On the Need for Quantitative Bias Analysis in the Peer-Review Process
- PMID: 28430833
- DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwx057
On the Need for Quantitative Bias Analysis in the Peer-Review Process
Abstract
Peer review is central to the process through which epidemiologists generate evidence to inform public health and medical interventions. Reviewers thereby act as critical gatekeepers to high-quality research. They are asked to carefully consider the validity of the proposed work or research findings by paying careful attention to the methodology and critiquing the importance of the insight gained. However, although many have noted problems with the peer-review system for both manuscripts and grant submissions, few solutions have been proposed to improve the process. Quantitative bias analysis encompasses all methods used to quantify the impact of systematic error on estimates of effect in epidemiologic research. Reviewers who insist that quantitative bias analysis be incorporated into the design, conduct, presentation, and interpretation of epidemiologic research could substantially strengthen the process. In the present commentary, we demonstrate how quantitative bias analysis can be used by investigators and authors, reviewers, funding agencies, and editors. By utilizing quantitative bias analysis in the peer-review process, editors can potentially avoid unnecessary rejections, identify key areas for improvement, and improve discussion sections by shifting from speculation on the impact of sources of error to quantification of the impact those sources of bias may have had.
Keywords: bias; causal inference; error; peer review; quantitative bias analysis; systematic error.
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Similar articles
-
Quantitative bias analysis for study and grant planning.Ann Epidemiol. 2020 Mar;43:32-36. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2020.01.013. Epub 2020 Feb 11. Ann Epidemiol. 2020. PMID: 32113733
-
Peer-review and editorial process of the Ethiopian Medical Journal: ten years assessment of the status of submitted manuscripts.Ethiop Med J. 2013 Apr;51(2):95-103. Ethiop Med J. 2013. PMID: 24079153
-
PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL EDITORS' VIEWS ON REAL-WORLD EVIDENCE.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2018 Jan;34(1):111-119. doi: 10.1017/S0266462317004408. Epub 2018 Feb 8. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2018. PMID: 29415784
-
Quantitative bias analysis methods for summary-level epidemiologic data in the peer-reviewed literature: a systematic review.J Clin Epidemiol. 2024 Nov;175:111507. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111507. Epub 2024 Aug 27. J Clin Epidemiol. 2024. PMID: 39197688 Free PMC article.
-
[Peer review: a closed system in need of reform].Lakartidningen. 2002 Jul 25;99(30-31):3106-8. Lakartidningen. 2002. PMID: 12198928 Review. Swedish.
Cited by
-
Child Health: Is It Really Assisted Reproductive Technology that We Need to Be Concerned About?Semin Reprod Med. 2018 May;36(3-04):183-194. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1675778. Epub 2019 Mar 13. Semin Reprod Med. 2018. PMID: 30866005 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Nonparticipation Selection Bias in the MOBI-Kids Study.Epidemiology. 2019 Jan;30(1):145-153. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000932. Epidemiology. 2019. PMID: 30299406 Free PMC article.
-
The use of the phrase "data not shown" in dental research.PLoS One. 2022 Aug 9;17(8):e0272695. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272695. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35944050 Free PMC article.
-
The Measurement Error Elephant in the Room: Challenges and Solutions to Measurement Error in Epidemiology.Epidemiol Rev. 2022 Jan 14;43(1):94-105. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxab011. Epidemiol Rev. 2022. PMID: 34664648 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The replication crisis in epidemiology: snowball, snow job, or winter solstice?Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2018 Jun;5(2):175-183. doi: 10.1007/s40471-018-0148-x. Epub 2018 Apr 12. Curr Epidemiol Rep. 2018. PMID: 33907664 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources