BMJ joins the ‘open’ debate

BMJ Open is the first BMJ Group journal to use fully open peer review

Revealing to authors who has peer reviewed their article has helped to make the process fairer and increase the credit for reviewers, according to a recent editorial published by the BMJ.

BMJ Deputy Editor, Trish Groves presents her perspectives on the advantages of transparency in peer review using the BMJ – with more than 10 years’ experience in open peer review – as an example of success.  The article explores alternate models of journal peer review and references the findings of a recently published randomised controlled trial which suggested that ‘telling peer reviewers that their signed reviews might be available in the public domain on the BMJ’s website, had no important effect on review quality’.

Read the full article by Dr Trish Groves here:

In a counter-debate published in the BMJ, Karim Khan, Editor in Chief of the BJSM argues that open peer review may dissuade reviewers from offering a true judgement of a paper, and in some cases, enable a jealous rival to sabotage the review process. He takes a closer look at closed peer review, where reviewers can opt for anonymity.

Karim Khan’s article is available in full here:

(Visited 137 times, 1 visits today)