Peer Reviewers Research Articles

Peer review: An essential component of scientific publications

The peer review is for the improvement of the manuscript. Additionally, it helps the editors make an informed decision about the suitability of the manuscript to be published in their journal. Currently, four types of reviews (double anonymized, single anonymized, open, and transparent peer reviews) are commonly followed. None of these are best for all situations. While the authors write the review, they should use the following sections: overview of the manuscript, major points, minor points, and recommendation to the editor. BSMMU gratefully acknowledges 57 reviewers of 45 articles published in 2023.

Dementia coaching: the missing link in primary care

Introduction: Each Belgian township has inhabitants who suffer from dementia and this prevalence will continue to rise. Not only Belgium but also other European countries are facing this increase.
 In Belgium, on average 70% of people with dementia are living and receiving care at home.
 Policy Context And Objective: There are many services available for people with dementia. The organization of these services is however, highly fragmented and difficult to navigate. Additionally, the multidisciplinary integration and coordination is limited.
 In 2015, the Belgian government approved a plan called “Integrated Care for a better health”, which led to the development of 12 pilot projects that aim to provide high quality care and support to patients through the implementation of different actions. One of these actions in the Waasland regional project aims to target the challenges as described above through the dementia coaching approach. This approach was developed and implemented bottom-up since 2019, with the input of informal caregivers and the Alzheimer’s patient organization.
 Subsequently, in 2021 a similar approach was developed for people with Parkinson’s disease.
 Target Population: The action targets people who are diagnosed with dementia, as well as their informal caregivers in the Waasland region. In October 2022, already 216 families have received guidance from one of the regional dementia coaches.
 Highlights: The dementia coaching approach is a unique initiative that targets coordination of care across organizations. It aims to be the “missing link” through a multidisciplinary coaching team of both self-employed coaches and coaches employed by the different regional health care organizations. Their main task is to assist in navigating the regional health systems and organizations, by house and/ or telephone calls.
 The regional hospital is an additional partner of the project alongside the primary care organizations.
 The approach aims to improve the perceived quality of care as well as patient empowerment. The project is continuously evaluated and improved based on its user experiences. The coaches need to follow a mandatory training and participate in peer reviews to ensure that they share a quality-based vision and approach.
 Since dementia coaching receives state funding for the pay of the coaches, it allows the approach to be offered without additional costs for its users. This improves accessibility of care.
 
 Transferability And Conclusion: The dementia coaching approach is already being implemented for people with Parkinson’s disease. The approach shows possibilities to be transferred to other target populations as well (e.g. other chronic diseases) and could be useful for people with comorbidities. This option is currently being explored.
 Additionally, the approach has the potential to be implemented in other regions and/or countries that are willing to add this missing link.
 Key words: pilot projects – co-creation – dementia – chronic disease - integrated care
 

Inappropriate Use of Submission and Rejection Emails for Advertising Revision Services and Congresses

Finding a niche journal for the submission of an academic paper can sometimes be a challenge for authors, and finding the right choice may involve a series of submissions and rejections. Emails from editors and journals related to the submission or rejection of a paper should be strictly related to these purposes, i.e., to inform authors that their paper has been received, outline the subsequent editorial handling or peer reviewer steps in the former, or the reasons for rejection in the latter. This paper highlights four cases of - in the author’s opinion - the abuse of such emails by COPE member journals and publishers (Emerald Publishing Ltd., Springer Nature, Elsevier, Wiley) to advertise for-profit English revision and editing services and/or conferences, as a way to maximize these emails for a dual purpose, namely to inform authors of submission-related aspects (valid communication) while also trying to obtain clients and thus business for non-submission-related aspects (invalid communication). Since an abuse of email-based communication for non-academic purposes is an ethics-related matter, there is a need for systematic research of this potential abuse of emails from both COPE member and non-member journals.

Interview with Professor Edwin van Teijlingen

Edwin van Teijlingen is Dutch by birth and a Professor of Reproductive Health at Bournemouth University in the south of England. He has achieved a PhD in Medical Sociology at the University of Aberdeen, UK. Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen connected with Nepal while supervising Nepali PhD scholars in UK, and he has been a frequent visitor to Nepal since 2006. He has supervised more than 35 PhDs, among which 13 are Nepali. He has examined more than 50 PhDs. He has published around 300 academic papers and book chapters in health promotion, midwifery, and health services research. He serves as a peer reviewer for worldwide famous health journals such as PLOS One and BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. He delivered a speech to the Members of Parliamentarians in Kathmandu in 2016 as part of a workshop to promote evidence-based policymaking. He is a committee member on various grant-awarding bodies in the UK, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, and the USA. He is a visiting Professor at the Centre for Disability Studies, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala in India (2020-present); the School of Health Sciences at the University of Nottingham in England (2017-2026); Nobel College, affiliated with Pokhara University, Nepal (2012-present); and Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences affiliated with Tribhuvan University (2009-present). We would like to express our gratitude for his acceptance to share personal and academic lives, which can inspire young and energetic scholars in Nepal and elsewhere.

Study on Effectiveness of Online Peer Review in C-E Translation

The author collects data from an online peer review platform (Peerceptive), where 25 junior English majors in Wenzhou Medical university were asked to exchange peer reviews of first drafts of 2 translation assignments and then make modifications on their own translation works based on peer reviews they received. The author analyzes the acceptance rate of peer reviews of 12 students, who are divided into 3 groups, good, average and weak based on their academic performance in their previous semester. The author also compares the test performance of the 12 students at the beginning of the semester and at the end of the semester. Finally, the author hands out questionnaires to collect students’ perceptions and attitudes towards online peer review in C-E translation. Based on a comprehensive and statistic analysis of the data collected from the 2 assignments, 1 test and 1 questionnaire, the author draws a conclusion that online peer review is beneficial for English major students in C-E translation.

Assessment: The Quality of Instrument to Measure Student’s Scientific Attitude (SSA) based on Content Validity and Empirical Testing

This research aims to determine the questionnaire quality based on: (1) content validity, and (2) empirical testing. The research was research and development using the 4-D model (defining, designing, developing, and disseminating stage). The instrument validation was conducted by an instrument expert, two physics teachers, and five peer reviewers. The subject of empirical testing was 206 students of class XII IPA SMAN 6 Yogyakarta in the 2019/2020 school year. The research instrument was a questionnaire of student’s scientific attitude (SSA) that consists of 20 statement items. The data were analyzed using the raw scale for content validity of the SSA questionnaire, and Product Moment Pearson for empirical testing validation using SPSS 16, and Cronbach’s Alpha value to determine the reliability. The results show that (1) all items of the SSA questionnaire meet content validity with raw scale score between 3.75 and 4, which means on excellent category; (2) the SSA questionnaire meet empirical validity with Product Moment Pearson r between 0.186 and 0.595; all r > rtable: 0.138 (n=206; α = 0.05), and meet reliability with Cronbach’s Alpha value between 0.724 and 0.756; all value > 0.60; which means the SSA questionnaire are feasible to use based on empirical testing

Summary Report APE 2023, 10--12 January, Berlin, Germany Berlin Re-Visited: Building Technological Support for Scholarship and Scientific Publishing

This paper summarizes the 18th Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) Conference: Berlin Re-Visited: Building Technological Support for Scholarship and Scientific Publishing, held as a hybrid event 10 and 11 January 2023, and organized by the Berlin Institute of Scholarly Publishing (BISP), a not-for-profit organization dedicated to bringing publishers, researchers, funders, and policymakers together. This year’s conference theme “Out with the old, in with the new!” was discussed and presented in keynote speeches, the APE lecture, and several panel discussions. Current challenges within scholarly publishing, e.g., with research integrity, trust, and research assessment, have much to do with the old ways of doing things. To move science forward, new technologies and innovations, like the decentralized web, FAIR digital objects, and blockchain technology are needed to shape new paradigms. In many sessions it was stressed that not just new technologies are needed to move science forward, but human collaboration and partnerships as well. The changing role of the journal and the importance to recognize more diverse research outputs, beyond the journal article, was a topic of importance. Not only research assessment reforms and improved collaboration amongst different stakeholder groups are needed to address this, new publishing systems, better metadata, and open infrastructures as well. A session presenting different start-ups showcased how Artificial Intelligence, Natural Language Processing and software technology can be used to tackle problems in e.g., finding relevant funders and peer reviewers, and detecting image plagiarism. It was also discussed what publishers can do to help achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Collaboration, data transparency and sharing best practices amongst researchers, funders, and policy makers are key. Another important topic during this year’s APE was how publishers can support Early Career Researchers: establishing new workflows and infrastructures that enable publication of a wider range of research outputs, and broader recognition of these outputs, will incentivize ECRs. This year’s APE was concluded with the APE Award Ceremony. The winner - Vsevolod Solovyov from Prophy - has used AI to enhance the current peer review system and made a very important contribution to improving the scholarly communication system.

