Table 1

General Medical Journal Editors’ Views on Previous Peer-Review Reports

Journal Editors’ ViewsYes/Agree No. (%)No/Disagree No. (%)Indecisive No. (%)NA No.
General statements of the history of a paper
  Would you like authors to indicate whether a paper has been previously submitted?22 (45)12 (24)15 (31)2
  Would you like authors to indicate where a paper has been previously submitted?15 (31)15 (31)19 (39)2
General statements on previous submissions
  We would like to know from which journal(s) the peer reviews originate28 (68)7 (17)6 (15)10
  We would like to see point-to-point response to the comments32 (78)6 (15)3 (7)10
  Submission of previous peer reviews should be obligatory in the future6 (15)19 (46)16 (39)10
Submission of peer-review reports will have the following effect
  Decrease the number of commissioned reviewer reports to reach a decision for that specific paper15 (37)11 (26)15 (37)10
  Decrease workload for the editorial team15 (36)17 (40)10 (24)9
  Decrease workload for reviewers in general20 (48)11 (26)11 (26)9
  Make submission processes more transparent25 (60)8 (19)9 (21)9
  Decrease time to decision17 (40)12 (29)13 (31)9
  • NA = not applicable.

    Note: Because of rounding of percentages, rows may add up to more than 100%.