Is the Peer Review Journal Dead?
Professor Tony Brown
Senior Staff Specialist
Department of Emergency Medicine
Royal Brisb...
Competing Interests Declaration
Professor Tony Brown
Educational / research funding:
Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, R...
550,000
550,000
> 1 / minute
550,000
> 1 / minute
>150 this morning
550,000
> 1 / minute
>150 this morning
> 5,600
(MedlineTM)
Is the Peer Review Journal Dead?
Aims
• What are journals for ?
• What do they do ?
• Who benefits ?
• What are the proble...
What are journals for ?
What are journals for ?
• Registration
• Certification
• Awareness
• Archiving
What do they do ?
What do they do ?
• Online submission
• Peer review
• Editorial decision
• Production
• Publication
Who benefits ?
Who benefits ?
• Author
• Publisher
• Editor / peer reviewers
What are the problems?
What are the problems?
• Peer review
• Most papers are rubbish
• Research hijacked
• Restricted full-text access
What are the problems?
Peer review
“Slow, expensive, ineffective, a lottery, biased,
incapable of detecting fraud and pron...
What are the problems?
Most papers are rubbish
• “Words on paper rarely lead directly to change
– and thank goodness they ...
What are the problems?
Research hijacked
Radcliffe Publishing
2013
Harper Collins 2013
What are the problems?
Restricted full-text access
$24 billion
biomedical publishing industry
What are the alternatives?
What are the alternatives?
• Release ALL data / publish negative trials
• Focus on the reader
• Post publication review
• ...
What are the alternatives?
Educational / translational focus
Websites Blog posts
Case studies Teaching videos
Podcasts Ele...
Is the Peer Review Journal Dead?
Conclusions
• Not yet – but smelling badly !
• Return the focus back onto the reader
• Ex...
Is the Peer Review Journal Dead?
Conclusions
• Not yet – but smelling badly …
• Return the focus back onto the reader
• Ex...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Brown: Is the Peer Review Journal Dead?

1,417

Published on

Tony Brown's emotive expose on the bias of medical research and publication. The flaws in our current paradigms.

Published in: Health & Medicine, Technology
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,417
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Brown: Is the Peer Review Journal Dead?

  1. 1. Is the Peer Review Journal Dead? Professor Tony Brown Senior Staff Specialist Department of Emergency Medicine Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital
  2. 2. Competing Interests Declaration Professor Tony Brown Educational / research funding: Astra Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Shire. Avant.
  3. 3. 550,000
  4. 4. 550,000 > 1 / minute
  5. 5. 550,000 > 1 / minute >150 this morning
  6. 6. 550,000 > 1 / minute >150 this morning > 5,600 (MedlineTM)
  7. 7. Is the Peer Review Journal Dead? Aims • What are journals for ? • What do they do ? • Who benefits ? • What are the problems ? • What are the alternatives ?
  8. 8. What are journals for ?
  9. 9. What are journals for ? • Registration • Certification • Awareness • Archiving
  10. 10. What do they do ?
  11. 11. What do they do ? • Online submission • Peer review • Editorial decision • Production • Publication
  12. 12. Who benefits ?
  13. 13. Who benefits ? • Author • Publisher • Editor / peer reviewers
  14. 14. What are the problems?
  15. 15. What are the problems? • Peer review • Most papers are rubbish • Research hijacked • Restricted full-text access
  16. 16. What are the problems? Peer review “Slow, expensive, ineffective, a lottery, biased, incapable of detecting fraud and prone to abuse” Smith R. BMJ 2004;329:242-4
  17. 17. What are the problems? Most papers are rubbish • “Words on paper rarely lead directly to change – and thank goodness they don’t, considering the rubbish that journals often publish”. Smith R. BMJ 2004;329:242-4 • Few trials are valid and relevant ( <1% – 7% ) Haynes RB. ACP J Club 1993;119:A22-A23 Scott I, Glaziou P. Med J Aust 2012;197:374-8
  18. 18. What are the problems? Research hijacked Radcliffe Publishing 2013 Harper Collins 2013
  19. 19. What are the problems? Restricted full-text access $24 billion biomedical publishing industry
  20. 20. What are the alternatives?
  21. 21. What are the alternatives? • Release ALL data / publish negative trials • Focus on the reader • Post publication review • ‘publish then filter’ • rating systems / Web 2.0 tools / crowdsourcing • Educational / translational focus …
  22. 22. What are the alternatives? Educational / translational focus Websites Blog posts Case studies Teaching videos Podcasts Elearning modules Apps ALL informed by the best literature
  23. 23. Is the Peer Review Journal Dead? Conclusions • Not yet – but smelling badly ! • Return the focus back onto the reader • Expect and embrace all forms of post publication review • Focus on education / translation
  24. 24. Is the Peer Review Journal Dead? Conclusions • Not yet – but smelling badly … • Return the focus back onto the reader • Expect / embrace post publication review • Focus on education / translation • EXCEPTION ! Emerg Med Australas 2014; 26 (1). Feb issue
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×