Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 28, 2025
15:18
Making MR Imaging Child's Play - Pediatric Neuroimaging Protocol, Guidelines and Procedure
Published on: July 30, 2009
18.5K
Peer review practices by medical imaging journals
Thomas C Kwee1, Hugo J A Adams2, Robert M Kwee3
1Medical Imaging Center, Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, P.O. Box 30.001, 9700 RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. thomaskwee@gmail.com.
Insights Into Imaging
|November 27, 2020
Summary
Medical imaging journals frequently use single-blinded peer review, which is associated with a higher impact factor. Practices for indicating preferred or non-preferred reviewers are common but do not correlate with journal impact factor.
Area of Science:
- Medical Imaging
- Scientific Publishing
- Peer Review
Background:
- Peer review is a critical component of scientific publishing, ensuring the quality and validity of research.
- Understanding current peer review practices in medical imaging is essential for journal editors and researchers.
- Variations in peer review models may influence journal reputation and impact.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the prevalent peer review models employed by medical imaging journals.
- To determine the association between peer review practices and journal impact factor.
- To analyze the use of reviewer preference and non-preference options in manuscript submissions.
Main Methods:
- A systematic analysis of journals categorized under "radiology, nuclear medicine and medical imaging" in the 2018 Journal Citation Reports.
- Categorization of journals based on their peer review models: single-blinded, double-blinded, open, or hybrid.
- Statistical analysis to assess the correlation between peer review practices and journal impact factor.
Main Results:
- Single-blinded peer review was the most common model (52.1%), followed by double-blinded (41.2%).
- Single-blinded peer review showed a weak but significant association with a higher journal impact factor, particularly in subspecialty journals.
- Options for indicating preferred or non-preferred reviewers were utilized by a substantial proportion of journals, but this did not correlate with impact factor.
Conclusions:
- Single-blinded peer review is a widely adopted practice in medical imaging journals and is weakly associated with higher impact factors.
- The implementation of reviewer preference or non-preference options is common but independent of journal impact.
- These findings highlight the prevalence of specific peer review strategies and their varied relationship with journal metrics in the field of medical imaging.
