and unbiased peer review system.

Purpose of the Study:

• To identify mechanisms by which peer review can distort research findings.
• To evaluate strategies for mitigating bias in the peer review process.
• To advocate for enhanced quality, transparency, and accountability in scientific publishing.

Main Methods:

• Comprehensive literature search of PubMed from inception to October 20, 2017.
• Analysis of various peer review models including double-blind, triple-blind, quadruple-blind, and open peer review.
• Discussion of evidence supporting bias mitigation strategies.

Main Results:

• Different types of bias can affect research before, during, and after interventions.
• Peer review systems, including double-blind and open peer review, have varying effects on research quality.
• Open peer review may offer a small positive impact on published report quality through "Skin in the Game" principles.

Conclusions:

• Improving the peer review process is ethically and morally imperative.
• Implementing strategies to mitigate bias can enhance the reliability of published research.
• There is a need for greater quality, transparency, and accountability in scientific peer review.