The Academic Peer Review Process: How to Succeed as an Author and Reviewer
James D. Reynolds, MD; William Good, MD; Rudy Wagner, MD; R.V. Paul Chan, MD; Michael Chiang, MD; Kyle Arnoldi, CO, COMT
University at Buffalo/Ross Eye Institute
Purpose/Relevance: Many pediatric ophthalmologists and orthoptists aspire to publish significant work. Once one establishes a body of work, we are often asked to critically review journal submissions as ad hoc reviewers or editorial board members. Despite this large contingent of publishing professionals, there is little guidance on becoming a good writer or reviewer. This workshop will provide strategies and tactics to improve your publication acceptance rate as well as methods to be of more value as a reviewer.
Target Audience: Ophthalmologists and orthoptists who are interested in becoming a better author or reviewer.
Current Practice: Scientific publications are the foundation of clinical medicine. Many of us wish to contribute. Yet few of us receive instruction or guidance. Rejection rates are high, manuscript quality is highly variable, and reviewers can fail in their duty to improve manuscripts.
Best Practice: Authors and reviewers should be clear, concise, pointed, guided by the data and not over reaching in their discussion or conclusions. Reviewers must be honest, logical, insightful, knowledgeable, forthright, equipoised, and importantly, take the time and effort to make the manuscript better.
Expected Outcomes: Aspiring authors and reviewers will have a good understanding of the peer review process; formulating a hypothesis, applying appropriate methods, presenting data, and most importantly, analyzing the data and discussing it in a way that supports appropriate conclusions. Participants will learn the value of brevity, clarity, good sentence construction, good grammar, reference utilization, limited, data driven discussions and conclusions.
Format: Panel discussion and audience participation.
Summary: A respected panel of current editors (including JAAPOS; JPOS; AOJ; and Retina) and researchers will provide concrete pearls and recommendations on how to organize research material, present it clearly and appropriately, analyze it, draw appropriate conclusions, and provide insightful criticism.
References: Mulligan, A: Is Peer Review in Crisis? Perspectives in Publishing 2:1-6, 2004.