Is peer review censorship?

The answer is not 42

During his long and illustrious career that now spans over 50 years David Triggle has had a major impact on biomedical science that can be linked to his research spanning the disciplines of chemistry and biology. Capitalizing on his undergraduate and postgraduate education in chemistry David's early research explored the pharmacology of adreno- and muscarinic receptors ultimately leading to studies of the cellular signaling processes that mediated the effects of receptor activation particularly with respect to calcium homeostasis. David's contributions to the identification and development of calcium channel antagonists resulted in benefits beyond the impact of such drugs in the treatment of diseases of the cardiovascular system. During David's 50+ year career many technological changes have occurred that have affected how research is conducted, funded and published and how its impact evaluated. Not all of these technological advances are necessarily positive and it is valuable to reflect on the long lasting impact of David's accomplishments with reference to such changes.

Emperor’s New Clothes

Publication in top journals has become an indicator of academic performance that has huge influence on academic careers, on research funding, and on institutional rankings. Pressure to publish in these journals is immense. Pre-publication peer review, never without its critics, cannot cope. Yet, more depends on this peer review than ever before. The activities of academic publishers, governments, research councils, and universities are all ultimately supported by a system that is heavily gamed and cannot withstand scrutiny. The article compares the practice of peer review with its replacement, the peer review of myth. Myth, like religion, is dependent on faith, not logic. The article looks closely at the transition, focusing particularly on management studies. It explores how the practice of peer review, with all its deficiencies, has been superseded by the peer review of myth, with no deficiencies at all. Vested interests profit, but academic research suffers.

O processo de revisão por pares: uma revisão integrativa de literatura

OBJETIVO: Avaliar as evidências disponíveis na literatura sobre o processo de revisão por pares de artigos científicos na área da saúde. MÉTODOS: Revisão integrativa de literatura, na qual foram realizadas buscas nas bases de dados da Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde, National Library of Medicine, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online e Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Um total de 12 estudos foi analisado. RESULTADOS: Foi demonstrado que existem muitas críticas ao processo em razão de sua subjetividade, porém acredita-se na necessidade dos mesmos. CONCLUSÃO: Este processo é imprescindível para a difusão do conhecimento, sendo uma etapa essencial no julgamento de manuscritos científicos, no entanto, considera-se importante que se façam mudanças no sentido de reduzir a subjetividade para garantir credibilidade ao processo.

[The "peer-review" process in biomedical journals: characteristics of "Elite" reviewers]

The "peer-review" system is used to improve the quality of submitted scientific papers and provides invaluable help to the Editors in their decision-making process. The "peer-review" system remains the cornerstone of the scientific process and, therefore, its quality should be closely monitored. The profile of the "elite" reviewers has been described, but further studies are warranted to better identify their main characteristics. A major challenge, not only for Editors but also for medical scientific societies as a whole, is to continue to guarantee the excellence in the "peer-review" process and to ensure that it receives adequate academic recognition.