Article Figures & Data
Tables
Additional Files
The Article in Brief
Should Authors Submit Previous Peer-Review Reports When Submitting Research Papers? Views of General Medical Journal Editors
Jochen W. L. Cals , and colleagues
Background Publishing research can be time consuming, as papers are often submitted and reviewed by multiple journals before final acceptance. In this study, the authors assess the views of medical journal editors about whether attaching previous peer-review reports when submitting the paper to a different journal could decrease the workload for both reviewers and editors and could shorten the time from final draft to actual publication.
What This Study Found Among 51 general medical journals surveyed online, a quarter at least occasionally receive previous peer review reports from authors submitting manuscripts, and about one-half have an interest in the idea. Editors reported both pros and cons. They reasoned that including previous reviews may reduce reviewers' workload, improve transparency, prevent duplication of efforts, and shorten the decision process; however, they expressed concerns about the introduction of bias and reluctance of authors to submit unfavorable reviews. They also expressed concerns that the practice of using previous peer reports could create lazy reviewers and editors and prohibit the manuscript from receiving an objective fresh start.
Implications
- Editors of general medical journals have diverging views on the use of peer-review reports in submission of scientific papers.
- The authors call for debate on how to improve the peer-review system.