Reviewer Feedback for Abstract Submissions to the Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting: A Pilot Project

Abstract

Purpose: To describe and evaluate a pilot project to provide reviewer comments to authors who submitted abstracts to the Hospital-based medicine topic area for the Pediatric Academic Societies (PAS) 2021 annual meeting METHODS: Abstract reviewers were encouraged via email to include reviewer comments for authors in their abstract reviews. Unedited comments were emailed to authors shortly after the abstract decision notifications were sent. We quantified the number of reviewers who commented per abstract. Additionally, we surveyed authors and reviewers to evaluate the perceived impact of the pilot project.

Results: For 123 abstracts submitted to the Hospital-based medicine topic area, every abstract received comments from at least one reviewer, and a median (IQR) of 4 (3-5) reviewers commented per abstract. The response rates for the author and reviewer surveys were 61/114 (54%) and 54/84 (64%), respectively, and both groups of respondents generally favored the pilot program. The majority of authors (59%) made changes to their project based on the feedback provided and 96% reported that they would like to continue to receive reviewer feedback for future PAS abstract submissions. Reviewers reported spending a mean of 11 minutes reviewing each abstract. Most (85%) felt that they spent the same or slightly more (1%-25%) time reviewing than in prior years. Multiple open-ended comments were provided, largely positive.

Conclusion: A pilot program to incorporate reviewer feedback into abstract decision notification for a large national research meeting was successful. This approach should be considered for future meetings to enhance this integral component of academic development.

Keywords: abstract; peer review; scientific meeting.