Community Members as Reviewers of Medical Journal Manuscripts: a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Journal
Journal of general internal medicine
ISSN: 1525-1497
Titre abrégé: J Gen Intern Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8605834
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2023
May 2023
Historique:
received:
28
04
2022
accepted:
08
09
2022
pmc-release:
01
05
2024
medline:
28
9
2022
pubmed:
28
9
2022
entrez:
27
9
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Community members may provide useful perspectives on manuscripts submitted to medical journals. To determine the impact of community members reviewing medical journal manuscripts. Randomized controlled trial involving 578 original research manuscripts submitted to two medical journals from June 2018 to November 2021. Twenty-eight community members who were trained, supervised, and compensated. A total of 289 randomly selected control manuscripts were reviewed by scientific reviewers only. And 289 randomly selected intervention manuscripts were reviewed by scientific reviewers and one community member. Journal editorial teams used all reviews to make decisions about acceptance, revision, or rejection of manuscripts. Usefulness of reviews to editors, content of community reviews, and changes made to published articles in response to community reviewer comments. Editor ratings of community and scientific reviews averaged 3.1 and 3.3, respectively (difference 0.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.1 to 0.3), on a 5-point scale where a higher score indicates a more useful review. Qualitative analysis of the content of community reviews identified two taxonomies of themes: study attributes and viewpoints. Study attributes are the sections, topics, and components of manuscripts commented on by reviewers. Viewpoints are reviewer perceptions and perspectives on the research described in manuscripts and consisted of four major themes: (1) diversity of study participants, (2) relevance to patients and communities, (3) cultural considerations and social context, and (4) implementation of research by patients and communities. A total of 186 community reviewer comments were integrated into 64 published intervention group articles. Viewpoint themes were present more often in 66 published intervention articles compared to 54 published control articles (2.8 vs. 1.7 themes/article, difference 1.1, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.8). With training, supervision, and compensation, community members are able to review manuscripts submitted to medical journals. Their comments are useful to editors, address topics relevant to patients and communities, and are reflected in published articles. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03432143.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Community members may provide useful perspectives on manuscripts submitted to medical journals.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To determine the impact of community members reviewing medical journal manuscripts.
DESIGN
METHODS
Randomized controlled trial involving 578 original research manuscripts submitted to two medical journals from June 2018 to November 2021.
PARTICIPANTS
METHODS
Twenty-eight community members who were trained, supervised, and compensated.
INTERVENTIONS
METHODS
A total of 289 randomly selected control manuscripts were reviewed by scientific reviewers only. And 289 randomly selected intervention manuscripts were reviewed by scientific reviewers and one community member. Journal editorial teams used all reviews to make decisions about acceptance, revision, or rejection of manuscripts.
MAIN MEASURES
METHODS
Usefulness of reviews to editors, content of community reviews, and changes made to published articles in response to community reviewer comments.
KEY RESULTS
RESULTS
Editor ratings of community and scientific reviews averaged 3.1 and 3.3, respectively (difference 0.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.1 to 0.3), on a 5-point scale where a higher score indicates a more useful review. Qualitative analysis of the content of community reviews identified two taxonomies of themes: study attributes and viewpoints. Study attributes are the sections, topics, and components of manuscripts commented on by reviewers. Viewpoints are reviewer perceptions and perspectives on the research described in manuscripts and consisted of four major themes: (1) diversity of study participants, (2) relevance to patients and communities, (3) cultural considerations and social context, and (4) implementation of research by patients and communities. A total of 186 community reviewer comments were integrated into 64 published intervention group articles. Viewpoint themes were present more often in 66 published intervention articles compared to 54 published control articles (2.8 vs. 1.7 themes/article, difference 1.1, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.8).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
With training, supervision, and compensation, community members are able to review manuscripts submitted to medical journals. Their comments are useful to editors, address topics relevant to patients and communities, and are reflected in published articles.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03432143.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36163530
doi: 10.1007/s11606-022-07802-z
pii: 10.1007/s11606-022-07802-z
pmc: PMC10160325
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03432143']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1393-1401Subventions
Organisme : NIMHD NIH HHS
ID : P60 MD002265
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIH HHS
ID : MD002265
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.
Références
Health Aff (Millwood). 2019 Mar;38(3):359-367
pubmed: 30830822
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Aug 1;177(8):1216-1218
pubmed: 28604924
BMJ. 2021 Nov 24;375:n2891
pubmed: 34819302
BMJ Open. 2019 Sep 20;9(9):e028732
pubmed: 31542741
EMBO Rep. 2015 Jun;16(6):672-3
pubmed: 25896681
J Gen Intern Med. 2022 Apr;37(Suppl 1):6-13
pubmed: 35349017
J Clin Transl Sci. 2018 Jun;2(3):139-146
pubmed: 30370066
Public Health Rep. 2013 Nov;128 Suppl 3:61-7
pubmed: 24179281
Ann Intern Med. 2014 Jul 15;161(2):122-30
pubmed: 25023251
Health Serv Res. 2007 Aug;42(4):1758-72
pubmed: 17286625
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2013 Fall;7(3):301-12
pubmed: 24056512
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 26;14:89
pubmed: 24568690
BMJ. 2000 Jan 8;320(7227):114-6
pubmed: 10625273
J Gen Intern Med. 2016 Jan;31(1):13-21
pubmed: 26160480
Health Expect. 2015 Feb;18(1):44-57
pubmed: 23033933
Health Expect. 2005 Sep;8(3):253-63
pubmed: 16098155