The CTSA External Reviewer Exchange Consortium (CEREC): Engagement and efficacy

AbstractIntroduction:Many institutions evaluate applications for local seed funding by recruiting peer reviewers from their own institutional community. Smaller institutions, however, often face difficulty locating qualified local reviewers who are not in conflict with the proposal. As a larger pool of reviewers may be accessed through a cross-institutional collaborative process, nine Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs formed a consortium in 2016 to facilitate reviewer exchanges. Data were collected to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of the consortium.Methods:The CTSA External Reviewer Exchange Consortium (CEREC) has been supported by a custom-built web-based application that facilitates the process and tracks the efficiency and productivity of the exchange.Results:All nine of the original CEREC members remain actively engaged in the exchange. Between January 2017 and May 2019, CEREC supported the review process for 23 individual calls for proposals. Out of the 412 reviews requested, 368 were received, for a fulfillment ratio of 89.3%. The yield on reviewer invitations has remained consistently high, with approximately one-third of invitations being accepted, and of the reviewers who agreed to provide a review, 88.3% submitted a complete review. Surveys of reviewers and pilot program administrators indicate high satisfaction with the process.Conclusions:These data indicate that a reviewer exchange consortium is feasible, adds value to participating partners, and is sustainable over time.

Download Full-text

Web-based physiotherapy for people affected by multiple sclerosis: a single blind, randomized controlled feasibility study

Clinical Rehabilitation ◽

10.1177/0269215518817080 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 33 (3) ◽

pp. 473-484 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Lorna Paul ◽

Linda Renfrew ◽

Jennifer Freeman ◽

Heather Murray ◽

Belinda Weller ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Sclerosis ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Exercise Programme ◽

Home Exercise ◽

Walk Test ◽

Web Based ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Home Exercise Programme ◽

Minute Walk ◽

Over Time

Objective: To examine the feasibility of a trial to evaluate web-based physiotherapy compared to a standard home exercise programme in people with multiple sclerosis. Design: Multi-centre, randomized controlled, feasibility study. Setting: Three multiple sclerosis out-patient centres. Participants: A total of 90 people with multiple sclerosis (Expanded Disability Status Scale 4–6.5). Interventions: Participants were randomized to a six-month individualized, home exercise programme delivered via web-based physiotherapy ( n = 45; intervention) or a sheet of exercises ( n = 45; active comparator). Outcome measures: Outcome measures (0, three, six and nine months) included adherence, two-minute walk test, 25 foot walk, Berg Balance Scale, physical activity and healthcare resource use. Interviews were undertaken with 24 participants and 3 physiotherapists. Results: Almost 25% of people approached agreed to take part. No intervention-related adverse events were recorded. Adherence was 40%–63% and 53%–71% in the intervention and comparator groups. There was no difference in the two-minute walk test between groups at baseline (Intervention-80.4(33.91)m, Comparator-70.6(31.20)m) and no change over time (at six-month Intervention-81.6(32.75)m, Comparator-74.8(36.16)m. There were no significant changes over time in other outcome measures except the EuroQol-5 Dimension at six months which decreased in the active comparator group. For a difference of 8(17.4)m in two-minute walk test between groups, 76 participants/group would be required (80% power, P > 0.05) for a future randomized controlled trial. Conclusion: No changes were found in the majority of outcome measures over time. This study was acceptable and feasible by participants and physiotherapists. An adequately powered study needs 160 participants.

Download Full-text

Developing a peer review process for web-based curricula

Journal of General Internal Medicine ◽

10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30218.x ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 19 (5) ◽

pp. 594-598 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Christopher L. Knight ◽

Henry A. Sakowski ◽

Bruce L. Houghton ◽

Mary B. Laya ◽

Dawn E. DeWitt

Keyword(s):

Peer Review ◽

Review Process ◽

Peer Review Process ◽

Web Based

Download Full-text

Evaluating, Improving, and Appreciating Peer Review at IJTMB

International Journal of Therapeutic Massage & Bodywork Research Education & Practice ◽

10.3822/ijtmb.v14i1.637 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 14 (1) ◽

pp. 1-3

Author(s):

Ann Blair Kennedy, LMT, BCTMB, DrPH

Keyword(s):

