Validity and reliability of the scientific review process in nursing journals - time for a rethink?

As pressure to publish increases in the academic nursing world, journal submission numbers and rejection rates are soaring. The review process is crucial to journals in publishing high quality, cutting-edge knowledge development, and to authors in preparing their papers to a high quality to enable the nursing world to benefit from developments in knowledge that affect nursing practice and patient outcomes and the development of the discipline. This paper does not intend to contribute to the debate regarding the ethics of reviewing, but rather seeks to explore notions of how the quality of the reviewing process can be enhanced to benefit authors, the reviewers, and the state of nursing knowledge. Furthermore, a call is made to editors to devise strategies for aiding reviewers to attain higher validity and reliability within the reviewing process by establishing clear standards and expectations and to ensure published work is judged against industry norms for quality.

[1]  Peggy Hawkins,et al.  Barriers and Strategies to the Revision Process From an Editor's Perspective , 2009 .

[2]  S. Turale Writing for international publication: A few tips for would‐be authors , 2010 .

[3]  Malcolm Tight Reviewing the reviewers , 2003 .

[4]  Francesca Bosetti,et al.  Is It Time to Standardize Ethics Guiding the Peer Review Process? , 2007, Lipids.

[5]  S. Henly,et al.  Quality of manuscript reviews in nursing research. , 2009, Nursing outlook.

[6]  L. Aiken,et al.  Building an international nursing outcomes research agenda. , 2008, Asian nursing research.

[7]  D. Colquhoun,et al.  Complementary Medicine in the Medical Curriculum , 1997, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[8]  S. Izumi Roles and rewards of journal peer reviewers. , 2009, Japan journal of nursing science : JJNS.

[9]  Perry J Pickhardt,et al.  Reviewing the reviewers: comparison of review quality and reviewer characteristics at the American Journal of Roentgenology. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  J. Carpenter,et al.  Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  K. Luker Assessing the quality of research: a challenge for nursing. , 2007, Nursing inquiry.

[12]  J. Baggs Through the looking glass: publishing in a journal in another language or another country. , 2010, Research in nursing & health.

[13]  Molly C Dougherty,et al.  Experience, time investment, and motivators of nursing journal peer reviewers. , 2008, Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing.

[14]  Mike Wright,et al.  *Reviewing Journal Rankings and Revisiting Peer Reviews: Editorial Perspectives , 2007 .

[15]  Richard Smith,et al.  Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals , 2006, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[16]  Vanora Hundley,et al.  Getting your paper to the right journal: a case study of an academic paper. , 2002, Journal of advanced nursing.

[17]  M. Johnstone Academic freedom and the obligation to ensure morally responsible scholarship in nursing. , 2012, Nursing inquiry.

[18]  A. Richardson,et al.  Writing for publication made easy for nurses: an evaluation. , 2011, British journal of nursing.

[19]  J. Robinson 'Bad Science' and publication ethics. , 2009, International nursing review.

[20]  Molly C Dougherty,et al.  Blinding in peer review: the preferences of reviewers for nursing journals. , 2008, Journal of advanced nursing.

[21]  Sara Schroter,et al.  Why do peer reviewers decline to review? A survey , 2006, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

[22]  The Peer-Review Process and Its Relationship With Environmental and Occupational Health , 2008, Archives of environmental & occupational health.

[23]  D. Moos The review process: What is it? , 2011, Journal of perianesthesia nursing : official journal of the American Society of PeriAnesthesia Nurses.

[24]  M. Shattell,et al.  Authors' and editors' perspectives on peer review quality in three scholarly nursing journals. , 2010, Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing.

[25]  V. Lambert,et al.  Editorial: Scholarly ethics , 2003 .

[26]  Hans-Dieter Daniel,et al.  Publications as a measure of scientific advancement and of scientists' productivity , 2005, Learn. Publ..

[27]  Claire D. Johnson Conflict of interest in scientific publications: a historical review and update. , 2010, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[28]  Linda V. Knight,et al.  Selecting an Appropriate Publication Outlet: A Comprehensive Model of Journal Selection Criteria for Researchers in a Broad Range of Academic Disciplines , 2008 .

[29]  Kathlyn E. Fletcher,et al.  The Validity of Peer Review in a General Medicine Journal , 2011, PloS one.

[30]  Michael L Callaham,et al.  The Relationship of Previous Training and Experience of Journal Peer Reviewers to Subsequent Review Quality , 2007, PLoS medicine.

[31]  Marion E Broome,et al.  Peer reviewer training and editor support: results from an international survey of nursing peer reviewers. , 2009, Journal of professional nursing : official journal of the American Association of Colleges of Nursing.

[32]  S. Turale Preparing nurses for the 21st century: reflecting on nursing shortages and other challenges in practice and education. , 2011, Nursing & health sciences.

[33]  M. Kearney,et al.  Nurse editors' views on the peer review process. , 2005, Research in nursing & health.

[34]  Sarah A. Martin Accept or reject? , 2010, Journal of pediatric health care : official publication of National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners.

[35]  A. Mulligan,et al.  Is peer review in crisis? , 2005, Oral oncology.

[36]  M. Broome Stewards of the discipline: The role of referees and peer review. , 2010, Nursing outlook.

[37]  Elizabeth Wager,et al.  Best Practice Guidelines on Publication Ethics: a Publisher's Perspective , 2006, International journal of clinical practice. Supplement.