Related Experiment Videos
[Referees--science's watchdogs and authors best friends]
Y Karlsson1, P Riis, M Nylenna
1Läkartidningens medicinska redaktion, Stockholm.
Nordisk Medicin
|January 1, 1995
Summary
External peer reviewers significantly contribute to scientific publishing but show wide assessment variability. A checklist aided reviewers, with experienced and junior referees being most critical.
Area of Science:
- Scientific publishing
- Peer review processes
- Scholarly communication
Context:
- External reviewers are crucial for maintaining scientific integrity and advising journal editors.
- A study surveyed 156 peer reviewers in Nordic countries.
Purpose:
- To assess the contribution and variability of external peer reviewers.
- To evaluate the utility of an assessment checklist for reviewers.
Summary:
- Peer reviewers make substantial contributions but exhibit significant differences in evaluating the same manuscripts.
- Both experienced and early-career reviewers demonstrated the highest levels of critical assessment.
- A trial indicated that an evaluation checklist was beneficial for most reviewers.
Impact:
- Highlights the need for standardized review criteria to improve consistency.
- Suggests checklists can enhance the peer review process and reviewer support.
- Informs journal editors and publishers on reviewer performance and training needs.