Peer Review ◽

Review Process ◽

Peer Review Process ◽

Scientific Publishing ◽

Publication Process ◽

Improve Efficiency ◽

Peer Reviewers

Peer review is a mainstay of scientific publishing and, while peer reviewers and scientists report satisfaction with the process, peer review has not been without criticism. Within this editorial, the peer review process at the IJTMB is defined and explained. Further, seven steps are identified by the editors as a way to improve efficiency of the peer review and publication process. Those seven steps are: 1) Ask authors to submit possible reviewers; 2) Ask reviewers to update profiles; 3) Ask reviewers to “refer a friend”; 4) Thank reviewers regularly; 5) Ask published authors to review for the Journal; 6) Reduce the length of time to accept peer review invitation; and 7) Reduce requested time to complete peer review. We believe these small requests and changes can have a big effect on the quality of reviews and speed in which manuscripts are published. This manuscript will present instructions for completing peer review profiles. Finally, we more formally recognize and thank peer reviewers from 2018–2020.

Download Full-text

The effects of an editor serving as one of the reviewers during the peer-review process

F1000Research ◽

10.12688/f1000research.8452.1 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 5 ◽

pp. 683 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Marco Giordan ◽

Attila Csikasz-Nagy ◽

Andrew M. Collings ◽

Federico Vaggi

Keyword(s):

Peer Review ◽

Review Process ◽

Peer Review Process ◽

Final Decision ◽

Scientific Journals ◽

Scientific Publications ◽

Peer Reviewers ◽

Decision Type ◽

Number Of Citations ◽

Decision Times

BackgroundPublishing in scientific journals is one of the most important ways in which scientists disseminate research to their peers and to the wider public. Pre-publication peer review underpins this process, but peer review is subject to various criticisms and is under pressure from growth in the number of scientific publications.MethodsHere we examine an element of the editorial process ateLife, in which the Reviewing Editor usually serves as one of the referees, to see what effect this has on decision times, decision type, and the number of citations. We analysed a dataset of 8,905 research submissions toeLifesince June 2012, of which 2,750 were sent for peer review, using R and Python to perform the statistical analysis.ResultsThe Reviewing Editor serving as one of the peer reviewers results in faster decision times on average, with the time to final decision ten days faster for accepted submissions (n=1,405) and 5 days faster for papers that were rejected after peer review (n=1,099). There was no effect on whether submissions were accepted or rejected, and a very small (but significant) effect on citation rates for published articles where the Reviewing Editor served as one of the peer reviewers.ConclusionsAn important aspect ofeLife’s peer-review process is shown to be effective, given that decision times are faster when the Reviewing Editor serves as a reviewer. Other journals hoping to improve decision times could consider adopting a similar approach.

Download Full-text

Metascience on Peer Review: Testing the Effects of a Study’s Originality and Statistical Significance in a Field Experiment

10.31222/osf.io/dkuhs ◽

2019 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Malte Elson ◽

Markus Huff ◽

Sonja Utz

Keyword(s):

Field Experiment ◽

Peer Review ◽

Gold Standard ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Review Process ◽

Peer Review Process ◽

Statistical Significance ◽

Selection Method ◽

Psychological Theories ◽

Peer Reviewers

Peer review has become the gold standard in scientific publishing as a selection method and a refinement scheme for research reports. However, despite its pervasiveness and conferred importance, relatively little empirical research has been conducted to document its effectiveness. Further, there is evidence that factors other than a submission’s merits can substantially influence peer reviewers’ evaluations. We report the results of a metascientific field experiment on the effect of the originality of a study and the statistical significance of its primary outcome on reviewers’ evaluations. The general aim of this experiment, which was carried out in the peer-review process for a conference, was to demonstrate the feasibility and value of metascientific experiments on the peer-review process and thereby encourage research that will lead to understanding its mechanisms and determinants, effectively contextualizing it in psychological theories of various biases, and developing practical procedures to increase its utility.

Download Full-text

Designing Web Based Offering and Sales Information System (Case Study : PT. Daya Berkah Sentosa Nusantara)

Procedia of Engineering and Life Science ◽

10.21070/pels.v1i2.1030 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 1 (2) ◽

Author(s):

Siti Nurjanah Ramadhany ◽

Ade Eviyanti

Keyword(s):

Information System ◽

Data Collection ◽

Positive Impact ◽

Literature Study ◽

Web Based ◽

Business World ◽

The Public ◽

To Come ◽

Over Time

Technology is increasingly sophisticated with over time competition in the business world such as E-Commerce has a positive impact on entrepreneurs to advance their companies, namely by creating online websites so that offerings and sales are easy among the public. By accessing the website page of PT. Daya Berkah Sentosa Nusantara buyers do not have to come directly to the place or company, and send offers according to admin needs.The purpose of this study is to make it easier for researchers to solve supply and sales problems based on problems that arise in the company. The method used in this study is the Waterfall Method, with data collection techniques used using observation, interviews and literature study. The desired result of this research is to be able to create a website for the company, to be able to expand marketing reach, buyers can view products through the website.