FACILITATORS OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN OLDER ADULTS AND THE IMPACT OF FEAR OF FALLING: WHAT KEEPS US MOVING?

Abstract Habitual participation in physical activity provides many well-documented health benefits for older adults. It has been suggested that high self-efficacy and internal motivation are facilitators of sustained participation, however, the findings are equivocal. Moreover, research suggests that fear of falling may negatively impact self-efficacy, leading to diminished physical activity levels. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with sustained participation in physical activity and the potential influence of fear of falling on participation in physical activity for older adults. A phenomenological study was conducted with a convenience sample of 19 community-dwelling older adults aged 55-85. Participants completed an online, open-ended survey to identify potential facilitators influencing habitual physical activity in older adults. Van Manen’s (1990) hermeneutical approach was employed to analyze data. Transcripts were analyzed for themes by two members of the research team. Trustworthiness was established by a peer reviewer who assessed theme accuracy. Self-motivation and life-long participation were identified as facilitators of sustained participation in physical activity. This study supports internal motivation as a facilitator; self-efficacy was not identified. Instead, lifelong participation was identified. For this study lifelong participation was defined as participating in physical activity from childhood throughout adulthood and into older adulthood. Furthermore, modification of habitual physical activity was reported due to fear of falling, namely those associated with outdoor activities. All other reported forms of physical activity were maintained. The influence of these modifications on sustained participation in physical activity for older adults is unclear and warrants further investigation.

Development of riparian vegetation biodiversity field guide book as river health biomonitoring instruction for class X SMA/MA students

This study aims to (1) determine the biodiversity of riparian vegetation as a biomonitoring of health in the Kuning River and Tambak Bayan, (2) produce a field guidebook for biodiversity of riparian vegetation as a guide for river health biomonitoring for 10th grade high school students, and (3) determine the quality a field guidebook for riparian vegetation biodiversity as a guide for river health biomonitoring which was developed after being assessed by material experts, media experts, peer reviewers, biology teachers and 10th grade high school students. The type of development research used is Research and Development (R & D) with the ADDIE model (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, Evaluation) and is limited to ADDE without implementation. The products that have been developed are assessed by material experts, media experts, peer reviewers, biology teachers and fifteen students from SMAN 1 Cangkringan. This research found 108 plant species consisting of 47 families. The product produced is a field guidebook for biodiversity of riparian vegetation for biomonitoring of river health. Product evaluation results according to material experts 85.88% (Very Good), media experts 83.63% (Very Good), peer reviewers 90.57%, (Very Good), biology teacher 91.42% (Very Good), and students 83.20% (Very Good). Based on this assessment, a field guidebook for biodiversity of riparian vegetation for biomonitoring of river health is worthy for use as teaching material for 10th grade high school students on water pollution.

2023 Reviewer Acknowledgment

Peer reviews are the foundation of high-quality academic publishing. Uro-Technology Journal was able to maintain its high standards for the quality of its published papers thanks to the tireless work of our reviewers. In 2023, we are thankful for the contributions of our reviewers. The editorial office would like to thank and recognize the following reviewers for their valuable time and devotion, regardless of whether the papers they reviewed were ultimately published.

Thank you

A year end thank you to our peer reviewers and editorial board.

Enhancing Healthcare Education: Leveraging ChatGPT for Innovative Simulation Scenarios

BackgroundDeveloping simulation scenarios for implementation in nursing programs is labor intensive and time consuming. The purpose of this study was to determine if ChatGPT could create accurate and realistic simulation scenarios efficiently to assist faculty in healthcare education. MethodsChatGPT was used to create five healthcare simulations. The scenarios were sent to 18 peer reviewers who evaluated them using a 25-question Likert scale survey, which also included opportunities to provide qualitative feedback. ResultsData analysis revealed that scenarios varied in terms of realism regarding patient profile, history, present illness and the way the scenario unfolded. Also noted was that pertinent information was missing in all scenarios however, the information generated was accurate. Most of the reviewer comments were positive and many were surprised at the amount of overall information included in each scenario. ConclusionsChatGPT is a powerful AI tool that has the potential to help simulation educators develop simulation scenarios. However, at present, caution needs to be employed, considering its current limitations.

