Improving the peer review of narrative literature reviews.

Jennifer A. Byrne

doi:10.1186/s41073-016-0019-2

Jennifer A. Byrne

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0019-2

Copy DOI

Abstract

As the size of the published scientific literature has increased exponentially over the past 30 years, review articles play an increasingly important role in helping researchers to make sense of original research results. Literature reviews can be broadly classified as either “systematic” or “narrative”. Narrative reviews may be broader in scope than systematic reviews, but have been criticised for lacking synthesis and rigour. The submission of more scientific manuscripts requires more researchers acting as peer reviewers, which requires adding greater numbers of new reviewers to the reviewing population over time. However, whereas there are many easily accessible guides for reviewers of primary research manuscripts, there are few similar resources to assist reviewers of narrative reviews. Here, I summarise why literature reviews are valued by their diverse readership and how peer reviewers with different levels of content expertise can improve the reliability and accessibility of narrative review articles. I then provide a number of recommendations for peer reviewers of narrative literature reviews, to improve the integrity of the scientific literature, while also ensuring that narrative review articles meet the needs of both expert and non-expert readers.

Highlights

Over the past 30 years, the size of the published scientific literature has expanded exponentially [1]
More quality peer reviewers are needed within the scientific community [3], including those with the capacity and confidence to review narrative literature reviews
It has been difficult to identify predictors of peer-reviewer performance and effective training methods, younger reviewer age has been reproducibly associated with better quality manuscript reviews [26, 27]

Summary

Introduction

Over the past 30 years, the size of the published scientific literature has expanded exponentially [1]. I will provide advice regarding the peer review of narrative reviews, and the advice presented aims to be broadly applicable. Peer reviewers with related content expertise are best placed to assess the reliability of the information presented, while other reviewers can ensure that this information remains accessible to readers with different levels of prior knowledge.

Results

Conclusion