Richard Smith: Peer reviewers—time for mass rebellion?
I’ve spent about six hours over the last two days reviewing two scientific papers, and the experience has made me wonder if it is time for peer reviewers to rise […]
I’ve spent about six hours over the last two days reviewing two scientific papers, and the experience has made me wonder if it is time for peer reviewers to rise […]
Engaging patients, caregivers, and patient advocates in scientific pre-publication peer review is a relatively new approach for many journals and institutions. Patient inclusion in peer review is increasing as it […]
Think for a moment about all the scientific articles you’ve peer reviewed throughout your career. Do you ever find it challenging to make time to perform the review? Do you […]
Increasing openness is a better route to eliminating biases than increasing anonymity […]
The suggestion that all referral decisions must be reviewed is a slur on the competence of GPs […]
Seven months ago, when I had just started my new career as a research editor at The BMJ, I was impressed by the open peer-review model that the journal applies. […]
The Franciscan philosopher Roger Bacon (c1214-1294), who some regard as the father of modern science, argued in his great text Opus Majus that there were four sources of ignorance: Frail […]
One of the conundrums of peer review is that reviewers need to be knowledgeable about the research being reported but shouldn’t have conflicts of interest. The trouble is that the […]
Peer review is faith not evidence based, but most scientists believe in it as some people believe in the Loch Ness monster. Research into peer review has mostly failed to […]
Without peer review The BMJ could not survive. The journal uses reviewers to help assess the quality and usefulness of about 8000 papers per year. In […]