Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Jan;11(1):274-84.
doi: 10.4103/0973-1229.109347.

Reviewer index: a new proposal of rewarding the reviewer

Sushil Ghanshyam Kachewar  1 , Smita Balwant Sankaye
Affiliations

Reviewer index: a new proposal of rewarding the reviewer

Sushil Ghanshyam Kachewar et al. Mens Sana Monogr. 2013 Jan.

Abstract

Science is strengthened not by research alone, but by publication of original research articles in international scientific journals that gets read by a global scientific community. Research publication is the 'heart' of a journal and the 'soul' of science - the outcome of collective efforts of authors, editors and reviewers. The publication process involves author-editor interaction for which both of them get credit once the article gets published - the author directly, the editor indirectly. However, the remote reviewer who also plays a key role in the process remains anonymous and largely unrecognised. Many potential reviewers therefore, stay away from this 'highly honorary' task. Appropriate peer review controls quality of an article and thereby ensures quality and integrity of the journal. Recognising and rewarding the role of the reviewer is therefore vital. In this article, we propose a novel idea of Reviewer Index (RI), Reviewer Index Directory (RID) and Global Reviewer Index Directory (GRID), which will strengthen science by focussing on the reviewer, as well as the author. By adopting this innovative Reviewer Centric Approach, a new breed of well-trained reviewers of high quality and sufficient quantity will be available for eternity. Moreover, RI, RID and GRID would also enable grading and ethical rewarding of reviewers.

Keywords: Author; Editor; Global reviewer index directory; Journal; Reviewer; Reviewer index; Reviewer index directory; Reward; Science.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of the paper
None
None
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Altman DG. Poor-quality medical research: What can journals do? JAMA. 2002;287:2765–7. - PubMed
    1. Baxt WG, Waeckerle JF, Berlin J, Callaham ML. Who reviews the reviewers? Feasibility of using fictitious manuscript to evaluate peer reviewer performance. Ann Emerg Med. 1989;32:310–7. - PubMed
    1. Callaham ML, Tercier J. The relationship of previous training and experience of journal peer reviewers to subsequent review quality. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e40. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Callaham M, Green S, Houry D. Does mentoring new peer reviewers improve review quality? A randomized trial. BMC Med Educ. 2012;12:83. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Frank JD, Caldamone A, Woodward M, Mouriquand P. This is the reason why we are exploring the possibility of rewarding courageous contributors and reviewers by giving them CME points for their hard work. J Pediatr Urol. 2009;5:1. - PubMed