16 September 2019
It’s Peer Review Week 2019, and this year’s theme is quality in peer review. To celebrate, we interviewed some of Rheumatology’s most prolific reviewers.
First up is Prof Janet Pope (University of Western Ontario and St. Joseph’s Health Care, London, Ontario, Canada), who has completed more than 110 reviews for Rheumatology so far. Here, Janet explains her top tips for reviewers, and how she would like to see peer review change in the future.
I submit many papers to peer-reviewed journals, so I think it is only fair to review others’ research in return. Reviewing allows me to learn about research ideas and where specific fields are heading.
The review process can make a paper even better. A great review raises the article to a higher level by asking probing questions. It looks at the added value of the study and where it fits into our current knowledge, and asks the authors to step back and see their strengths and limitations.
If you are faced with your first peer review, you should say yes and do it! You can ask a supervisor or another senior for advice, and you will learn from the experience. My advice is to divide your review into big questions and smaller questions. The big questions should focus on why the study is important, how accurate and thorough the methods and results are, and whether the discussion is broader than simply re-phrasing the findings. The smaller questions should look at changes to content, style, phrasing and key references.
Remember to be critical, but kind. Do not hastily judge a paper by its standard of English; take time to read and absorb what the authors are trying to demonstrate. However, do not be afraid to reject a paper, especially if it is not a match for the current journal. With constructive comments, the paper will improve.
While I think that the review process is pretty fair, I would like to see more double-blinded reviews in the future. Currently there may be a bias towards big names and well-known centres. Junior authors or less well-known centres producing work of the same calibre may not have papers accepted as easily.
Reviewing requires a lot of work and commitment, and does not count for promotion or receive much recognition. As a section editor for a journal, it is very difficult to get people to say yes to reviewing articles, which in turn makes it hard to fairly assess a paper.
Tell us about your peer review experiences! We’ll be discussing quality in peer review from 16-20 September over on Twitter @RheumJnl and @RheumatologyUK. Join the conversation using #PeerRevWk19.