Peer Review Ethics of Scientific Papers

Abstract

Evaluation of the scientific paper, by the experts of the scientific topic addressed in the article is known as "peer review". Peer review is fundamental to the scientific publication process and the quality of the publication. The type of review process is generally based on the number of reviewers, authors and institutions blinded by the reviewer identity or not. Peer reviewers are experts chosen by editors to provide written assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of written research, with the aim of improving the reporting of research by identifying the highest quality material for the journal. The peer reviewers selected for the journal are required to meet minimum standards. The reviewers must have background in original research, publication of articles, formal training, and experience of performing critical appraisal of manuscripts.

Reviewers will be expected to be professional, honest, courteous, prompt, and constructive. While reviewing the manuscripts, the reviewers are desired to observe following elements.

1.       Identify and comment accurately and constructively on major strengths and weaknesses of study design, methodology, results and interpretation of the data.

2.       Comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study, or any evidence of low standards.

3.       Provide constructive and professional suggestions for improvement of the manuscript.

4.       Write a recommendation to editor to make a decision on acceptance (and/or revision) of the manuscript.

5.       Treat the manuscript as confidential and not retain or copy it. Also, reviewers must not share the manuscript with any colleagues.

6.       If reviewers suspect misconduct, they should notify the editor in confidence, and should not share their concerns with other parties unless officially notified by the journal.

The editors should make an effort to educate reviewers on how to "peer review". The editors should routinely assess all reviews for review quality and other performance characteristics of the reviewers. Individual performance data must be kept confidential.

Editors, if possible, after the professional peer review should strongly consider having a statistician review the report of the original research which is being considered for publication.