Download Full-text

High adoption rates in a new preprint service from Springer Nature and Research Square

Septentrio Conference Series ◽

10.7557/5.4897 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Damian Pattinson

Keyword(s):

Peer Review ◽

Real Time ◽

Biomedical Research ◽

Review Process ◽

Positive Impact ◽

Peer Review Process ◽

Manuscript Reviewer ◽

Peer Reviewers ◽

Gates Foundation

In recent years, funders have increased their support for early sharing of biomedical research through the use of preprints. For most, such as the COAlitionS group of funders (ASAPbio 2019) and the Gates foundation, this takes the form of active encouragement, while for others, it is mandated. But despite these motivations, few authors are routinely depositing their work as a preprint before submitting to a journal. Some journals have started offering authors the option of posting their work early at the point at which it is submitted for review. These include PLOS, who offer a link to BiorXiv, the Cell journals, who offer SSRN posting through ‘Sneak Peak’, and Nature Communications, who offer posting to any preprint and a link from the journal page called ‘Under Consideration’. Uptake has ranged from 3% for the Nature pilot, to 18% for PLOS (The Official Plos Blog 2018). In order to encourage more researchers to post their work early, we have been offering authors who submit to BMC Series titles the opportunity to post their work as a preprint on Research Square, a new platform that lets authors share and improve their research. To encourage participation, authors are offered a greater amount of control and transparency over the peer review process if they opt in. First, they are given a detailed peer review timeline which updates in real time every time an event occurs on their manuscript (reviewer invited, reviewer accepts etc). Second, they are encouraged to share their preprint with colleagues, who are able to post comments on the paper. These comments are sent to the editor when they are making their decision. Third, authors can suggest potential peer reviewers, recommendations which are also passed onto the editor to vet and invite. Together, these incentives have had a positive impact on authors choosing to post a preprint. Among the journals that offer this service, the average opt-in rate is 40%. This translates to over 3,000 manuscripts (as of July 2019) that have been posted to Research Square since the launch of the service in October 2018. In this talk I will demonstrate the functionality of Research Square, and provide demographic and discipline data on which areas are most and least likely to post.

Download Full-text

PRISMA2020: an R package and Shiny app for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams, with interactivity for optimised digital transparency and Open Synthesis

10.1101/2021.07.14.21260492 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Neal R Haddaway ◽

Matthew J Page ◽

Christopher C Pritchard ◽

Luke A McGuinness

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Science Communication ◽

Review Process ◽

Evidence Synthesis ◽

R Package ◽

Web Based ◽

Shiny App ◽

Data Files ◽

Flow Diagrams

Background Reporting standards, such as PRISMA aim to ensure that the methods and results of systematic reviews are described in sufficient detail to allow full transparency. Flow diagrams in evidence syntheses allow the reader to rapidly understand the core procedures used in a review and examine the attrition of irrelevant records throughout the review process. Recent research suggests that use of flow diagrams in systematic reviews is poor and of low quality and called for standardised templates to facilitate better reporting in flow diagrams. The increasing options for interactivity provided by the Internet gives us an opportunity to support easy-to-use evidence synthesis tools, and here we report on the development of tools for the production of PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review flow diagrams. Methods and Findings We developed a free-to-use, Open Source R package and web-based Shiny app to allow users to design PRISMA flow diagrams for their own systematic reviews. Our tools allow users to produce standardised visualisations that transparently document the methods and results of a systematic review process in a variety of formats. In addition, we provide the opportunity to produce interactive, web-based flow diagrams (exported as HTML files), that allow readers to click on boxes of the diagram and navigate to further details on methods, results or data files. We provide an interactive example here; https://driscoll.ntu.ac.uk/prisma/. Conclusions We have developed a user-friendly suite of tools for producing PRISMA 2020-compliant flow diagrams for users with coding experience and, importantly, for users without prior experience in coding by making use of Shiny. These free-to-use tools will make it easier to produce clear and PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review flow diagrams. Significantly, users can also produce interactive flow diagrams for the first time, allowing readers of their reviews to smoothly and swiftly explore and navigate to further details of the methods and results of a review. We believe these tools will increase use of PRISMA flow diagrams, improve the compliance and quality of flow diagrams, and facilitate strong science communication of the methods and results of systematic reviews by making use of interactivity. We encourage the systematic review community to make use of these tools, and provide feedback to streamline and improve their usability and efficiency.

