How to review journal manuscripts

Reviewing manuscripts is central to editorial peer review, which arose in the early 1900s in response to the editor's need for expert advice to help select quality articles from numerous submissions. Most reviewers learn by trial and error, often giving up along the way because the process is far from intuitive. This primer will help minimize errors and maximize enjoyment in reviewing. Topics covered include responding to a review invitation, crafting comments to editors and authors, offering a recommended disposition, dealing with revised manuscripts, and understanding roles and responsibilities. The target audience is primarily novice reviewers, but seasoned reviewers should also find useful pearls to assist their efforts.

[1]  Ermenegyldo Munhoz Junior Requisitos uniformes para manuscritos submetidos a periódicos biomédicos: escrevendo e editando para publicações biomédicas , 2006 .

[2]  Edward J. Huth,et al.  How To Write and Publish Papers in the Medical Sciences , 1984 .

[3]  R. J. Hayes,et al.  Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. , 1995, JAMA.

[4]  J. PérezMartín,et al.  [International Committee of Medical Journal Editors]. , 2008, Revista alergia Mexico.

[5]  Carlos Alberto Guimarães,et al.  Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Writing and editing for biomedical publication , 2008, Revista espanola de cardiologia.

[6]  A systematic guide to reviewing a manuscript. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  S. Thibeault,et al.  Informed Consent in Otolaryngology Research , 2005, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[8]  C. Weijer,et al.  Bioethics for clinicians: 10. Research ethics. , 1997, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[9]  N. Black,et al.  What makes a good reviewer and a good review for a general medical journal? , 1998, JAMA.

[10]  R. Fletcher,et al.  Conflict of interest in peer-reviewed medical journals , 2010, Notfall + Rettungsmedizin.

[11]  C Poole,et al.  Low P-Values or Narrow Confidence Intervals: Which Are More Durable? , 2001, Epidemiology.

[12]  S. Hollis,et al.  What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials , 1999, BMJ.

[13]  D. Sackett Bias in analytic research. , 1979, Journal of chronic diseases.

[14]  Virginia Walbot,et al.  Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts? , 2009, Journal of biology.

[15]  G. Heath,et al.  Research status of case reports for medical school institutional review boards. , 2007, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

[16]  R. Horton,et al.  Uniform format for disclosure of competing interests in ICMJE journals , 2009, The Lancet.

[17]  A. Flood From the editors: external peer review at HSR. , 2004, Health services research.

[18]  Kenneth F Schulz,et al.  Blinding in randomised trials: hiding who got what , 2002, The Lancet.

[19]  J. Nunemacher,et al.  Optimal management of giant cell arteritis and polymyalgia rheumatica , 2012, Therapeutics and clinical risk management.

[20]  J. Pérez Martín [International Committee of Medical Journal Editors]. , 2008, Revista alergia Mexico.

[21]  P. Singer,et al.  Bioethics for clinicians. , 1996, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[22]  A. DeMaria What constitutes a great review? , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[23]  Ted W. Goodman The Forbes Book of Business Quotations , 1999 .

[24]  D. Moher,et al.  The Revised CONSORT Statement for Reporting Randomized Trials: Explanation and Elaboration , 2001, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[25]  J. Burnham The evolution of editorial peer review. , 1990, JAMA.

[26]  D. Moher,et al.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials , 2001, The Lancet.

[27]  F. Lemaire Do all types of human research need ethics committee approval? , 2006, American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine.

[28]  R. Rosenfeld The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Data Users , 1998, Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

[29]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. , 2009, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[30]  Jonathan A C Sterne,et al.  Sifting the evidence—what's wrong with significance tests? , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[31]  D. C. Henckel,et al.  Case report. , 1995, Journal.

[32]  F. Schmidt Meta-Analysis , 2008 .

[33]  M. Gardner,et al.  Confidence intervals rather than P values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. , 1986, British medical journal.

[34]  R. Fletcher,et al.  Conflict of interest in peer-reviewed medical journals: the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) position on a challenging problem. , 2010, The international journal of occupational and environmental medicine.

[35]  D Moher,et al.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. , 2001, Annals of internal medicine.

[36]  C. Mulrow,et al.  Peer Review: Integral to Science and Indispensable to Annals , 2003, Annals of Internal Medicine.