International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Prague, CZE, 1997/09.
All authors may not be equal in the eyes of reviewers.
Specifically, well-known authors may receive less objective (poorer quality) reviews.
One study at a single journal found a small improvement in review quality when reviewers were masked to author identity.
To determine whether masking reviewers to author identity is generally associated with higher quality of review at biomedical journals, and to determine the success of routine masking techniques.
A randomized controlled trial performed on external reviews of manuscripts submitted to Annals of Emergency Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA, Obstetrics & Gynecology, and Ophthalmology.
Two peers reviewed each manuscript.
In one study arm, both peer reviewers received the manuscript according to usual masking practice.
In the other arm, one reviewer was randomized to receive a manuscript with author identity masked, and the other reviewer received an unmasked manuscript.
Review quality on a 5-point Likert scale as judged by manuscript author and editor.
A difference of 0.5 or greater was considered important.
A total of 118 manuscripts were randomized, 26 to usual practice and 92 to intervention.
In the intervention arm, editor quality assessment was complete for 77 (84%) of 92 manuscripts.
Author quality assessment was complete on 40 (54%) of 74 manuscripts. (...)
Mots-clés Pascal : Article, Médecine, Qualité, Influence, Auteur, Sélection, Exploration, Homme, Littérature scientifique, Revue médicale, Identité
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Article, Medicine, Quality, Influence, Author, Selection, Exploration, Human, Scientific literature
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 98-0443497
Code Inist : 002B30A09. Création : 25/01/1999.