Vintzileos Anthony M, Ananth Cande V, Odibo Anthony O, Chauhan Suneet P, Smulian John C, Oyelese Yinka
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Winthrop-University Hospital, Mineola, NY.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY; Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Dec;211(6):703.e1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.053. Epub 2014 Jun 28.
We sought to determine the extent to which reviewers' recommendations influence the final editorial disposition of manuscripts submitted for publication.
Five reviewers retrieved their electronic databases of obstetrical manuscripts that they had reviewed for Obstetrics and Gynecology and the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. The recommendations of each reviewer were grouped in 1 of 3 categories: rejection (or not acceptance), acceptance with major revisions, and acceptance with minor or no revisions. These recommendations were contrasted in the final editorial disposition of the manuscript, which was recorded as "accepted" or "rejected." The quality of the reviews was assessed in a random sample of 10% of the reviews, stratified by reviewer and journal.
A total of 635 reviews were analyzed. Overall, the most influential reviewers' recommendation was rejection, which was accompanied by 93% rejection rate. Recommendation for acceptance with minor or no revisions was accompanied by 67% acceptance rate whereas acceptance with major revisions was accompanied by 40% acceptance rate. There were no variations among reviewers regarding their degree of influence with respect to the final disposition of the manuscript. The final disposition of manuscripts was not influenced by the quality of the reviews nor reviewer's demographics including reviewer's age, year of first peer review, and years active in peer review.
The degree of influence on the final disposition of the manuscript depends on the type of recommendation. A recommendation for rejection was the most influential and it was associated with a high rate of rejection. Recommendations for acceptance or minor revisions were also influential but to a lesser degree.
我们试图确定审稿人的建议对提交发表的稿件最终编辑处理的影响程度。
五位审稿人检索了他们为《妇产科学》和《美国妇产科学杂志》审阅过的产科稿件电子数据库。每位审稿人的建议分为以下三类之一:拒绝(或不接受)、接受但需大幅修改、接受且只需小幅修改或无需修改。这些建议与稿件的最终编辑处理情况进行对比,最终编辑处理情况记录为“接受”或“拒绝”。通过按审稿人和期刊分层,从10%的审稿意见中随机抽样来评估审稿质量。
共分析了635条审稿意见。总体而言,最具影响力的审稿人建议是拒绝,其伴随的拒绝率为93%。建议接受且只需小幅修改或无需修改的伴随接受率为67%,而建议接受但需大幅修改的伴随接受率为40%。在稿件最终处理方面,审稿人之间的影响力程度没有差异。稿件的最终处理不受审稿质量的影响,也不受审稿人的人口统计学特征影响,包括审稿人的年龄、首次同行评审年份以及活跃于同行评审的年限。
对稿件最终处理的影响程度取决于建议的类型。拒绝建议最具影响力,且与高拒绝率相关。接受或小幅修改建议也有影响力,但程度较小。