Peer Review

Reflecting on challenges and opportunities for the practice of person-centred rehabilitation

OBJECTIVES

To (1) reflect on challenges to the practice of person-centred rehabilitation; and (2) propose opportunities for the development of person-centred rehabilitation.

CHALLENGES

Person-centred practice has received widespread endorsement across healthcare settings and is understood to be an important, positive approach in rehabilitation. However, the rhetoric of this approach does not always translate meaningfully into practice. Emphasis on patient choice, patient involvement in decision making, and increasing patient capacity for self-management have become a proxy for person-centred rehabilitation in lieu of a more fundamental shift in practice and healthcare structures. System (e.g. biomedical orientation), organisational (e.g. key performance indicators) and professional (e.g. identity as expert) factors compete with person-centred rehabilitation.

OPPORTUNITIES

Four key recommendations for the development of person-centred rehabilitation are proposed including to: (1) develop a principles-based approach to person-centred rehabilitation; (2) move away from the dichotomy of person-centred (or not) rehabilitation; (3) build person-centred cultures of care in rehabilitation; and (4) learn from diverse perspectives of person-centred rehabilitation.

CONCLUSION

Fixed assumptions about what constitutes person-centred rehabilitation may limit our ability to respond to the needs of persons and families. Embedding person-centred ways of working is challenging due to the competing drivers and interests of healthcare systems and organisations. A principles-based approach, enabled by person-centred cultures of care, may achieve the aspirations of person-centred rehabilitation.

Peer review ethics in Iranian LIS scholarly journals: a comparison between views of reviewers and authors

Peer review is one of the most efficient ways to ensure the quality of papers for possible publication in scholarly journals. However, the process of peer review is not free of bias and disorders. Many reviewers are unaware of how their attitudes towards the evaluation of scholarly papers may violate Peer Review Ethics (PRE). This paper attempts to analyze the different ethical issues influencing the job of reviewing. The research sample for this study included 7 Iranian library and information journals, 124 Iranian peer reviewers, and 34 authors. Peer reviewers and authors were asked to evaluate the most important ethical elements of peer review in Iranian LIS journals through two different questionnaires based on Rajabali Beglou et al. (2019) research. Findings showed that there was no difference among authors and reviewers in terms of gender in most PRE elements. Also, the level of experience of the authors was not significant in terms of understanding and acceptance of the PRE among reviewers and authors. However, review experiences regarding some PRE elements were significant in respondents’ viewpoints. The experiences reviewers had already gained were influential on their views about PRE. In addition, results showed that there were significant differences among reviewers and authors about the PRE elements in LIS journals. Authorship experiences had not effect on the PRE elements and the dual role of peer reviewing and authorship had no impact on their views.

Methodological Issues in Rehabilitation Research: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

To identify, synthesize, and categorize the methodological issues faced by the rehabilitation field.

DATA SOURCES

A scoping review was conducted using studies identified in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Google Scholar up to August 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

We included all type of publications describing methodological issues in rehabilitation research where rehabilitation is described as a multimodal process. The methodological issues have been categorized and classified.

DATA EXTRACTION

The synthesis included qualitative and quantitative analysis. To focus the attention on rehabilitation, we post hoc divided in "specific issues" (highly related to, even if not exclusive of, rehabilitation research) and "generic issues" (common in biomedical research).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Seventy-one publications were included: 68% were narrative reviews, 15% systematic reviews, 7% editorials, 4% meta-epidemiologic studies, and 5% others. Specific methodological issues include the following: problematic application of randomized controlled trials (32%), absent definition of core outcome sets (28%), poor interventions description (22%), weak methodological (conducting) and reporting quality (21%), scarce clinical practice applicability (14%), lack of blinding assessor (10%), inadequate randomization methods or inadequate allocation concealment (8%), and inadequate participants description and recruitment (8%). "Generic" issues included the following: data and statistical description (31%), authors' methodological training (7%), peer review process (6%, n=4), funding declaration (6%), ethical statement (3%), protocol registration (3%), and conflict of interest declaration (1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Methodological and reporting issues might influence the quality of the evidence produced in rehabilitation research. The next steps to move forward in the field of rehabilitation could be to evaluate the influence of all these issues on the validity of trial results through meta-epidemiologic studies and to develop specific checklists to provide guidance to authors to improve the reporting and conduct of trials in this field.

