ArticleProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2022
The challenge of recruiting peer reviewers from one medical journal's perspective.
Article in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Behavior characteristics of peer reviewers in medical journals: a survey from China.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- Screening, sorting, and the feedback cycles that imperil peer review.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- When peer review drags on: the harm to early career researchers.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Article
- Dramatic increases in redundant publications in the Generative AI era.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- A structured, journal-led peer-review mentoring program enhances peer review training.Research integrity and peer review · 2024Article
- Implementation of a novel peer review academy by Surgery and the Association of Women Surgeons.Surgery · 2024Article
- Peer reviewers' willingness to review, their recommendations and quality of reviews after the Finnish Medical Journal switched from single-blind to double-blind peer review.Research integrity and peer review · 2023Article
- Introducing the SURGERY Peer Review Academies.Surgery · 2023Article
- Peer reviewer survey forProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2023Article
- Survey of challenges and insights into the peer review process in anesthesiology and pain journals: An editorial perspective.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peer review continues to be a crucial part of the scientific publishing process. Many editors have reported difficulty recruiting potential reviewers and receiving timely recommendations. Poor reviewer acceptance and completion rates can complicate and delay publication. However, few studies have examined these rates in detail. Here we analyze reviewer invitation, acceptance, and completion data from the
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.