Calling All Experts: Broadening the Definition of Expert Peer Review

Abstract

MODERATOR: Jonathan Schultz Director of Journal Operations American Heart Association SPEAKERS: Jonathan Schultz Patricia Baskin Executive Editor Neurology Journals, American Academy of Neurology H.E. Hinson, MD Associate Professor at Oregon Health and Science University Ashwini Sehgal, MD Professor at Case Western Reserve University REPORTER: Tony Alves Highwire Press For the session “Calling all Experts: Broadening the Definition of Expert Peer Review,” moderator Jonathan Schultz kicked off the session by noting that, although the traditional model of peer review is that an editor will send a manuscript to 2 or 3 reviewers who are experts on the topic of the manuscript, there is a growing recognition that sometimes a more specialized reviewer may need to be involved. In a presentation entitled “Technical/Methods/Reproducibility Review,” different forms of technical review were discussed. Because science articles are more complex, the American Heart Association (AHA) contracted with a team of technical editors who look at manuscripts at the revision stage and focus on the technical aspects of the manuscript like the abstract, methods, figures, and data—all elements that you need to understand reproducibility of the research. Three of the AHA’s technical reviewers answered questions posed by Schultz. They discussed that their role as a technical reviewer is to look at the content of the article to be sure that authors are providing necessary key components such as background and methods details. The best way to do that is to look at the reporting guidelines and to use standard reporting guideline checklists. It’s also important […]