Download Full-text

The quality of internet information on psychosis treatment for Australian people (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.28135 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Kay Wilhelm ◽

Tonelle Handley ◽

Catherine McHugh McHugh ◽

David Lowenstein ◽

Kristy Arrold

Keyword(s):

Review Process ◽

Substantial Improvement ◽

Website Quality ◽

Related Information ◽

Internet Information ◽

Editorial Review ◽

Assess Quality ◽

Available Information ◽

Over Time

BACKGROUND The internet is increasingly seen as an important source of health information for consumers and their families. Accessing information related to their illness and treatment enables consumers to more confidently discuss their health and treatments with their doctors, but the abundance of readily available information also means can be confusing in terms of how reliable the information to enable consumers, families and clinicians to participate in the decision-making process of their care. OBJECTIVE The current study aimed to rate the quality of websites with psychosis-related information (using a validated instrument (DISCERN) and purpose-developed Psychosis Website Quality Checklist (PWQC) to assess quality over time and aid professionals in directing consumers to the best available information. METHODS Entering search terms ‘psychotic’, ‘psychosis’, ‘schizophrenia’, ‘delusion’, ‘hallucination’ into the search engine Google (www.google.com.au) provided 25 websites evaluated by DISCERN and PWQC at two time points, January-March 2014, and January-March 2018, by three diverse health professionals. RESULTS Only the six highest ranked achieved DISCERN scores indicating “good” quality. The overall mean scores of websites were 43.96 (SD=12.08) indicating “fair” quality. PWQC ratings were high on “availability and usability” but poor on “credibility,” “currency,” and “breadth and accuracy”, with no substantial improvement quality over time. Having an editorial/ review process (56% of websites) was significantly associated with higher quality scores on both scales. CONCLUSIONS The quality of available information was ‘fair’ and had not significantly improved over time. While higher-quality websites exist, there is no easy way to assess this on face value. Having a readily identifiable editorial/review process was one indicator of website quality. CLINICALTRIAL Not applicable

Download Full-text

Ontology Versioning Driven by Instance Evolution in the τOWL Framework

Journal of Information & Knowledge Management ◽

10.1142/s0219649222500022 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Zouhaier Brahmia ◽

Fabio Grandi ◽

Abir Zekri ◽

Rafik Bouaziz

Keyword(s):

Semantic Web ◽

Real World ◽

Ontology Construction ◽

Web Based ◽

The Real ◽

Initial Design ◽

Design Time ◽

Schema Versioning ◽

History Of ◽

Over Time

Like other components of Semantic Web-based applications, ontologies are evolving over time to reflect changes in the real world. Several of these applications require keeping a full-fledged history of ontology changes so that both ontology instance versions and their corresponding ontology schema versions are maintained. Updates to an ontology instance could be non-conservative that is leading to a new ontology instance version no longer conforming to the current ontology schema version. If, for some reasons, a non-conservative update has to be executed, in spite of its consequence, it requires the production of a new ontology schema version to which the new ontology instance version is conformant so that the new ontology version produced by the update is globally consistent. In this paper, we first propose an approach that supports ontology schema changes which are triggered by non-conservative updates to ontology instances and, thus, gives rise to an ontology schema versioning driven by instance updates. Note that in an engineering perspective, such an approach can be used as an incremental ontology construction method driven by the modification of instance data, whose exact structure may not be completely known at the initial design time. After that, we apply our proposal to the already established [Formula: see text]OWL (Temporal OWL 2) framework, which allows defining and evolving temporal OWL 2 ontologies in an environment that supports temporal versioning of both ontology instances and ontology schemas, by extending it to also support the management of non-conservative updates to ontology instance versions. Last, we show the feasibility of our approach by dealing with its implementation within a new release of the [Formula: see text] OWL-Manager tool.

Download Full-text