...
Do your journal office and website have detailed guidelines on how you select reviewers for each manuscript, if you allow authors to make recommendations of peer reviewers or request that certain people not be peer reviewers, and if/how you honour those recommendations/requests? [9.3.1.4]
...
Number and expertise of
...
peer reviewers
As a minimum standard, every Cochrane Review will be peer-reviewed by at least one clinical/topic specialist (with a minimum of one external to the CRG editorial team) and one statistician/methodologist (who may, in certain circumstances, be part of the CRG editorial team).
...
Do you train editors and peer reviewers about peer reviewing special aspects such as figures/tables, statistics, supplementary material, data? [9.2.2.6]
...
Peer review of Cochrane Reviews of diagnostic test accuracy
The peer review process for Cochrane Reviews of diagnostic test accuracy (DTA Reviews; see section 1.3 of the Cochrane peer review policy) is managed centrally under the direction of the Editorial and Methods Department (EMD) to assure scientific quality and manage the limited peer review expertise for these reviews. Each Cochrane Review is managed through the DTA peer review process (which runs in parallel with the CRG peer review process) by a DTA contact editor who returns Peer reviewer and editorial comments to the CRG for transmission to the author.
...
Fields
When a Cochrane Review covers a topic that is relevant to the scope of a Cochrane Field, it is advisable to contact the Field to obtain a subject-specialist Peer reviewer. Cochrane Fields have access to methodologists, clinicians, policy-makers and consumers with expertise and experience relevant to their topic area. Obtaining peer review input from a Field can ensure that the review has addressed all methodological and clinical issues appropriately and has maximum relevance to, and impact upon, the external stakeholders in this area.
...
Consumers as
...
peer reviewers
Consumers have an important role to play in the peer review of a Cochrane Review, and it is an expectation that all CRGs seek involvement from consumers, or from other potential users of the Cochrane Review. Consumer peer review ensures that Cochrane Review questions are relevant to people requiring and accessing health care, and that meaningful outcomes and potential harms are considered.
...
For additional guidance on seeking a suitable consumer Peer reviewer, the Consumer Network recommends that all CRGs use TaskExchange to recruit for consumer Peer reviewers. Also available are the ACTIVE project resources from the Cochrane Training website.
...
Study authors as
...
peer reviewers
It may be necessary for authors of trials or studies included in a Cochrane Review (study authors) to be invited to be Peer reviewers; for example, when the field is small and it is difficult to find Peer reviewers with expertise in the field. This is acceptable as long as at least one other Peer reviewer is external to the CRG editorial team and independent of any studies included in the review. The fact that a Peer reviewer is an author of an included trial must be made clear in the conflict of interest statement, and the authors of the Cochrane Review should be made aware of this when receiving peer review comments.
...
Inviting
...
peer reviewers
It is best practice to contact new potential Peer reviewers at an institutional email address rather than a generic email address (for example, Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) to reduce the risk of Peer reviewer fraud. This can occur when someone other than a legitimate peer reviewer is able to complete a peer review report by intercepting an invitation email. Of course, there are circumstances when this might not be possible and, in such cases, the CRG editorial team should be aware of the risk and proceed with common sense. Peer reviewers' contact details should be stored in Archie, not in external spreadsheets. A link to the academic / professional profile of potential Peer reviewer can be added to a Note on the review's Properties sheet. Please encourage new Peer reviewers to create a Cochrane Account (https://account.cochrane.org/) so that they can be added to a workflow. If you create an Archie person record for a new Peer reviewer, this will automatically create a linked Cochrane Account, and the Peer reviewer will be sent an email with instructions to activate the account and choose a password. If the Peer reviewer chooses not to activate their account, their details will remain in Archie (the activation email informs them of this).
...
We refer to Guidelines for peer reviewers. To consider which additional COPE resources to link to (manipulation).
...
Peer review checklists
Cochrane peer review checklists can be used and modified as needed. It is not a requirement for CRGs to use these checklists, but some sections and statements are mandatory and must be sent to all Peer reviewers (see below). These checklists provide a structured series of questions to guide Peer reviewers through the process and provide structured peer review feedback. Guided peer review can be especially helpful to less experienced Peer reviewers or for people undertaking named peer review. The following checklists are available, and will be updated from time to time:
...
- Do you encourage reviewers to comment on ethical questions (eg, protection of patients/animals, evidence of adherence to appropriate standards, clinical trial pre-registration, consent from humans for study participation and/or publication of data)? [9.2.3.1]
- Do you encourage reviewers to comment on possible research misconduct (eg, data fabrication/falsification) [9.2.3.2]
- Do you encourage reviewers to comment on possible publication misconduct (eg, redundant publication, plagiarism, undeclared conflicts of interest) [9.2.3.3]
- Do you encourage reviewers to comment on [peer] reviewer conflicts of interest that became apparent during review? [9.2.3.4]
- Do you encourage reviewers to comment on any portions of a manuscript that they did not/could not review? [9.2.3.5]
...