A systematic review of peer review for scientific manuscripts

BACKGROUND

The usefulness of peer review has been expressed as a method to improve the quality of published work. However, there has been a lack of systematic reviews to date to highlight the essential themes of the peer-review process.

METHODS

We performed a search of the English language literature published prior to October 2011 using PubMed to identify articles regarding peer review. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed a priori. Data were extracted and then analyzed for the prevalence of peer-review themes contained within the literature.

RESULTS

Of the 941 articles found during our original literature search, 37 were selected for review. The majority were commentary/editorial articles. The themes in our search included the structure and process of the peer-review system, the criteria for papers, ethics, and the different forms of the peer-review process.

CONCLUSIONS

The criteria for submission will vary, but our systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of what reviewers expect from authors. Our systematic review also highlighted ethical considerations for both authors and reviewers during the peer-review process. Although the topic of peer review is expansive and its process may vary from journal to journal, the understanding of the themes outlined in this paper will help authors recognize how to write a more successful paper. Also, more research must be carried out to establish the efficacy of the different styles of peer review, and it would be presumptuous to draw conclusions until further research is established.

Do unblinded assessors bias muscle strength outcomes in randomized controlled trials of progressive resistance strength training in older adults?

OBJECTIVE

Knowledge of treatment assignment and failing to analyze results by randomized treatment groups--an intention-to-treat analysis--may cause bias in the treatment effect estimate in randomized controlled trials. This study was undertaken to determine the difference in lower limb muscle strength measured by blinded vs. by unblinded outcome assessors in 73 progressive resistance strength training trials conducted in older adults.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of randomized controlled trials published before 2007.

RESULTS

Meta-regression analyses showed that trials that used blinded assessors (n = 18) tend to report smaller effect sizes than do those that used unblinded assessors (n = 55), with a difference of -0.80 (95% confidence interval, -1.35 to -0.25). This result still holds even after adjusting for the use of an intention-to-treat analysis, with an adjusted difference of -0.65 (95% confidence interval, -1.26 to -0.04). The reported effects were exaggerated in trials that used unblinded assessors.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that assessor blinding is important and is a safeguard to the internal validity of exercise trials in older adults.

Research ethics II: Mentoring, collaboration, peer review, and data management and ownership

PURPOSE

In this series of articles--Research Ethics I, Research Ethics II, and Research Ethics III--the authors provide a comprehensive review of the 9 core domains for the responsible conduct of research (RCR) as articulated by the Office of Research Integrity. In Research Ethics II, the authors review the RCR domains of mentoring, collaboration, peer review, and data management and ownership.

METHOD

They relied on authoritative documents, both historical and contemporary, insightful commentary, and empirical research in order to identify current issues and controversies of potential interest to both faculty and students.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors close by urging readers to stay abreast of the manifold ethics issues facing today's community of scientists, policymakers, and research institutions, and to adhere to best practices as they evolve.

Phototherapy for enhancing peripheral nerve repair: a review of the literature

Posttraumatic nerve repair continues to be a major challenge of restorative medicine. Although enormous progress has been made in surgical techniques over the past three decades, functional recovery after a severe lesion of a major nerve trunk is often incomplete and sometimes unsatisfactory. It is thus particularly important to investigate clinical protocols to enhance nerve regeneration after surgical nerve repair. The present article reviews literature on one possible rehabilitation approach for enhancing nerve recovery, namely phototherapy. The number of experimental studies that have reported on the promoting action of phototherapy on peripheral nerve regeneration, together with the few known side effects related to the use of this type of physical therapy, make it possible to suggest that the time for broader clinical trials has come.