- This event has passed.
Preprint on Structured Peer Review published
Sunday, 4 February 2024
Peer Review Committee Chair, Mario Malički and Committee member Bahar Mehmani posted a preprint titled Structured Peer Review: Pilot results from 23 Elsevier Journals. Preprint link can be found at: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.02.01.578440
In the preprint, authors recommend the following 8 questions to be implemented as structured peer review:
Introduction
- Is the background and literature section up to date and appropriate for the topic?
- Are the primary (and secondary) objectives clearly stated at the end of the introduction?
Methods
- Are the study methods (including theory/applicability/modelling) reported in sufficient detail to allow for their replicability or reproducibility?
- Are statistical analyses, controls, sampling mechanism, and statistical reporting (e.g., P-values, CIs, effect sizes) appropriate and well described?
Results
- Is the results presentation, including the number of tables and figures, appropriate to best present the study findings?
- Are additional sub-analyses or statistical measures needed (e.g., reporting of CIs, effect sizes, sensitivity analyses)?
Discussion
- Is the interpretation of results and study conclusions supported by the data and the study design?
- Have the authors clearly emphasized the limitations of their study/theory/methods/argument?
Answer options
We recommend questions of a multiple-choice style, with the last answer option having a free text field in which reviewers should provide constructive criticism to the authors on how to improve their manuscript. This should allow for easier calculation of rater agreement, and better readability for the authors. We recommend the following choices for all questions:
[ ] Not Applicable
[ ] Beyond my expertise, additional reviewer(s) should be consulted
[ ] Yes
[ ] No, the authors should (consider):
(please list and number Your suggestions so that the author/s can more easily follow your instructions or provide rebuttals)