Bias in the Peer Review Process: Can We Do Better?
- PMID: 31135720
- DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003260
Bias in the Peer Review Process: Can We Do Better?
Abstract
Peer review is the major method used by the scientific community to evaluate manuscripts and decide what is suitable for publication. However, this process in its current design is not bulletproof and is prone to reviewer and editorial bias. Its lack of objectivity and transparency raise concerns that manuscripts might be judged based on interests irrelevant to the content itself and not on merit alone. This commentary reviews some of the most common biases that could potentially affect objective evaluation of a manuscript and proposes alternatives to the current single-blind peer review process that is being used by most scientific journals, including Obstetrics & Gynecology. By rethinking and tackling the shortcomings of the current methodology for peer review, we hope to create a discussion that will eventually lead to improving research and, ultimately, patient care.
Comment in
-
Peer Review: Always Room for Improvement.Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jun;133(6):1079-1080. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003296. Obstet Gynecol. 2019. PMID: 31135719 No abstract available.
References
-
- Tennant JP, Dugan JM, Graziotin D, Jacques DC, Waldner F, Mietchen D, et al. A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review. F1000Res 2017;6:1151.
-
- Mayden KD. Peer review: publication's gold standard. J Adv Pract Oncol 2012;3:117–22.
-
- Shatz D. Peer review a critical inquiry. Lanham (MD): Rowman & Littlefield Publishers; 2004.
-
- Manchikanti L, Kaye AD, Boswell MV, Hirsch JA. Medical journal peer review: process and bias. Pain Physician 2015;18:E1–14.
-
- Smith R. Opening up BMJ peer review: a beginning that should lead to complete transparency. BMJ: Br Med J 1999;318:4–5.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources