Peer review of papers presented to be published by medical journals is considered to be a critical requirement to be satisfied prior to publishing the information.
Objectives: 1.- To establish prevalence of rejection of papers received by an important national journal, from 2003 to 2007. 2.- To inform operating characteristics of peer review prosess in a sample of papers in the same period.
Method: From 2003 to march 2007, 332 papers were sent to publication. Estimating a prevalence of rejection of 20% and an error of 3,75%, a sample size of 188 articles was required (Epitable of EpiInfo 6.04b). The papers were reviewed by one to three peers, one of them in charge essencially of methodological aspects. Also, editors examined all papers.
Results: Methodological peer alone or with other 1 or 2, reviewed 95:188: 50,53% of submitted papers. Percentage of rejection suggested by methodological peer was 45% but when additional one or two participated, the percentage was reduced to 30,52%. The overall rejection proportion was only 13,29% due to acceptance of 22 papers initially rejected. In 69,6% of papers it was recommended to give the authors the chance of make corrections in order to publish, with or without new review. Papers accepted with no change at all were uncommon, 7,5%.
Conclusions: 1.- As pointed out previously prevalence of rejection finally was only 13,29%. 2.- The process of reviewing papers should be clearly established as to time required to perform peer review and corrections by the authors. 3.- All papers should be submitted to methodological examination. 4.- The position of reviewer in medical journals requires more precise definition, indicating clearly the requirements to reach that position by those interested.
Keywords : Peer review, rejection of papers, peers |
