...
Date | Section | What's new |
|---|---|---|
Cleared up inconsistency in policy and guidance to make it clearer that peer review is a named process between authors and reviewers, but that this doesn't mean all peer reviewer names must be publicaly avaliable.Updates were made to following sectionsaround Acknowledgement of peer reviewers: The policy states a named peer-review process, but does not state that peer review names need to be made publically avaliable. The guidance implied that peer reviewer names sould be made publically avaliable unless anonymity was agreed by the EinC. The wording in the guidance has been changed in the following sections to address this inconsistency:
| ||
| Declarations of potential conflicts of interest for peer reviewers: implementation information | Corrected link to conflict of interest policy | |
| Acknowledgement | Corrected Archie search term from "Peer reviewer" to "External referee". | |
| Exceptions to named peer review: editorial management | Added "Reason(s) for opting to remain anonymous" to the list of information that needs to be provided to the Editorial & Methods Department. | |
| Cochrane TaskExchange: new peer reviewers | New section added. | |
| Peer review checklists | Updated guidance for consumer peer reviewers to v3. General updates/revisions to branding/format, contact details, and terminology. Updated peer review checklists to v3. Added data protection statement, updated acknowledgement, links and formatting. |
...