Schroter, Sara, Price, Amy, Flemyng, Ella, Demaine, Andrew, Elliot, Jim, Harmston, Rebecca R., Richards, Tessa, Staniszewska, Sophie and Stephens, Richard (2018) Perspectives on involvement in the peer-review process : surveys of patient and public reviewers at two journals. BMJ Open, 8 (9). e023357. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023357 ISSN 2044-6055.

Preview	PDF WRAP-perspectives-involvement-peer-review-patient-journals-Staniszewska-2018.pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer. Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0. Download (767Kb) | Preview
	Archive (ZIP) WRAP-accepted version-2018.zip - Accepted Version Embargoed item. Restricted access to Repository staff only Download (764Kb)

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

Objective
In 2014/2015, The BMJ and Research Involvement and Engagement (RIE) became the first journals to routinely include patients and the public in the peer review process of journal articles. This survey explores the perspectives and early experiences of these reviewers.

Design
A cross-sectional survey.

Setting and participants
Patient and public reviewers for The BMJ and RIE who have been invited to review.

Results
The response rate was 69% (157/227) for those who had previously reviewed and 31% (67/217) for those who had not yet reviewed. Reviewers described being motivated to review by the opportunity to include the patient voice in the research process, influence the quality of the biomedical literature and ensure it meets the needs of patients. Of the 157 who had reviewed, 127 (81%) would recommend being a reviewer to other patients and carers. 144 (92%) thought more journals should adopt patient and public review. Few reviewers (16/224, 7%) reported concerns about doing open review. Annual acknowledgement on the journals’ websites was welcomed as was free access to journal information. Participants were keen to have access to more online resources and training to improve their reviewing skills. Suggestions on how to improve the reviewing experience included: allowing more time to review; better and more frequent communication; a more user-friendly process; improving guidance on how to review including videos; improving the matching of papers to reviewers’ experience; providing more varied sample reviews and brief feedback on the usefulness of reviews; developing a sense of community among reviewers; and publicising of the contribution that patient and public review brings.

Conclusions
Patient and public reviewers shared practical ideas to improve the reviewing experience and these will be reviewed to enhance the guidance and support given to them.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
Divisions:	Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School Faculty of Science, Engineering and Medicine > Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences > Warwick Research in Nursing
SWORD Depositor:	Library Publications Router
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Peer review, Patient participation, Scholarly publishing, Public health -- Research, Scholarly periodicals, Medicine -- Research
Journal or Publication Title:	BMJ Open
Publisher:	BMJ Publishing Group
ISSN:	2044-6055
Official Date:	3 September 2018
Dates:	Date Event 3 September 2018 Published 14 August 2018 Accepted
Volume:	8
Number:	9
Article Number:	e023357
DOI:	10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023357
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Publication Status:	Published
Access rights to Published version:	Open Access (Creative Commons)
Date of first compliant deposit:	18 September 2018
Date of first compliant Open Access:	19 September 2018

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item

Downloads