Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To see whether telling peer reviewers that their signed reviews of original research papers might be posted on the BMJ's website would affect the quality of their reviews.

Design

Randomised controlled trial.

Setting

A large international general medical journal based in the United Kingdom.

Participants

541 authors, 471 peer reviewers, and 12 editors.

Intervention

Consecutive eligible papers were randomised either to have the reviewer's signed report made available on the BMJ's website alongside the published paper (intervention group) or to have the report made available only to the author-the BMJ's normal procedure (control group). The intervention was the act of revealing to reviewers-after they had agreed to review but before they undertook

SUBMITTER: van Rooyen S 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2982798 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature