Peer Review Process

Peer review exists to ensure that journals publish good science which is of benefit to entire scientific community.

Sometimes authors find the peer-review process intimidating because it can lead to the rejection of their manuscript. Keep in mind that revisions and improvement are part of the publication process and actually help raise the quality of your manuscript. Therefore, peer review should serve several purposes.

1. To help select quality articles for publication (filter out studies that have been poorly conceived, designed, and executed) with the selection being based upon:

  • The scientific merit and validity of the article and its methodology
  • Has the research that is being reported been carried out well with no flaws in the design or methodology?
  • Ensure that the work is reported correctly, with acknowledgement of the existing body of work.
  • Ensure that the results presented have been interpreted correctly and all possible interpretations considered.
  • Ensure that the results are not too preliminary or speculative, but at the same time not block the sharing of innovative new research and theories.
  • The relevance of the article to the specific clinical practice – select work that will be the greatest interest to the readership.
  • The interest of the topic to the clinical reader.
  • The presentation and understandability of the article itself.

  • 2. To improve the manuscript whenever possible.

  • Generally improve the quality and readability of a publication.

  • 3. To check against malfeasance within the scientific and clinical community.

    4. Provide editors with evidence to make judgments as to whether articles meet the selection criteria for their particular publication.

    The main functions of the peer review process are to help maintain standards and ensure that the reporting of research work is as truthful and accurate as possible. Peer review contributes to the ongoing process used by individual clinicians to assess what information to believe and what to view with skepticism. This occurs because individual clinicians with varied levels of experience know that a peer reviewed, published manuscript has been reviewed and deemed worthy by others, often with greater or more varied experience than they possess. While most clinicians have the ability to critically read a research manuscript, they cannot be expected to be experts in all areas and make judgments about topics about which they know little.