Abstract
To the Editor:— The reviewer of scientific articles has a great obligation to the readership of the journal, to the author of the paper, and to the journal itself. Obviously, the reviewer needs to be competent in the subject under discussion. With the rapid advances in science, only a reviewer directly engaged in the area he is to review can adequately undertake the task. His critique should concern itself with the clarity of the text, the methods employed, statistical tests that may or should have been carried out, rationale of the interpretations as well as a careful assessment of the references. An article should not be accepted for publication unless all pertinent views have been cited and proper credit is given to previously published work. Personal bias should obviously not affect a reviewer's critique. The task of the reviewer would be facilitated if authors would transmit their papers for review
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
