This document discusses the peer review process used by various biomedical journals. It notes that authors generally prefer double-blind peer review, where the identity of both the author and reviewer are unknown, while editors prefer single-blind review. The document also examines issues like the number of reviewers, who serves as reviewers, review timelines, and reviewer rewards. It provides some examples of journals that take different approaches to peer review, such as PLoS ONE which practices open peer review. The document concludes by arguing that scientific papers were historically anonymous and that journals should consider adopting more open peer review practices.

1. Peer Review Process
Athanasia Benekou
Medical Writer
Biomedical journals in Greece
34th Annual Hellenic Medical Congress
May, 20-24 2008

2. Do we like Peer
Review?

3. Overall satisfaction

4. Examples
Method Journal
External review American Journal of Obstetrics
and Gynecology
BioMed Central Journals
Editorial board Circulation
In-house +/- external review Natrure, Lancet
JAMA
In-house +/- external review +
expert committee
BMJ
Source: Wager E, Godlee F, Jefferson T. How to Survive Peer Review, BMJ 2003

5. Peer review type Author
(%)
Editor
(%)
Single-blind 25 72
Double-blind 56 22
Open 13 3
Post-publication 5 1
Πηγή: Peer review in scholarly journals: Perspective of the scholarly community – an
international study. PRC, Mark Ware Consulting , 2008
Authors seems to prefer double-blind review
...but not the editors

6. Πηγή: Peer review in scholarly journals: Perspective of the scholarly community – an
international study. PRC, Mark Ware Consulting , 2008

7. The critique
http://blogs.nature.com/peer-to-
peer/categories/peer_review_debate/

8. http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/guidelines
The aid
http://www.wame.org/

9. Reviewers
How many?
Who?
Timelines?
Reward?

10. Πηγή: Peer review in scholarly journals: Perspective of the scholarly community – an
international study. PRC, Mark Ware Consulting , 2008
Time distibution

11. Some intresting cases
PLoS ONE, www.plosone.org
Nature oper-peer-review trial
BiomedCentral, www.biomedcentral.com

13. «Finally, scientific papers were often anonymous 200 years ago. It was
dropped as a system because readers liked authors to be accountable.
We should do the right thing and get our reviewers to sign, and the
experience of journals that are open tells us that the sky will not
collapse on us if all journals were to become open.»

14. Peer Review Process
Athanasia Benekou
Medical Writer
Biomedical journals in Greece
34th Annual Hellenic Medical Congress
May, 20-24 2008