Versions Compared

Old Version 23

changes.mady.by.user Harriet MacLehose

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Christine Schorfheide

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Warning

1 July 2024: The Editorial Publishing & Policy Resource is scheduled to be archived. This page may not contain the most updated version of the information and is being retained for reference until 1 August 2024. 

Tip

Please see the Cochrane Library editorial policy on peer review.
Editors may refer to Peer review in the revised editorial guidance resource.


Table of Contents
maxLevel2

...

Any concerns or disagreements concerning the peer review process should be resolved by the CRG. When necessary, the CRG can request that peer reviewers provide more evidence for their comments, solicit the opinion of other peer reviewers, involve the DTA Editorial team, or invite additional peer reviewers, as appropriate, to help resolve conflict. Note that authors are required to respond to peer reviewers’ comments adequately; see Collating and addressing peer review comments).

If the CRG are is unable to resolve concerns or disagreements, the case may be referred to the Editor in Chief escalated by either the authors or the CRG, using the to the Cochrane Library appeals process or complaints procedure, as appropriate.