Peer review and publication delay.

Area of Science:

• Scholarly Publishing
• Bibliometrics
• Journal Editorial Processes

Background:

• Selecting qualified peer reviewers is essential for maintaining the integrity and quality of scientific publications.
• Traditional methods rely on volunteer databases, which may not always yield the most suitable experts.
• An alternative involves searching databases like PubMed for authors of similar articles.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the impact of an alternative peer reviewer selection method on editorial process efficiency.
• To quantify the time and invitation rates associated with this PubMed-based reviewer identification strategy.
• To assess the contribution of peer review challenges to overall publication delays.

Main Methods:

• Systematic PubMed searches were conducted to identify authors of relevant articles as potential peer reviewers.
• The study tracked the number of invitations sent per accepted reviewer.
• Editorial timelines, from initial invitation to final report receipt, were recorded.

Main Results:

• In 2018, the journal Pharmacy Practice required an average of 4.70 invitations per accepted peer reviewer.
• The average time from the first reviewer invitation to the last report received was 61 days.
• These metrics indicate a significant bottleneck in the peer review process.

Conclusions:

• The strategy of identifying peer reviewers via PubMed searches for similar articles, while potentially enhancing reviewer appropriateness, substantially increases editorial workload and publication timelines.
• The high invitation-to-acceptance ratio and extended review duration highlight a critical peer review crisis.
• This crisis directly contributes to significant delays in the publication of scholarly work.