Branding/Logomark minus Citation Combined Shape Icon/Bookmark-empty Icon/Copy Icon/Collection Icon/Close Copy 7 no author result Created with Sketch. Icon/Back Created with Sketch. Match!

Peer Reviewer Training and Editor Support: Results From an International Survey of Nursing Peer Reviewers

Published on Mar 1, 2009in Journal of Professional Nursing 1.83
· DOI :10.1016/j.profnurs.2008.08.007
Margaret Comerford Freda20
Estimated H-index: 20
(Albert Einstein College of Medicine),
Margaret H. Kearney26
Estimated H-index: 26
(UR: University of Rochester)
+ 2 AuthorsMolly C. Dougherty24
Estimated H-index: 24
(UNC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
Cite
Abstract
Topic Nursing journals depend on the services of peer reviewers for their expertise in research and clinical practice. Although some research has been done with peer reviewers of biomedical journals, to date, our knowledge about reviewers of nursing journals is minimal. Methods In this international survey of 1,675 reviewers for 41 nursing journals, reviewers were asked 69 questions about their experiences reviewing for professional nursing journals. This article examines their answers to the survey questions about training to become reviewers and the support they receive from editors. Results Results showed that 65% wanted formal training, although only about 30% received such training in the form of orientation, manuals, practice reviews, or workshops. For most peer reviewers, it took one to five reviews before they felt comfortable with the process, although some commented that, “I still question my reviews” and “It took a few years.” In this sample, 31% reported getting feedback from editors about their reviews, but 87% wanted feedback. Most (80%) wanted to see the other reviews of the manuscripts they reviewed, although only about 45% actually saw them. Reviewers reported that the editor had been helpful to them by providing feedback, demonstrating appreciation of their efforts, mentoring, and being available. Conclusions We concluded from this research that many reviewers' needs for training and support are not being met and that both reviewers and nursing editors could profit from a better understanding of the process. Editors could consider instituting programs of orientation, training, and support such as feedback on reviews, making other reviews available, and feedback on final disposition of manuscripts. Reviewers should consider discussing these issues with editors to make their needs for feedback and training known. Intervention studies to examine the effects of such programs on reviewer satisfaction could ultimately strengthen the nursing literature.
  • References (20)
  • Citations (27)
Cite
References20
Newest
Published on Sep 7, 2011in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 7.75
Sinead Brophy31
Estimated H-index: 31
(Swansea University),
Helen Davies9
Estimated H-index: 9
(Swansea University)
+ 2 AuthorsRhys Williams21
Estimated H-index: 21
(Swansea University)
Background Latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA) is a slowly developing type 1 diabetes. Objectives To compare interventions used for LADA. Search methods Studies were obtained from searches of electronic databases, supplemented by handsearches, conference proceedings and consultation with experts. Date of last search was December 2010. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and controlled clinical trials (CCT) evaluating interventions for LADA or type 2 diabetes with antibo...
Published on Dec 1, 2008in Journal of Nursing Scholarship 2.54
Margaret H. Kearney26
Estimated H-index: 26
(UR: University of Rochester),
Judith Gedney Baggs21
Estimated H-index: 21
+ 2 AuthorsMargaret Comerford Freda20
Estimated H-index: 20
(Yeshiva University)
Purpose: To describe nursing journal reviewers' professional backgrounds, reviewing experience, time investment, and perceptions of their role. Design: Exploratory descriptive cross-sectional study. Methods: A 69-question survey containing both fixed-option and open-ended questions and accessed via the World Wide Web was completed by 1,675 nursing journal reviewers who had been invited to participate by editors of 52 nursing journals. Findings: Participants were from 44 countries, with 74% from ...
Published on Dec 1, 2008in Journal of Nursing Scholarship 2.54
Rebecca Schnall17
Estimated H-index: 17
,
Patricia W. Stone Rn Mph44
Estimated H-index: 44
+ 3 AuthorsSuzanne Bakken37
Estimated H-index: 37
Purpose: To describe the development and psychometric testing of the Patient Safety Attitudes, Skills and Knowledge Scale (PS-ASK). Methods: Content validity of a 35-item instrument was established by a panel of experts. The instrument was pilot tested on 285 nursing students. Principal components analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation was conducted, and Cronbach's alphas were examined. Paired samples t-tests were used to show responsiveness of the scales pre- and post-patient safety curriculum. R...