Mandatory sections and statements that must be sent to Peer reviewers
If a CRG does not use the standard Cochrane peer review checklists, the following sections/statements must be included in the materials sent to the Peer reviewer, and the responses reviewed and recorded appropriately in Archie.
...
EMD note: Some yes and some no; clarifications to be added to policy and guidance.
...
Managing named peer review
From January 2019, and consistent with Cochrane's core principles, including open and transparent communication and decision making, all CRGs will adopt a named peer review process, in which the Cochrane Review author and Peer reviewer know each other’s names and affiliations during the peer review process. See section 2 of the Cochrane Peer Review Policy.
...
EMD note: Peer reviewer invitation email states that peer review must be confidential, but we operate a system of named peer review. Also included in expectations of peer reviewers. Needs some clarification.
...
Delegation of peer review responsibilities
Cochrane recognises the need for training and mentoring for early career researchers, and the delegation of peer review responsibilities to junior staff members is therefore permitted under certain circumstances. For example, when the junior staff member is a subject expert and the experience is used as a training/mentoring exercise. The invited Peer reviewer must request permission from the CRG, or the DTA Editorial Team if appropriate, to delegate their responsibilities, and must provide the full name and contact details (including position and institutional email address) for the junior staff member so that they can be acknowledged appropriately. The invited Peer reviewer must sign-off on, and take responsibility for, the final peer review report. Both the original Peer reviewer and the delegated Peer reviewer must return the “Potential conflicts of interest” and the “Permissions” statements from the peer review checklist; they may both be acknowledged in the permitted ways for their contributions to the peer review report.
...
EMD note: Some yes and some no; clarifications to be added to policy and guidance.
...
Declarations of potential conflicts of interest for peer reviewers
Peer reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest every time they undertake peer review of a Cochrane Review. See Section 5 of the Cochrane peer review policy for further details.
...
Do you train editors and peer reviewers about declaring conflicts of interest and areas of expertise and, if needed, declining a review request? [9.2.2.4]
...
Acknowledgement
As a minimum, the names of all Peer reviewers who have submitted a peer review report or completed peer review checklist during the current calendar year will be published on the CRG website, unless the Peer reviewer has not consented to this. Lists from previous years must be archived and publically accessible from the CRG website. See Section 6 of the Cochrane peer review policy for further details.
...
Acknowledgement on the CRG website
To generate a list of Peer reviewers who have submitted a peer review report or completed a peer review checklist during the current calendar year, the following actions can be taken:
...
See Cochrane Wounds for an example of how the annual lists of peer reviewers can be displayed on the CRG website.
...
Acknowledgement in the Cochrane Review
If the Cochrane Review authors agree and permission is granted by the Peer reviewer (as requested in the peer review checklist), Peer reviewers should be acknowledged in the published Cochrane Review. A suitable acknowledgement might be: “The authors [or the CRG Editorial Team, if you prefer] are grateful to the following Peer reviewers for their time and comments: [Insert peer reviewer names and affiliations]”
If Peer reviewers would prefer to remain anonymous use wording to ensure that it is clear how many Peer reviewers were involved in the process, for example: "The authors [or the CRG Editorial Team, if you prefer] are grateful to the following Peer reviewers for their time and comments: [insert Peer reviewer names and affiliations], and also to the [insert number of anonymous Peer reviewers] who wish to remain anonymous.
...
Other forms of acknowledgment
Peer reviewers may, in some circumstances, receive payment from the CRG; for example, for undertaking a rapid review or when specialist/expert input is needed. This is at the discretion of the CRG, who will fund this payment.
...
Other avenues for acknowledging Peer reviewer contributions that CRGs should be aware of are Publons and ORCID. In both instances the Peer reviewer is responsible for registering with the relevant service and creating a profile. Peer reviewers can also earn Cochrane Membership through completing Peer review tasks.
...
Publons
Publons is a service that provides credits for peer review in a format that can be used in CVs and funding applications. See the Publons website for more information.
...
Note that Publons has the facility to upload full peer review reports. As Peer reviewers of Cochrane Reviews are bound to confidentiality until the Cochrane Review is published (see the Committee on Publication Ethics’ Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers), peer review reports of Cochrane Reviews that have yet to be published should not be posted to Publons. Any confidential comments to the Editor should also not be posted on Publons.
...
ORCID
ORCID provides a unique, persistent digital identifier to all registered researchers to support automated links between the researcher and their professional activities to ensure that work is recognised and attributed correctly. Peer review activity can be recorded in an ORCID account, either via a service such as Publons, or it may be added manually.
ORCID identifiers can be recorded in Peer reviewers’ individual Archie accounts; see International editorial organizations: information for Cochrane Editors.
9 Collating Peer review comments
...