Asian Journal of Surgery
Volume 32, Issue 4 , Pages 240-246, October 2009

Peer Review Practices in Biomedical Literature: A Time for Change?

  • Kamal Kumar Mahawar

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland, UK
  • ,
  • Deepak Kejariwal

      Affiliations

    • Department of Gastroenterology, UK
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Deepak Kejariwal, Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of North Durham, North Road, Durham, County Durham DH1 5TW, United Kingdom
  • ,
  • Ajay Malviya

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthopaedics, Wansbeck General Hospital, Ashington, UK
  • ,
  • Rashmi Birla

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust, Durham, UK
  • ,
  • Y.K.S. Viswanath

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesborough, UK

Accepted 10 August 2009.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to collect the opinions of a cross section of published authors on current practices concerning peer review in biomedical publishing.

Methods

A questionnaire on various aspects of peer review was emailed to authors, whose manuscripts were published in Gut or the British Journal of Surgery between 2001 and 2006. Authors were asked to base their responses on their overall experience with peer review in biomedical literature and not with that one particular journal.

Results

Most respondents felt that peer review is an effective quality control mechanism and does help improve manuscripts. Although some felt that it may cause delays in publication, lead to some research being lost and may not prevent all research-related fraud, most authors felt that there was still a strong role for the peer review process as it exists today.

Conclusion

An overwhelming majority of authors in our study approved of the current peer review practices in biomedical literature. A minority did however seem concerned. We discuss here the surrounding issues.

Key Words:  biomedical publishing , peer review

No full text is available. To read the body of this article, please view the PDF online.

 

PII: S1015-9584(09)60401-2

doi:10.1016/S1015-9584(09)60401-2

Asian Journal of Surgery
Volume 32, Issue 4 , Pages 240-246, October 2009