How to Review a Manuscript

被引:12
作者
Alam, Murad [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Dept Dermatol, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[2] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Dept Otolaryngol, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
[3] Northwestern Univ, Feinberg Sch Med, Dept Surg, Chicago, IL 60611 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
PROCEDURAL DERMATOLOGY; PUBLICATION BIAS; SAMPLE-SIZE; TRIALS; POWER;
D O I
10.1097/DSS.0000000000000421
中图分类号
R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];
学科分类号
100206 ;
摘要
BACKGROUNDPeer review of submitted manuscripts is widely perceived as a cornerstone of assuring quality in academic journals. However, in medical school and beyond, dermatologic surgeons receive minimal instruction in the methodology of critically reviewing new literature.OBJECTIVETo guide new or less experienced reviewers through the steps of assessing a manuscript for the journal. To clarify the most important elements of the review and to discuss common pitfalls and their avoidance.METHODSA stepwise template was suggested on how to review manuscripts.RESULTSAn algorithmic approach to reviewing a paper can demystify the process, increase efficiency, and reduce the likelihood that important elements of the review will be omitted or overlooked. Nonetheless, this recommended approach is a starting point, and individual reviewers would be expected to modify it to reflect their particular preferences and to adapt it to specific papers.CONCLUSIONReviewing a manuscript for the journal is amenable to a simple algorithmic approach. Encouraging recent graduates and others to review for the journal by clarifying the process can further assist the editorial staff in selecting the best manuscripts and improving these before publication.
引用
收藏
页码:883 / 888
页数:6
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]   Confidence intervals in procedural dermatology: An intuitive approach to interpreting data [J].
Alam, M ;
Barzilai, DA ;
Wrone, DA .
DERMATOLOGIC SURGERY, 2005, 31 (04) :462-466
[2]  
Alam M, 2005, DERMATOL SURG, V31, P201
[3]   Blinded vs. unblinded peer review of manuscripts submitted to a dermatology journal: a randomized multi-rater study [J].
Alam, M. ;
Kim, N. A. ;
Havey, J. ;
Rademaker, A. ;
Ratner, D. ;
Tregre, B. ;
West, D. P. ;
Coleman, W. P., III .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, 2011, 165 (03) :563-567
[4]   Systematic Review of Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials in Dermatologic Surgery: Jadad Scores, Power Analysis, and Sample Size Determination [J].
Alam, Murad ;
Rauf, Mutahir ;
Ali, Sana ;
Nodzenski, Michael ;
Minkis, Kira .
DERMATOLOGIC SURGERY, 2014, 40 (12) :1299-1305
[5]   PUBLICATION BIAS IN CLINICAL RESEARCH [J].
EASTERBROOK, PJ ;
BERLIN, JA ;
GOPALAN, R ;
MATTHEWS, DR .
LANCET, 1991, 337 (8746) :867-872
[6]   THE PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS OF PEER-REVIEW AND THE SUPPRESSION OF INNOVATION [J].
HORROBIN, DF .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1990, 263 (10) :1438-1441
[7]   Tips on how to write a paper [J].
Johnson, Timothy M. .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY, 2008, 59 (06) :1064-1069
[8]  
Mahoney M.J., 1977, Cognit. Ther. Res., V1, P161, DOI [10.1007/BF01173636, DOI 10.1007/BF01173636]
[9]  
Moher David, 2010, J Clin Epidemiol, V63, pe1, DOI [10.1136/bmj.c869, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.10.001, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.004]
[10]  
Moher D, 2009, ANN INTERN MED, V151, P264, DOI [10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135, 10.1136/bmj.b2700, 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097, 10.1136/bmj.i4086, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.07.299, 10.1136/bmj.b2535, 10.1186/2046-4053-4-1]