Statistical reviewers improve reporting in biomedical articles: a randomized trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although peer review is widely considered to be the most credible way of selecting manuscripts and improving the quality of accepted papers in scientific journals, there is little evidence to support its use. Our aim was to estimate the effects on manuscript quality of either adding a statistical peer reviewer or suggesting the use of checklists such as CONSORT or STARD to clinical reviewers or both.

Methodology and principal findings

Interventions were defined as 1) the addition of a statistical reviewer to the clinical peer review process, and 2) suggesting reporting guidelines to reviewers; with "no statistical expert" and "no checklist" as controls. The two interventions were crossed in a 2x2 balanced factorial design including original research articles conse

SUBMITTER: Cobo E 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1824709 | biostudies-literature | 2007 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature