APGO

Background:

The quality of peer reviewers is extremely important to the quality and academic credibility of a journal. Peer reviewers or manuscript referees act as intellectual gatekeepers to the journal as they provide an objective assessment of a submitted manuscript and determine its value for publication. There is no formal process in which trainees learn about the peer review process and how to act as manuscript referees. 

Methods: Residents were offered the opportunity to individually review a submitted journal manuscript as part of the peer review process. First, the residents and attending discussed how the peer review process works. Residents then independently reviewed a submitted manuscript. They then discussed their findings and jointly formatted recommendations to the journal editor with the attending. Residents who had participated in the program were then surveyed via a Google Form regarding their experience learning about the peer review process and how to serve as a manuscript referee. Simple descriptive statistical analysis was performed.

Results:

12 residents were surveyed via Google Forms who had participated in the manuscript referee exercise. On average, it took residents 2.8 hours to review and discuss a manuscript. 92% felt that this exercise was very valuable for their medical education. 100% reported gaining more insight into / knowledge regarding the peer review process. 100% would be willing to serve as a manuscript referee again in the future. 100% would recommend participation to a fellow resident.

Discussions: A mentoring program to expose residents to the peer review process as manuscript referees was felt to be valuable and provide insight into the peer review process. A manuscript referee mentoring program would be easy to implement into any residency with faculty who regularly contribute to the peer review process.

Keywords: Curriculum Development/Evaluation, Evidence Based Practice, Faculty Development, Mentoring, Publication, Research Methods