Published on Apr 18, 2007in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 7.75
Tom Jefferson40
Estimated H-index: 40
(Cochrane Collaboration),
Melanie Rudin4
Estimated H-index: 4
+ 1 AuthorsFrank Davidoff36
Estimated H-index: 36
Background Scientific findings must withstand critical review if they are to be accepted as valid, and editorial peer review (critique, effort to disprove) is an essential element of the scientific process. We review the evidence of the editorial peer-review process of original research studies submitted for paper or electronic publication in biomedical journals. Objectives To estimate the effect of processes in editorial peer review. Search methods The following databases were searched to June ...
Published on Jan 30, 2007in PLOS Medicine
Michael L. Callaham38
Estimated H-index: 38
(UCSF: University of California, San Francisco),
John Tercier2
Estimated H-index: 2
(Lancaster University)
Background Peer review is considered crucial to the selection and publication of quality science, but very little is known about the previous experiences and training that might identify high-quality peer reviewers. The reviewer selection processes of most journals, and thus the qualifications of their reviewers, are ill defined. More objective selection of peer reviewers might improve the journal peer review process and thus the quality of published science.
Published on Jan 1, 2007in Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 3.87
Leanne Tite5
Estimated H-index: 5
,
Sara Schroter21
Estimated H-index: 21
Background: Peer reviewers are usually unpaid and their efforts not formally acknowledged. Some journals have difficulty finding appropriate reviewers able to complete timely reviews, resulting in publication delay. Objectives and methods: A survey of peer reviewers from five biomedical journals was conducted to determine why reviewers decline to review and their opinions on reviewer incentives. Items were scored on 5-point Likert scales, with low scores indicating low importance or low agreemen...
Published on Oct 1, 2006in Obstetrics & Gynecology 4.96
Annemieke P. Landkroon1
Estimated H-index: 1
,
Anne Margriet Euser1
Estimated H-index: 1
+ 2 AuthorsA. John P.M. Overbeke16
Estimated H-index: 16
OBJECTIVE: To validate and test a simple instrument for assessing the quality of a review. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, the quality of 247 reviews of 119 original articles submitted to the Dutch Journal of Medicine was assessed using a 5-point scale that has been used for years by Obstetrics & Gynecology. Each review was assessed by three editors of the journal. Intraobserver variability, calculated as an intraclass correlation coefficient, was assessed by having the same ed...
Published on Dec 1, 2005in Research in Nursing & Health 1.68
Margaret H. Kearney26
Estimated H-index: 26
(UR: University of Rochester),
Margaret Comerford Freda20
Estimated H-index: 20
(Albert Einstein College of Medicine)
A growing body of research challenges the inter-rater reliability of peer reviewers and the value of reviewer training or blinding in improving the quality of manuscript reviews, but double-blinded peer review of papers remains a relatively unexamined standard for nursing journals. Using data from a larger emailed survey, the views of 88 nurse editors on peer review were analyzed using content analysis. The majority of nurse editors reported that blinding was important in peer review, to maintai...
Published on Jun 1, 2005in American Journal of Roentgenology 3.16
Mark A. Kliewer35
Estimated H-index: 35
,
Kelly S. Freed17
Estimated H-index: 17
+ 2 AuthorsJames M. Provenzale73
Estimated H-index: 73
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to determine which manuscript reviewer characteristics are most strongly associated with reviewer performance as judged by editors of the American Journal of Roentgenology (AJR).MATERIALS AND METHODS. At the AJR, manuscript reviews are rated by the journal editors on a subjective scale from 1 (lowest) to 4, on the basis of the value, thoroughness, and punctuality of the critique. We obtained all scores for AJR reviewers and determined the average score for...
Published on Mar 1, 2005in Journal of Nursing Scholarship 2.54
Margaret Comerford Freda20
Estimated H-index: 20
,
Margaret H. Kearney26
Estimated H-index: 26
Purpose :T odescribe the editorial practices of nurse editors, including proprietary arrangements, manuscript processing systems, and editorial review, and to ascertain editors’ opinions on effective editorial practices. Design :A descriptive study in which an author-designed 108-question survey was distributed and collected by e-mail. Of 177 international nursing editors identified, 164 e-mail addresses could be located, and 137 nurse editors expressed willingness to participate. Ninety journal...
Cited By27
Newest
Published on Mar 1, 2018in Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2.03
Patricia A. Curtin5
Estimated H-index: 5
(UO: University of Oregon),
John Russial7
Estimated H-index: 7
(UO: University of Oregon),
Alec Tefertiller1
Estimated H-index: 1
(KSU: Kansas State University)
This survey of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC) scholars (N = 547; response rate = 39.3%) examines perceptions of peer review, a study last undertaken in 1990. Respondents rated intrinsic motivations, such as helping others, more highly than extrinsic motivations, such as reviewing as a consideration for career advancement. Respondents believed they did a significantly better job as reviewers than did scholars who reviewed their work. More experienced re...
