Comprehensive examination of the peer review process in academic medicine: Towards reaching unbiased decisions - Editorial

Dino Fanfan; Mark McKenney; Adel Elkbuli

doi:10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102211

Comprehensive examination of the peer review process in academic medicine: Towards reaching unbiased decisions - Editorial

Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2021 Mar 15:64:102211. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102211. eCollection 2021 Apr.

Authors

Dino Fanfan¹, Mark McKenney^{1

2}, Adel Elkbuli¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Surgery, Division of Trauma and Surgical Critical Care, Kendall Regional Medical Center, Miami, FL, USA.
² Department of Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.

Abstract

•The implementation of double- or triple-blind review practices will ensure that authors with worthwhile and prominent research will have fair and equitable review regardless of their prominence in the field.•Improving the quality of our reviews and raising the standings of our publishing authors. This makes way for healthy competition and a drive to produce high quality research.•It is our responsibility to limit or eliminate bias by promoting impartiality and increasing the level of transparency between the editorial teams and authors, allowing peer review to be more inclusive, instructional, and equitable.

Keywords: Academic integrity; Bias; Doubleblind; Editorial boards; Peer review process; Single blind peer-review process.

Publication types

Editorial