Flaws Documented, Reforms Debated at Congress on Journal Peer Review

Abstract

RESEARCH is revealing much room for improvement in the long-concealed world of medical journal peer review. A host of shortcomings, from bias and error poor readability and a lack of clear standards, were documented in studies presented at the Second International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication, held in Chicago, Ill. See also p 2856. The meeting, sponsored by the American Medical Association, was designed to stimulate research, not rehash editorial opinion, says congress director Drummond Rennie, MD, Deputy Editor (West), JAMA , Chicago, Ill. We are looking closely for information we can put into practice improve and, if necessary, reinvent medical journals, says George D. Lundberg, MD, Editor, JAMA . Need for Standards Despite Rennie's call focus on research, calls for establishing standards peppered the meeting. Speakers cited a need for clear statements of the types of reasons papers are rejected, what is expected from reviewers, how