Home » Posts tagged 'research'
Tag Archives: research
Pros and Cons of Paying Peer Reviewers
April 12, 2024 / Leave a comment
By: Juliana Ancalmo, Chad E Cook PT, PhD, FAPTA, Ciara Roche
Background:
Critical appraisal is a hallmark of peer reviewed publishing. Critical appraisal provides analytical evaluations of whether the results of the study can be believed, and can be transferred appropriately into other environments, for use in policy, education, or clinical practice [1]. Historically, critical appraisal is performed by peer reviewers who are either content or research experts (or both). Peer reviewers have viewed this act as an obligation for science, especially those who benefit from peer review as authors, and are not currently paid for this service.
Recent limitations brought forth by qualified peer reviewers has ignited discussion around paying for reviewing services. Although this topic had been highly debated previously, a new wave of conversation was reignited when researcher and Chief Scientific officer James Heathers [2] argued for a $450 fee for a peer review in an editorial published on Medium. This, coupled with the challenges many researchers faced post-COVID have spurred people on both sides of this argument to speak out. In this blog we will outline the pros and cons of this debate and discuss the complexity of the issue at hand.
Yes, Peer Review is Broken, but It’s Probably Worse than You Think
April 11, 2024 / Leave a comment
By: Chad E. Cook PT, PhD, FAPTA
We have problems: There are countless publications, editorials, and blogs indicating we have a notable problem with the peer review system used in scientific publications [1-4]. Concerns have included its inconsistency, its slow process, and the biases associated with reviewers (especially reviewer two) who have an axe to grind. These limitations and the knowledge that publishing companies are making record profit margins [5] off the free labor of reviewers, while authors are required to pay to publish, are especially difficult to stomach. This problem has been ongoing for some time but in my opinion, it seems to have worsened recently. Having been immersed in publishing for over 25 years as an author, and over 20 years as an editor-in-chief or associate editor for four journals, I’d like to outline my concerns that qualify my statement in the title that it’s “probably worse than you think”.
Recent Blogs »
-
Advantages and Disadvantages of Research Metrics used to Evaluate a Researcher’s Impact or Influence
By: Chad E Cook PT, PhD, FAPTA Background: Each year, in Duke University’s Division of Physical Therapy, I teach a class on research methodology. One…
-
“It’s Not You, It’s Us…”: Heterogeneity of Treatment Effects as a Challenge to Effectiveness Trials.
By: Damian L Keter, PT, DPT, PhD Background: Comparative effectiveness studies are the cornerstone of medicine and health sciences research. They have a goal of…
-
Is Myofascial Pain Syndrome a Legitimate Primary Diagnosis?
By: Chad E Cook, Damian Keter, Ken Learman Background: Myofascial Pain Syndrome (MPS) is hypothesized to be both a primary and/or a secondary chronic pain…
-
Risk of Bias Measures can be Biased
By: Chad E Cook, Damian Keter, Ken Learman Navigating the Literature: Navigating the ever-growing, healthcare literature can be challenging [1]. The sheer amount of new…
-
Why Isn’t Everyone Using Stepped Care for Musculoskeletal Injuries?
By: Chad E. Cook PT, PhD, FAPTA Resource efficiency models Musculoskeletal (MSK) outcomes have shown some concerning trends over the last decade. Conditions like low…
-
Three Ways That Recruitment in Randomized Controlled Trials May Not Reflect Real Life
By: Chad Cook, Amy McDevitt, Derek Clewley, Bryan O’Halloran As we wind up a year of recruitment on the SS-MECH trial [1], we are compelled…