ArticleLancet (London, England)2022
Should peer reviewers be paid to review academic papers?
Article in Lancet (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring views on remuneration for review: a survey of patient and public reviewers forBMJ open · 2026Article
- Paying peer reviewers: benefits, risks, and challenges.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Does the disconnect between the peer-reviewed label and reality explain the peer review crisis, and can open peer review or preprints resolve it? A narrative review.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- Remembering the Reviewers.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2025Article
- The Peer Review Crisis Demands Radical Reform: Why Reviewers Should Become Paid Professional Referees.Cureus · 2025Article
- On improving the sustainability of peer review.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- The challenge of reviewers scarcity in academic journals: payment as a viable solution.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2024Article
- An overview of the peer review process in biomedical sciences.Australasian psychiatry : bulletin of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists · 2024Review
- The peer-review process in Europe's leading case report journal for cardiovascular diseases: a survey for improving transparency and quality.European heart journal. Case reports · 2024Article
- Paying reviewers and regulating the number of papers may help fix the peer-review process.F1000Research · 2024Article
- Peer Review inJAACAP open · 2023Article
- Recognizing and marshalling the pre-publication error correction potential of open data for more reproducible science.Nature ecology & evolution · 2023Article
- How to improve scientific peer review: Four schools of thought.Learned publishing : journal of the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers · 2023Article
- Peer Review: A Process Primed for Quality Improvement?The Journal of urology · 2023Article
- J'Accuse….. Or The Plight of pro-bono Volunteer Scientists in Academic Publishing.Human genomics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35461548What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.