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
. 2018 Jul;25(2):112-119.
doi: 10.1159/000488135. Epub 2018 Apr 3.

Collective Conversational Peer Review of Journal Submission: A Tool to Integrate Medical Education and Practice

Vivek Podder  1 , Amy Price  2   3 , Madhava Sai Sivapuram  4 , Ashwini Ronghe  5 , Srija Katta  6 , Avinash Kumar Gupta  7 , Rakesh Biswas  8
Affiliations

Collective Conversational Peer Review of Journal Submission: A Tool to Integrate Medical Education and Practice

Vivek Podder et al. Ann Neurosci. 2018 Jul.

Abstract

Background: In this study, we demonstrate a collective collaborative, conversational, pre-publication peer review of a randomized controlled trial.

Methods: Using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist, a group of research-oriented undergraduate medical and pharmacy students and their teacher collectively on an online forum, discuss and review a randomized controlled trial submitted to the Annals of Neurosciences and the explanatory commentary from each reviewer makes a basic scaffold for critical appraisal of the manuscript.

Results: This method provided the opportunity for students to engage in online interactive training and allowed them to understand tools used for critical appraisal of a study. Students were incentivized by the potential publication credit and they look forward to continuing this work and perhaps providing one small step to making medical education more interactive.

Conclusion: Open peer review involving a group of reviewers at a time produces multidirectional reviewing concepts, thus helps to improve the quality of paper and also may reduce the time between review and publication.

Keywords: Collective peer review; Conversational learning; Medical education; Practice; Prepublication.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Bera K, Seth B, Biswas R. Conversational learning among medical students: harnessing the power of web 2.0 through user ­driven healthcare. Ann Neurosci. 2013;20:37–38. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Steel G, Price A, Seth B, Biswas R, Chatterjee P. Charity is welcome: the international benefits and pitfalls of peer Review. PeerJ PrePrints. 2016;4:e1585v2.
    1. Manchikanti L, Kaye AD, Boswell MV, Hirsch JA. Medical journal peer review: process and bias. Pain Physician. 2015;18:E1–E14. - PubMed
    1. Vercellini P, Buggio L, Viganò P, Somigliana E. Peer review in medical journals: beyond quality of reports towards transparency and public scrutiny of the process. Eur J Intern Med. 2016;31:15–19. - PubMed
    1. Wicherts JM. Peer review quality and transparency of the peer-review process in open access and subscription journals. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0147913. - PMC - PubMed