Advanced search
Publication Cover
Medical Teacher Volume 34, 2012 - Issue 9
Submit an article Journal homepage
2,267
Views
26
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Twelve Tips

Becoming a peer reviewer to medical education journals

Samy A. AzerKing Saud University, Saudi Arabia; SAMY A. AZER, MD, PhD (USyd), MEd (UNSW), FACG, PhD (UNSW), is a Professor of Medical Education and the Head of Curriculum Development and Research Unit, College of Medicine, King Saud University. He was a Professor of Medical Education and Chair of Medical Education Research and Development Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia. Formerly, he was a Senior Lecturer in Medical Education at the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, the University of Melbourne and the University of Sydney. Over the last four years, he has conducted a number of seminars in Malaysia, Saudi Arabia and several other countries titled, ‘Mastering the Art of Medical Education Research’, with the aim to develop peer review skills of participants. He has been a reviewer to many journals including Medical Education, Medical Teacher, BMC Medical Education, BMJ, Clinical Anatomy, Anatomical Sciences Education and others. He is one of the Associate Editors of BMC Medical Education and on the Editorial Board of MedEdWorld, UK.Correspondence[email protected]
,
Subha RamaniBoston University School of Medicine, USA; SUBHA RAMANI, MBBS, MMEd, MPH, is an Associate Professor of Medicine at Boston University School of Medicine. She is a general internist with a major interest in medical education. She completed Internal Medicine residencies at the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), India, as well as East Tennessee State University, USA, and a fellowship in General Internal Medicine at Boston University. She has participated in several medical education courses and completed a Masters in Medical Education at the University of Dundee, Scotland. Over the last 7 years, she has organised many staff development workshops and seminars for clinical educators at her institution and various educational conferences including the AMEE meeting. She has served as a peer reviewer for medical education journals including the Medical Teacher, Medical Education and Academic Medicine and is a contributing editor to MedEdWorld.
&
Ray PetersonUniversity of Adelaide, Australia; RAY PETERSON, BSc (Hon), MAppSc, PhD, DipEd, Grad DipScEd, is an Associate Professor in Education in the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Adelaide. He trained in science education and moved into medical education in the mid-1990s. He has worked on major curriculum development and renewal projects in medicine and has wide ranging educational interests in teaching, learning and assessment. Prior to his current appointment, he was Head of the Discipline of Medical Education at the University of Queensland. He supervises post graduate research students in medical, dental and physiotherapy education and regularly reviews for international medical education journals.
Pages 698-704 | Published online: 30 May 2012

References

  • Benos DJ, Bashari E, Chaves JM, Gaggar A, Kapoor N, LaFrance M, Mans R, Mayhew D, McGowan S, Polter A, et al. The ups and downs of peer review. Adv Physiol Educ 2007; 31: 145–152
  • Benos DJ, Kirk KL, Hall JE. How to review a paper. Adv Physiol Educ 2003; 27: 47–52
  • Black N, van Rooyen S, Godlee F, Smith R, Evans S. What makes a good reviewer and a good review for a general medical journal. JAMA 1998; 280: 231–233
  • Bland C, Addeane Caelleigh A, Steinecke A. Reviewers etiquette. Acad Med 2001; 76: 954–955
  • Bordage G. Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: The strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Acad Med 2001; 76: 889–896
  • Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW. The effectiveness of journal peer review. Peer review in health sciences, 2, F Godlee, T Jefferson. BMJ Books, London 2003; 62–75
  • Garmel GM. Reviewing manuscripts for biomedical journals. Perm J 2010; 14(1)32–40
  • Godlee F. Making reviewers visible: Openness, accountability, and credit. JAMA 2002; 287: 2762–2765
  • Guilford WH. Teaching peer review and the process of scientific writing. Adv Physiol Educ 2001; 25: 167–175
  • ICMJE. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. 2010. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Ethical consideration in the conduct and reporting research in the conduct and reporting research: Conflict of interest. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/ethical_4conlicts.html
  • Isohanni M. Peer review-still the well-functioning quality control and enhancer in scientific research. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2005; 112: 165–166
  • McNutt RA, Evans AT, Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW. The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review: A randomized trial. JAMA 1990; 263: 1371–1376
  • Mennin SP, Cole McGrew M. Scholarship in teaching and best evidence medical education: Synergy for teaching and learning. Med Teach 2000; 22: 468–471
  • Navalta JW, Lyons TS. Student peer review decisions on submitted manuscripts are as stringent as faculty peer reviewers. Adv Physiol Educ 2010; 34: 170–173
  • Provenzale JM, Robert J, Stanley RJ. A systematic guide to reviewing a manuscript. J Nucl Med Technol 2006; 34: 92–99
  • Rennie D. Editorial peer review: Its development and rationale. Peer review in health sciences, 2, F Godlee, T Jefferson. BMJ Books, London 2003; 1–13
  • Schroter S, Black N, Evans N, Carpenter J, Godlee F, Smith R. Effects of training on quality of peer review: Randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2004; 328(7441)673
  • Schroter S, Tite L, Hutchings A, Black N. Differences in review quality and recommendations for publication between peer reviewers suggested by authors or by editors. JAMA 2006; 295: 314–317
  • Simpson KJ. Reviewing and original research manuscript for the International Journal of Exercise Science: A guide for students and professionals. Int J Exerc Sci 2008; 1: 43–49
  • Van Rooyen S, Evans GF, Smith R, Black N. Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review: A randomized trial. JAMA 1998; 280: 234–237

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.