Review Workshop Materials & How to Use Them for Ptba Exam
Reviewer training materials
What practise we know about peer review?
In 2011 the House of Commons Science and Applied science Committee held an inquiry into peer review and sought written and oral bear witness from a wide range of experts and organisations. BMJ'due south written evidence reviewed the latest inquiry evidence on the strengths and weaknesses of peer review as a quality control mechanism for scientists, publishers, and the public including:
• Measures to strengthen peer review;
• The processes by which reviewers with the requisite skills and knowledge are identified, in detail equally the volume of multidisciplinary research increases;
• The impact of IT and greater use of online resource on the peer review process;
• Possible alternatives to peer review.
Training package for The BMJ's peer reviewers
Objectives
Practice you review work for The BMJ, or are you thinking well-nigh becoming a reviewer for The BMJ? If so, we hope y'all will use this training pack. It will help you lot to learn more about peer review, and to understand what makes a review really useful to editors and authors.
The pack includes PowerPoint presentations and written exercises. Much of the material hither relates to the general art of peer review, but we have too included specific guidance on what The BMJ needs from you lot.
We developed this pack for utilize in a randomised controlled trial of peer reviewer training. At present you can use it as you wish; for your ain learning or to teach others. There are four objectives:
• To inform participants on the land of peer review research;
• To make articulate what constitutes a good review;
• To help participants understand what matters to editors about reviews; and
• To give participants help in producing a good review.
Objective Ane: To inform participants on the state of peer review enquiry
Download What we know about peer review (Microsoft PowerPoint presentation, 261 KB)
Farther reading:
• Rennie R. Editorial peer review:its evolution and rationale (PDF - 71 KB). In Godlee F, Jefferson T, editors. Peer review in wellness sciences. 2d edition. London: BMJ Books, 2003:i-13.
• Overbeke J, Wager Due east. The state of show: what nosotros know and what nosotros don't know about journal peer review (PDF - 89KB). In Godlee F, Jefferson T, eds. Peer review in wellness sciences. Second edition. London: BMJ Books, 2003:45-61.<
• Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW. The effectiveness of editorial peer review (PDF - 82 KB). In Godlee F, Jefferson T, editors. Peer review in health sciences. 2nd edition. London: BMJ Books, 2003:62-75.
• Martyn C. Peer review: some questions from Socrates (PDF - 46 KB). In Godlee F, Jefferson T, editors. Peer review in health sciences. Second edition. London: BMJ Books, 2003:322-8.
• Smith R. The hereafter of peer review (PDF - 82 KB). In Godlee F, Jefferson T, editors. Peer review in health sciences. 2d edition. London: BMJ Books, 2003:329-46.
• WAME website has a good bibliography, including original research on peer review
• Website of the International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication for abstracts and articles from the second, tertiary, and fourth peer review congresses.
Objective Three: To assistance participants sympathize what matters to editors about reviews
Below are three reviews of manuscripts recently published in The BMJ. Having read the presentation on what editors want from reviewers, we would like yous to read these three reviews and note their strengths and weaknesses. This practice should take approximately xv minutes. Having noted the strengths and weaknesses of each review, read our critique of each review from the editorial perspective.
• Referee'due south report for Paper A
• Referee's report for Newspaper B
• Referee's report for Paper C
Objective Iv: To give participants help in producing a adept review
We would like you to do a exercise rapid review of the newspaper titled: Magnetic bracelets for relieving hurting in lower-limb osteoarthritis: a randomised controlled trial. To aid guide your review, we accept also provided a question canvass, and links to our standard Guidance for Reviewers and the CONSORT statement. You should spend approximately 30 minutes on this do. It is not a "formal" review, and nosotros do non want you lot to send us your review.
• Manuscript to review (PDF - 114 KB)
• Question sheet to assist guide your review (Microsoft Word - 22KB)
• Full general guidance for The BMJ's peer reviewers
• CONSORT statement
This paper was published in The BMJ in 2004. Below are links to the reviews of the submitted version (and an extra review commissioned for this training package) and also the published version of this newspaper. Please do not read these reviews until subsequently you have completed the exercise above.
• Reviews of magnetic bracelets paper (Microsoft Word - 52KB)
• Published version of magnetic bracelets paper (PDF - 145KB)
Source: https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-reviewers/training-materials
0 Response to "Review Workshop Materials & How to Use Them for Ptba Exam"
Post a Comment