Evaluating the BMJ guidelines for economic submissions : Prospective audit of economic submissions to BMJ and The Lancet.
International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Prague, CZE, 1997/09.
Context. - Editorial management of articles on health economics may benefit from guidelines for peer review and revision.
- To assess whether publication (in August 1996) of the BMJ guide-lines on peer review of economics submissions made any difference to editorial and peer review processes, quality of submitted manuscripts, and quality of published manuscripts.
Design and Setting
- Before-after study conducted in the editorial offices of BMJ and The Lancet of the effect of the BMJ guidelines on review and revision of economics submissions, defined as those making explicit comments about resource allocation and/or costs of interventions.
Main Outcome Measures
- Editorial fate and changes in the quality of submissions.
- A total of 2982 manuscripts were submitted to the 2 journals during the before periods, 105 (3.5%) of which were economics submissions.
Of these, 27 (24.3%) were full economics evaluations, and 78 (75.7%) were other economics submissions.
Overall acceptance rate was 11.6% (12/105).
During the after period 2077 manuscripts were submitted to the 2 journals, 87 (4.2%) of which were economics submissions.
Eighteen (20.7%) were full economics evaluations, and 69 (79.3%) were other economics submissions.
Overall acceptance rate was 6.9% (6/87). (...)
Mots-clés Pascal : Article, Médecine, Document publié, Guide, Impact économique, Exploration, Homme, Littérature scientifique, Revue médicale, Editorial
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Article, Medicine, Published document, Guide, Economic impact, Exploration, Human, Scientific literature
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 98-0445310
Code Inist : 002B30A09. Création : 25/01/1999.