Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40189947›Full record

ArticleTrends in cell biology2025

The value of joint peer review between early career researchers and supervisors.

Viviana Macarelli, Florian T Merkle

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Trends in cell biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Paying peer reviewers: benefits, risks, and challenges.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Viviana MacarelliInstitute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK.
Florian T MerkleInstitute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0QQ, UK; Cambridge Stem Cell Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0AW, UK; Department of Pharmacology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1QR, UK. Electronic address: fm436@cam.ac.uk.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 211221
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Peer review is essential for maintaining the quality of published research, but this skill is often not explicitly taught to early career researchers (ECRs). Joint peer review with supervisors can both promote ECR professional growth and enhance review quality. We describe the advantages and best practices of joint peer review.

Indexed as

Peer ReviewPeer Review, ResearchResearch PersonnelHumansmanuscript evaluationmentorshippeer reviewscientific publishing

Identifiers

PMID40189947
PMCPMC7617740

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.