Shared burden is always lighter - Peer-review performance in an ophthalmological journal 2010-2020. - OpacWWW

Tytuł:: Shared burden is always lighter - Peer-review performance in an ophthalmological journal 2010-2020.
Autorzy:: Bro T; Section for Ophthalmology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Hammarfelt B; Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås, Borås, Sweden.
Źródło:: Acta ophthalmologica [Acta Ophthalmol] 2022 Aug; Vol. 100 (5), pp. 559-563. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Oct 05.
Typ publikacji:: Journal Article
Język:: English
Imprint Name(s):: Publication: Oxford, UK : Wiley-Blackwell
Original Publication: Oxford, UK ; Malden, MA : Blackwell Munksgaard
MeSH Terms:: COVID-19*/epidemiology
Peer Review, Research*
Humans ; Pandemics ; Publishing ; Retrospective Studies
References:: Acta Ophtahlmologica Issue archive. [WWW document]. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/loi/17553768 [accessed on 2021-06-30].
Acta Ophthalmologica (2021): Acta Ophthalmologica. [WWW document]. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/17553768 [accessed on 2020-03-23].
Bornmann L (2011): Scientific peer review. Annu Rev Inform Sci Technol 45: 197-245.
Breuning M, Backstrom J, Brannon J, Gross B & Widmeier M (2015): Reviewer fatigue? Why scholars decline to review their peers’ work. PS Polit Sci Polit 48: 595-600.
Burns CS & Fox CW (2017): Language and socioeconomics predict geographic variation in peer review outcomes at an ecology journal. Scientometrics 113: 1113-1127.
Clarviate Analytics (2021): 2019 Journal Performance Data for: ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA. [WWW document]. https://clarivate.com/ [accessed on 2021-05-26].
Clarviate Analytics (2021): Core Collection, basic search. [WWW document]. https://clarivate.com/ [accessed on 2021-05-31].
Csiszar A (2016): Peer review: Troubled from the start. Nature 532: 306-308.
Didham RK, Leather SR & Basset Y (2017): Don’t be a zero-sum reviewer. Insect Conserv Divers 10: 1-4.
Else H (2020): How a torrent of COVID science changed research publishing - in seven charts. Nature 588: 553.
Fox CW, Albert AYK & Vines TH. (2017): Recruitment of reviewers is becoming harder at some journals: a test of the influence of reviewer fatigue at six journals in ecology and evolution. Res Integr Peer Rev 2.
Fox CW & Meyer J (2021): The influence of the global COVID-19 pandemic on manuscript submissions and editor and reviewer performance at six ecology journals. Funct Ecol 35: 4-10.
Garcia JA, Rodriguez-Sánchez R & Fdez-Valdivia J (2021): The editor-manuscript game. Scientometrics 126: 4277-4295.
Klus MF & Dilger A (2020): Success factors of academic journals in the digital age. Business Res 13: 1115-1143.
Kovanis M, Porcher R, Ravaud P & Trinquart L (2016): The global burden of journal peer review in the biomedical literature: strong imbalance in the collective enterprise. PLoS One 11: e0166387.
Lewin A (2014): The peer-review process: the good, the bad, the ugly, and the extraordinary. Manag Organ Rev 10: 167-173.
Murray D, Siler K, Larivière V, Chan WM, Collings AM, Raymond J & Sugimoto CR (2018): Gender and international diversity improves equity in peer review. bioRxiv: 400515.
Publons. (2018): Global State of peer review.
Publons (2021): Publons. [WWW document]. https://publons.com/about/home/ [accessed on 2021-05-25].
Severin A & Chataway J (2021): Overburdening of peer reviewers: A multi-stakeholder perspective on causes and effects. Learned Publishing (Early view). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/leap.1392 [accessed on 2021-09-30].
Tennant JP (2018): The state of the art in peer review. FEMS Microbiol Lett 365.
Contributed Indexing:: Keywords: academic journal; authorship; desk rejection; editorial boards; pandemic; peer review; reviewer fatigue; reviewers; scholarly communication
Entry Date(s):: Date Created: 20211005 Date Completed: 20220708 Latest Revision: 20220708
Update Code:: 20240105
DOI:: 10.1111/aos.15033
PMID:: 34608758
: Czasopismo naukowe

Pełny tekst

Purpose: There are concerns in the academic publishing community that it is becoming more difficult to secure reviews for scientific manuscripts. This study examines trends in editorial and peer review processes in an ophthalmological journal over the last decade.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of editorial data from the journal Acta Ophthalmologica containing all manuscript submissions between 2010 and 2020.
Results: The number of yearly submissions grew between 2010 and 2019 from 1014 to 1623, and in 2020, the number of submissions increased to 2449. In total, the number of submissions increased by 142% between 2010 and 2020. Similarly, the proportion of desk-rejected manuscripts increased from 48% to 67% during the period 2010-2020. The number of invitations needed to obtain one review showed an increase from 1.9 to 2.6 between 2010 and 2019, but remained stable between 2019 and 2020. However, the number of reviewers per reviewed manuscript, reviewed manuscripts per reviewer and time from invitation to completed review assignment remained almost constant between 2010 and 2020. Researchers based in North American were disproportionally often invited to review (18%) compared to their share of published articles (7%), and they also declined review invitation more frequently compared to scholars in other parts of the world.
Conclusions: The study revealed an increase in submitted manuscripts to an ophthalmological journal over the last decade, with a further increase during the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of reviewer invitations needed to obtain one review grew during the study period but remained constant between 2019 and 2020, despite a vast increase in submitted manuscripts. Hence, the burden for unique reviewers did not increase. Instead, the proportion of desk-rejected manuscripts grew, and the reviewer pool expanded, which allowed the annual average number of reviews by individual reviewers to remain stable.
(© 2021 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica Foundation.)

Zaloguj się, aby uzyskać dostęp do pełnego tekstu.

Informacja

Shared burden is always lighter - Peer-review performance in an ophthalmological journal 2010-2020.