Yarris Lalena M, Gottlieb Michael, Scott Kevin, Sampson Christopher, Rose Emily, Chan Teresa M, Ilgen Jonathan
Oregon Health & Science University, Department of Emergency Medicine, Portland, Oregon.
Rush University Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
West J Emerg Med. 2017 Jun;18(4):721-728. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2017.2.33430. Epub 2017 Apr 19.
Peer review, a cornerstone of academia, promotes rigor and relevance in scientific publishing. As educators are encouraged to adopt a more scholarly approach to medical education, peer review is becoming increasingly important. Junior educators both receive the reviews of their peers, and are also asked to participate as reviewers themselves. As such, it is imperative for junior clinician educators to be well-versed in the art of peer reviewing their colleagues' work. In this article, our goal was to identify and summarize key papers that may be helpful for faculty members interested in learning more about the peer-review process and how to improve their reviewing skills.
The online discussions of the 2016-17 Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Faculty Incubator program included a robust discussion about peer review, which highlighted a number of papers on that topic. We sought to augment this list with further suggestions by guest experts and by an open call on Twitter for other important papers. Via this process, we created a list of 24 total papers on the topic of peer review. After gathering these papers, our authorship group engaged in a consensus-building process incorporating Delphi methods to identify the papers that best described peer review, and also highlighted important tips for new reviewers.
We found and reviewed 24 papers. In our results section, we present our authorship group's top five most highly rated papers on the topic of peer review. We also summarize these papers with respect to their relevance to junior faculty members and to faculty developers.
We present five key papers on peer review that can be used for faculty development for novice writers and reviewers. These papers represent a mix of foundational and explanatory papers that may provide some basis from which junior faculty members might build upon as they both undergo the peer-review process and act as reviewers in turn.
同行评审是学术界的基石,它提升了科学出版的严谨性和相关性。随着鼓励教育工作者在医学教育中采用更具学术性的方法,同行评审变得越来越重要。初级教育工作者既要接受同行的评审,也被要求自己作为评审人员参与其中。因此,初级临床教育工作者必须精通评审同事工作的技巧。在本文中,我们的目标是识别并总结一些关键论文,这些论文可能对有兴趣更多了解同行评审过程以及如何提高评审技能的教员有所帮助。
2016 - 17年急诊医学学术生活(ALiEM)教员孵化器项目的在线讨论包括了关于同行评审的热烈讨论,其中突出了一些关于该主题的论文。我们通过邀请客座专家提出进一步建议,并在推特上公开征集其他重要论文,来扩充这个列表。通过这个过程,我们创建了一份关于同行评审主题的总共24篇论文的列表。收集这些论文后,我们的作者团队采用德尔菲法进行了一个达成共识的过程,以确定最能描述同行评审的论文,并突出对新评审人员的重要提示。
我们找到了并评审了24篇论文。在结果部分,我们展示了我们作者团队评选出的关于同行评审主题的排名前五的最高评分论文。我们还就这些论文与初级教员和教员发展人员的相关性进行了总结。
我们展示了五篇关于同行评审的关键论文,可用于新手作者和评审人员的教员发展。这些论文涵盖了基础论文和解释性论文,可能为初级教员在经历同行评审过程以及反过来担任评审人员时提供一些可借鉴的基础。