Peer review of clinical and translational research manuscripts: Perspectives from statistical collaborators
- PMID: 38384899
- PMCID: PMC10879991
- DOI: 10.1017/cts.2023.707
Peer review of clinical and translational research manuscripts: Perspectives from statistical collaborators
Abstract
Research articles in the clinical and translational science literature commonly use quantitative data to inform evaluation of interventions, learn about the etiology of disease, or develop methods for diagnostic testing or risk prediction of future events. The peer review process must evaluate the methodology used therein, including use of quantitative statistical methods. In this manuscript, we provide guidance for peer reviewers tasked with assessing quantitative methodology, intended to complement guidelines and recommendations that exist for manuscript authors. We describe components of clinical and translational science research manuscripts that require assessment including study design and hypothesis evaluation, sampling and data acquisition, interventions (for studies that include an intervention), measurement of data, statistical analysis methods, presentation of the study results, and interpretation of the study results. For each component, we describe what reviewers should look for and assess; how reviewers should provide helpful comments for fixable errors or omissions; and how reviewers should communicate uncorrectable and irreparable errors. We then discuss the critical concepts of transparency and acceptance/revision guidelines when communicating with responsible journal editors.
Keywords: Biostatistics; clinical and translational science; peer review; reviewer guidance; study design.
© The Author(s) 2024.
Conflict of interest statement
CJL receives research funding to his institution from NIH, DoD, CDC, Biomeme, Entegrion, Endpoint Health, AstraZeneca, bioMerieux, and stock options in Bioscape Digital unrelated to the current work.
References
-
- Dance A. Stop the peer-review treadmill. I want to get off. Nature. 2023;614(7948):581–583. - PubMed
-
- Publons. 2018 Global State of Peer Review. London: Clarivate Analytics, 2018. https://publons.com/static/Publons-Global-State-Of-Peer-Review-2018.pdf.
-
- Flaherty C. The peer-review crisis. Inside Higher Education, 2022. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2022/06/13/peer-review-crisis-create...
-
- Fox CW. Difficulty of recruiting reviewers predicts review scores and editorial decisions at six journals of ecology and evolution. Scientometrics. 2017;113(1):465–477.
Publication types
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources