ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2026
The CUAJ trainee peer-reviewer training program Pilot evaluation of a structured peer review curriculum for Canadian urology residents and fellows.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPeer review underpins academic publishing and represents a core scholarly competency; however, most trainees receive little structured or mentored instruction in conducting high-quality reviews. As the demand for rigorous peer review grows, journals must also cultivate the next generation of reviewers. For a society journal such as the Canadian Urological Association Journal (CUAJ), this cultivation also supports strengthening scholarly capacity within its Canadian urology community. We therefore developed and piloted the CUAJ Trainee Peer-Reviewer Training Program.
methodsWe designed and implemented a one-year, structured, and mentored trainee peer-reviewer training program for Canadian urology residents and fellows. The program included: 1) a didactic seminar introducing principles of peer review, ethical considerations, and best practices; 2) a structured mock peer-review exercise with facilitated group feedback; and 3) completion of three mentored manuscript peer reviews under the supervision of editorial board members, with individualized feedback. Participants completed baseline and exit surveys assessing self-reported knowledge, confidence, and peer-review competencies, as well as providing feedback on the initiative using 10-point Likert scales.
resultsNine trainees completed the program. Participants reported increased familiarity with the peer-review process (median 7, interquartile range [IQR] 4-8 before vs. 9, IQR 8-10 after, p=0.02) and confidence in conducting peer review (5, IQR 4-8 before vs. 9, IQR 8-9 after, p=0.01). Improvements were also observed across multiple domains of critical appraisal and peer-review skills, including evaluation of study design, statistical methods, interpretation of results, and provision of constructive feedback. Participants reported a high likelihood of continuing to engage in peer review after the program (median 9, IQR 8-10). All participants indicated they would recommend the initiative to other trainees, and overall satisfaction with the program was high (median 9, IQR 8-10).
conclusionsThe CUAJ Trainee Peer-Reviewer Training Program was feasible and well-received by trainees. In its pilot year, the program provided structured exposure to the peer-review process and was associated with improvements in trainees' self-reported familiarity, confidence, and comfort with evaluating key components of scientific manuscripts. This trainee-focused peer-review initiative may represent a practical and sustainable strategy to strengthen the Canadian urology reviewer pipeline while equitably introducing trainees to the principles of critical appraisal and scholarly publishing.
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.