TY - JOUR
T1 - Challenges and Controversies in Peer Review
T2 - JACC Review Topic of the Week
AU - Peer Review Task Force of the Scientific Publications Committee
AU - Kusumoto, Fred M.
AU - Bittl, John A.
AU - Creager, Mark A.
AU - Dauerman, Harold L.
AU - Lala, Anuradha
AU - McDermott, Mary M.
AU - Turco, Justine Varieur
AU - Taqueti, Viviany R.
AU - Fuster, Valentin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation
PY - 2023/11/21
Y1 - 2023/11/21
N2 - The process of peer review has been the gold standard for evaluating medical science, but significant pressures from the recent COVID-19 pandemic, new methods of communication, larger amounts of research, and an evolving publication landscape have placed significant pressures on this system. A task force convened by the American College of Cardiology identified the 5 most significant controversies associated with the current peer-review process: the effect of preprints, reviewer blinding, reviewer selection, reviewer incentivization, and publication of peer reviewer comments. Although specific solutions to these issues will vary, regardless of how scientific communication evolves, peer review must remain an essential process for ensuring scientific integrity, timely dissemination of information, and better patient care. In medicine, the peer-review process is crucial because harm can occur if poor-quality data or incorrect conclusions are published. With the dramatic increase in scientific publications and new methods of communication, high-quality peer review is more important now than ever.
AB - The process of peer review has been the gold standard for evaluating medical science, but significant pressures from the recent COVID-19 pandemic, new methods of communication, larger amounts of research, and an evolving publication landscape have placed significant pressures on this system. A task force convened by the American College of Cardiology identified the 5 most significant controversies associated with the current peer-review process: the effect of preprints, reviewer blinding, reviewer selection, reviewer incentivization, and publication of peer reviewer comments. Although specific solutions to these issues will vary, regardless of how scientific communication evolves, peer review must remain an essential process for ensuring scientific integrity, timely dissemination of information, and better patient care. In medicine, the peer-review process is crucial because harm can occur if poor-quality data or incorrect conclusions are published. With the dramatic increase in scientific publications and new methods of communication, high-quality peer review is more important now than ever.
KW - peer review
KW - preprints
KW - scientific communication
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85175693291&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2023.08.056
DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2023.08.056
M3 - Review article
C2 - 37968021
AN - SCOPUS:85175693291
SN - 0735-1097
VL - 82
SP - 2054
EP - 2062
JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
IS - 21
ER -