Can ChatGPT and Other AI Bots Serve as Peer Reviewers?

Can ChatGPT and Other AI Bots Serve as Peer Reviewers?

Xenophagy as a Strategy for Mycobacterium leprae Elimination during Type 1 or Type 2 Leprosy Reactions: A Systematic Review.

Mycobacterium leprae is an intracellular bacillus that causes leprosy, a neglected disease that affects macrophages and Schwann cells. Leprosy reactions are acute inflammatory responses to mycobacterial antigens, classified as type1 (T1R), a predominant cellular immune response, or type2 (T2R), a humoral phenomenon, leading to a high number of bacilli in infected cells and nerve structures. Xenophagy is a type of selective autophagy that targets intracellular bacteria for lysosomal degradation; however, its immune mechanisms during leprosy reactions are still unclear. This review summarizes the relationship between the autophagic process and M. leprae elimination during leprosy reactions. Three databases, PubMed/Medline (n = 91), Scopus (n = 73), and ScienceDirect (n = 124), were searched. After applying the eligibility criteria, articles were selected for independent peer reviewers in August 2023. From a total of 288 studies retrieved, eight were included. In multibacillary (MB) patients who progressed to T1R, xenophagy blockade and increased inflammasome activation were observed, with IL-1β secretion before the reactional episode occurrence. On the other hand, recent data actually observed increased IL-15 levels before the reaction began, as well as IFN-γ production and xenophagy induction. Our search results showed a dichotomy in the T1R development and their relationship with xenophagy. No T2R studies were found.

‘Great work folks!’: establishing interpersonal communication in transparent peer reviews of research articles

In this paper, we examine how referees establish interpersonal relationships by mitigating criticism and expressing compliments as a realization of politeness strategies through the analysis of a specific corpus of transparent peer review reports (TPRs) with 220 reports totaling approximately 200,000 words. For the analysis, employing a framework drawn primarily on Brown and Levinson’s (1987) politeness strategies and following a detailed review of the literature, we coded all occurrences of politeness strategies using UAM Corpus Tool 3.3x (O’Donnell, 2021). Conducting intercoder/intracoder reliability tests, we identified and interpreted a variety of politeness strategies at the sentence and discourse levels, which were used for mitigating criticism and expressing compliments. Our results suggest that reviewers resorted to a variety of politeness strategies, predominantly negative politeness strategies, to mitigate their criticism directed at the authors of manuscripts. This is significant especially in the light of earlier studies where reviewer reports appeared to include some blunt/hurtful comments due partly to the anonymity of the reviewing process. Rather than focusing on just communicating criticism or a required change, reviewers were found to have cared about politeness and seemed to achieve interpersonal communication goals in TPRs by means of favoring an egalitarian approach rather than an authoritative one, supporting Gosden’s (2003) argument on the interpersonal aspect of reviewing discourse. This research contributes to our understanding of how criticism in TPRs can be conveyed without imposing, leading to encouraging, constructive and polite reports in English as part of science communication, especially when the review reports are publicly available.

Prevalence of Short Peer Reviews in 3 Leading General Medical Journals

High-quality peer reviews are often thought to be essential to ensuring the integrity of the scientific publication process, but measuring peer review quality is challenging. Although imperfect, review word count could potentially serve as a simple, objective metric of review quality. To determine the prevalence of very short peer reviews and how often they inform editorial decisions on research articles in 3 leading general medical journals. This cross-sectional study compiled a data set of peer reviews from published, full-length original research articles from 3 general medical journals (The BMJ, PLOS Medicine, and BMC Medicine) between 2003 and 2022. Eligible articles were those with peer review data; all peer reviews used to make the first editorial decision (ie, accept vs revise and resubmit) were included. Prevalence of very short reviews was the primary outcome, which was defined as a review of fewer than 200 words. In secondary analyses, thresholds of fewer than 100 words and fewer than 300 words were used. Results were disaggregated by journal and year. The proportion of articles for which the first editorial decision was made based on a set of peer reviews in which very short reviews constituted 100%, 50% or more, 33% or more, and 20% or more of the reviews was calculated. In this sample of 11 466 reviews (including 6086 in BMC Medicine, 3816 in The BMJ, and 1564 in PLOS Medicine) corresponding to 4038 published articles, the median (IQR) word count per review was 425 (253-575) words, and the mean (SD) word count was 520.0 (401.0) words. The overall prevalence of very short (<200 words) peer reviews was 1958 of 11 466 reviews (17.1%). Across the 3 journals, 843 of 4038 initial editorial decisions (20.9%) were based on review sets containing 50% or more very short reviews. The prevalence of very short reviews and share of editorial decisions based on review sets containing 50% or more very short reviews was highest for BMC Medicine (693 of 2585 editorial decisions [26.8%]) and lowest for The BMJ (76 of 1040 editorial decisions [7.3%]). In this study of 3 leading general medical journals, one-fifth of initial editorial decisions for published articles were likely based at least partially on reviews of such short length that they were unlikely to be of high quality. Future research could determine whether monitoring peer review length improves the quality of peer reviews and which interventions, such as incentives and norm-based interventions, may elicit more detailed reviews.