Published on Jan 1, 2017
Pali U. K. De Silva2
Estimated H-index: 2
(MSU: Murray State University),
Candace K. Vance2
Estimated H-index: 2
(MSU: Murray State University)
Peer review of scholarly articles is a mechanism used to assess and preserve the trustworthiness of reporting of scientific findings. Since peer reviewing is a qualitative evaluation system that involves the judgment of experts in a field about the quality of research performed by their colleagues (and competitors), it inherently encompasses a strongly subjective element. Although this time-tested system, which has been evolving since the mid-eighteenth century, is being questioned and criticize...
Published on Jun 1, 2016in Journal of Nursing Education 1.07
Kristen A. Sethares9
Estimated H-index: 9
,
Nancy S Morris1
Estimated H-index: 1
Peer review is an expectation of PhD-prepared nurses but a lack of evidence in the best methods to train students is of concern.Guided by the ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation) model, faculty at two universities developed, implemented, and evaluated a peer review assignment for 22 second-year PhD nursing students. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis.Students reported the process of peer...
Published on Feb 1, 2016in Nurse Education Today 2.44
Jiayun Xu4
Estimated H-index: 4
(UofU: University of Utah),
Kyounghae Kim4
Estimated H-index: 4
(Johns Hopkins University)
+ 1 AuthorsMarie T. Nolan Rn20
Estimated H-index: 20
(Johns Hopkins University)
ABSTRACT There is a need for scholars to be prepared as peer reviewers in order to ensure the continual publication of quality science. However, developing the skills to craft a constructive critique can be difficult. In this commentary, we discuss the use of a group peer review mentoring model for PhD students to gain experience in peer review from a faculty member who is experienced in peer review. Central to this model, was the opportunity for each student and faculty mentor to openly discuss...
Published on Mar 1, 2015in Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 4.65
James Galipeau13
Estimated H-index: 13
(Ottawa Hospital Research Institute),
David Moher126
Estimated H-index: 126
(Ottawa Hospital Research Institute)
+ 4 AuthorsPaul C. Hébert65
Estimated H-index: 65
(UdeM: Université de Montréal)
Abstract Objectives To investigate whether training in writing for scholarly publication, journal editing, or manuscript peer review effectively improves educational outcomes related to the quality of health research reporting. Study Design and Setting We searched MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library for comparative studies of formalized, a priori–developed training programs in writing for scholarly publication, journal editing, or manuscript peer review. Comparators include...
Published on Jun 1, 2014in Nursing Inquiry 1.50
Melanie Jasper17
Estimated H-index: 17
(Swansea University),
Mojtaba Vaismoradi16
Estimated H-index: 16
(Swansea University)
+ 1 AuthorsHannele Turunen18
Estimated H-index: 18
(University of Eastern Finland)
As pressure to publish increases in the academic nursing world, journal submission numbers and rejection rates are soaring. The review process is crucial to journals in publishing high quality, cutting-edge knowledge development, and to authors in preparing their papers to a high quality to enable the nursing world to benefit from developments in knowledge that affect nursing practice and patient outcomes and the development of the discipline. This paper does not intend to contribute to the deba...
Published on May 23, 2014
Marilyn A. Dyrud8
Estimated H-index: 8
(Oregon Institute of Technology)
This paper examines the issue of plagiarism at a professional level, using an ethics lens. It includes information about the general situation, cases in engineering and technology, and suggestions for journal editors and reviewers to help stem the tide of an ethical problem that is on the rise.
Published on Dec 1, 2013in Systematic Reviews
James Galipeau13
Estimated H-index: 13
(Ottawa Hospital Research Institute),
David Moher126
Estimated H-index: 126
(Ottawa Hospital Research Institute)
+ 5 AuthorsAnita Palepu38
Estimated H-index: 38
(UBC: University of British Columbia)
Background An estimated $100 billion is lost to ‘waste’ in biomedical research globally, annually, much of which comes from the poor quality of published research. One area of waste involves bias in reporting research, which compromises the usability of published reports. In response, there has been an upsurge in interest and research in the scientific process of writing, editing, peer reviewing, and publishing (that is, journalology) of biomedical research. One reason for bias in reporting and ...