To blind or not to blind? What authors and reviewers prefer

Objective  In order to inform discussions about possible changes to Medical Education's blinding policy, members of the journal's editorial board were interested in discovering reviewers' and authors' preferences with regard to the current double‐blind policy and various alternatives.

[1]  Fiona Godlee,et al.  Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review , 1999, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[2]  John Spencer,et al.  Reviewers' perceptions of the peer review process for a medical education journal , 2005, Medical education.

[3]  D. Katz,et al.  Incidence and nature of unblinding by authors: our experience at two radiology journals with double-blinded peer review policies. , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[4]  Steven M. Shugan.  Editorial: Changes in the Review Process , 2002 .

[5]  N. Black,et al.  Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review: a randomized trial. , 1998, JAMA.

[6]  D. Rennie,et al.  Masking author identity in peer review: what factors influence masking success? PEER Investigators. , 1998, JAMA.

[7]  D. Rennie,et al.  Does masking author identity improve peer review quality? A randomized controlled trial. PEER Investigators. , 1998, JAMA.

[8]  F. Godlee,et al.  Effect on the quality of peer review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their reports: a randomized controlled trial. , 1998, JAMA.

[9]  S. B. Friedman,et al.  The effects of blinding on acceptance of research papers by peer review. , 1994, JAMA.

[10]  D. Laband,et al.  A citation analysis of the impact of blinded peer review. , 1994, JAMA.

[11]  R. Fletcher,et al.  The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. A randomized trial. , 1990, JAMA.

[12]  J. Cleary,et al.  Blind versus Nonblind Review: Survey of Selected Medical Journals , 1988, Drug intelligence & clinical pharmacy.

[13]  Lee Shiflett,et al.  A difficult balance: Editorial peer review in medicine , 1988, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[14]  A Difficult Balance: Editorial Peer Review in Medicine , 1987 .

[15]  Anonymous authors, anonymous referees: an editorial exploration. , 1985, Journal of neuropathology and experimental neurology.

[16]  Stuart A. Kirk,et al.  Recognition of Authors in Blind Review of Manuscripts , 1981 .