Perspectives on systematic review protocol registration: a survey amongst stakeholders in the clinical research publication process

BackgroundAs systematic reviews (SRs) inform healthcare decisions, it is key that they address relevant questions and use rigorous methodology. Registration of SR protocols helps researchers identify relevant topics for future reviews and aims to prevent bias and duplication of effort. However, most SRs protocols are currently not registered, despite its significance. To guide future recommendations to enhance preregistration of SRs, it is important to gain a comprehensive understanding of the perspectives within the research community. Therefore, this study aims to examine the experiences with and factors of influence (barriers and facilitators) on prospective SR registration amongst researchers, peer reviewers and journal editors.MethodsTwo different surveys were distributed to two groups: researchers and journal editors both identified from an existing sample of SRs. Researchers who indicated to have peer reviewed a SR were surveyed on their perspectives as peer reviewers as well. Survey design and analysis were informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Shared and unique subthemes from the perspectives of researchers, peer reviewers and journal editors were identified and linked to the SR registration process (Innovation), to team, organisation (Inner setting) and (inter)national research community (Outer setting), and to characteristics of researchers, peer reviewers or journal editors (Individuals).ResultsThe survey’s response rates were 65/727 (9%) for researchers, of which 37 were peer reviewers, and 22/308 (7%) for journal editors. Most respondents (n = 76, 94%) were familiar with SR protocol registration and 81% of researchers had registered minimally one SR protocol. Shared SR registration process subthemes were the importance and advantages of SR protocol registration, as well as barriers such as a high administrative burden. Shared subthemes regarding the inner and outer setting centred on journal processes, external standards and time. Shared individual factors were knowledge, skills and awareness.ConclusionsThe majority of the respondents were familiar with SR protocol registration and had a positive attitude towards it. This study identified suboptimal registration process, administrative burden and lack of mandatory SR protocol registration as barriers. By overcoming these barriers, SR protocol registration could contribute more effectively to the goals of open science.Systematic review registrationosf.io/gmv6z.

The Dream of Psychosocial Thinking

AbstractThis essay is a response to four peer reviews of Unseen City, touching on the key ideas showcased in each: the move in community psychoanalysis from an authoritative scripting of the cure to elaborations of care; the role of the public clinic in the global city; the post colonial uncanny; the contribution of literature to the psy-disciplines.

Where are the carrots? A proposal to start crediting peer reviewers for their contribution to science

Key points The peer review system is viewed by many as being flawed and antiquated. While it is unlikely that the system will be overhauled completely, some changes seem to be warranted. Our proposal is to change the incentives to do peer review by making reviews a part of the tenure criteria and valuing reviews as a contribution to the literature. The proposal would require more transparency than is currently the industry norm to prevent unwanted effects. We believe these changes would not only increase willingness to review, but also lead to shorter turnaround times and increase the quality of reviews.

Programmatic assessment in Medical Education – Review

A programmatic assessment is a systematic process by which we evaluate our processes, services, and outcomes through a systematic approach with the intention of enhancing our quality and performance. With the help of a structured approach, we will be able to gather, analyze, and interpret data in order to determine strengths and weaknesses within our company's operations. As part of the organization's assessment program, a variety of methodologies will be used, including surveys, performance metrics, and peer reviews, to provide an understanding of the effectiveness of the organization as a whole. In this review, the primary objectives are to identify the benefits, the approach to their implementation, as well as areas for improvement, set measurable goals, develop strategic changes, and identify the challenges associated with implementing programmatic assessments in medical education. Through the adoption of a continuous improvement culture, this assessment program will have the ability to empower our organization to adapt to evolving challenges as well as provide better services to our stakeholders.