Imperfect but important: a fellow’s perspective on journal peer review

Strategies for Developing Journal Peer Reviewers: A Scoping Review

“…Some articles described training without specific mention about how it was accomplished (Chauvin et al, 2015; Goodman, 2018; Haines et al, 2017; Heim et al, 2018; Janke et al, 2017; Nguyen et al, 2015; Patel, 2014; Yarris et al, 2017). Specific training formats reported included workshops (Bhattacharya & Ellis, 2018; Bruce et al, 2016; Dhillon, 2021; Goodman, 2021; Hesselberg et al, 2020; Wagner et al, 2016; Way et al, 2021), online modules/tutorials (Blockeel et al, 2017; Chauvin et al, 2019; Goodman, 2018; Hesselberg et al, 2020; Mondal & Mondal, 2021; Neumann, 2020; Peternelj-Taylor, 2021), and courses (Gasparyan & Kitas, 2012; Hooper et al, 2018). The type of content to include in training was also reported (Barroga, 2020; Blockeel et al, 2017; Brown et al, 2017; Glonti et al, 2019; Peternelj-Taylor, 2021; Wagner et al, 2016).…”

“…Another provision involves sharing reviews, including editors sharing all reviewers’ comments with the author (Brown et al, 2017) and with all members of the review team (Ali & Watson, 2016; Neumann, 2020). These three articles, however, are editorial commentaries that say little of the efficacy of this strategy.…”

“…Although the number of personal practices reported in the literature is much lower than the other two categories, they demonstrate the need for reviewers to actively engage in their own development. Practicing reviewing (Dhillon, 2021; Goodman, 2018; Neumann, 2020; Podder et al, 2018; Schroter et al, 2018; Smith et al, 2019; Wagner et al, 2016) using published articles (Heim et al, 2018) or a personal or a peer’s manuscript (Jericho et al, 2017) was the primary individual strategy reported and was found to increase reviewer confidence (Schroter et al, 2018). Participating in a journal club (Goodman, 2021; Jericho et al, 2017), reading widely (Goodman, 2021), and joining an editorial board (Jericho et al, 2017) were mentioned in a limited capacity.…”

O Processo de Revisão por Pares

“…Aos revisores é pedido que leiam metodicamente os manuscritos e forneçam avaliações oportunas, organizadas e construtivas para ajudar os autores a clarificar as suas mensagens. 7 Muitas vezes a qualidade deste feedback é variável, pois quase ninguém é formalmente treinado em como efectuar revisão por pares.…”