Cargando…

Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals

Improving the methodological rigour and the quality of data analysis in manuscripts submitted to journals is key to ensure the validity of scientific claims. However, there is scant knowledge of how manuscripts change throughout the review process in academic journals. Here, we examined 27 467 manus...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Garcia-Costa, Daniel, Forte, Anabel, Lòpez-Iñesta, Emilia, Squazzoni, Flaminio, Grimaldo, Francisco
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9470276/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36117870
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.210681
_version_ 1784788806580305920
author Garcia-Costa, Daniel
Forte, Anabel
Lòpez-Iñesta, Emilia
Squazzoni, Flaminio
Grimaldo, Francisco
author_facet Garcia-Costa, Daniel
Forte, Anabel
Lòpez-Iñesta, Emilia
Squazzoni, Flaminio
Grimaldo, Francisco
author_sort Garcia-Costa, Daniel
collection PubMed
description Improving the methodological rigour and the quality of data analysis in manuscripts submitted to journals is key to ensure the validity of scientific claims. However, there is scant knowledge of how manuscripts change throughout the review process in academic journals. Here, we examined 27 467 manuscripts submitted to four journals from the Royal Society (2006–2017) and analysed the effect of peer review on the amount of statistical content of manuscripts, i.e. one of the most important aspects to assess the methodological rigour of manuscripts. We found that manuscripts with both initial low or high levels of statistical content increased their statistical content during peer review. The availability of guidelines on statistics in the review forms of journals was associated with an initial similarity of statistical content of manuscripts but did not have any relevant implications on manuscript change during peer review. We found that when reports were more concentrated on statistical content, there was a higher probability that these manuscripts were eventually rejected by editors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9470276
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher The Royal Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94702762022-09-15 Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals Garcia-Costa, Daniel Forte, Anabel Lòpez-Iñesta, Emilia Squazzoni, Flaminio Grimaldo, Francisco R Soc Open Sci Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Improving the methodological rigour and the quality of data analysis in manuscripts submitted to journals is key to ensure the validity of scientific claims. However, there is scant knowledge of how manuscripts change throughout the review process in academic journals. Here, we examined 27 467 manuscripts submitted to four journals from the Royal Society (2006–2017) and analysed the effect of peer review on the amount of statistical content of manuscripts, i.e. one of the most important aspects to assess the methodological rigour of manuscripts. We found that manuscripts with both initial low or high levels of statistical content increased their statistical content during peer review. The availability of guidelines on statistics in the review forms of journals was associated with an initial similarity of statistical content of manuscripts but did not have any relevant implications on manuscript change during peer review. We found that when reports were more concentrated on statistical content, there was a higher probability that these manuscripts were eventually rejected by editors. The Royal Society 2022-09-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9470276/ /pubmed/36117870 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.210681 Text en © 2022 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence
Garcia-Costa, Daniel
Forte, Anabel
Lòpez-Iñesta, Emilia
Squazzoni, Flaminio
Grimaldo, Francisco
Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals
title Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals
title_full Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals
title_fullStr Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals
title_full_unstemmed Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals
title_short Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals
title_sort does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? a study on 27 467 submissions to four journals
topic Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9470276/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36117870
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.210681
work_keys_str_mv AT garciacostadaniel doespeerreviewimprovethestatisticalcontentofmanuscriptsastudyon27467submissionstofourjournals
AT forteanabel doespeerreviewimprovethestatisticalcontentofmanuscriptsastudyon27467submissionstofourjournals
AT lopezinestaemilia doespeerreviewimprovethestatisticalcontentofmanuscriptsastudyon27467submissionstofourjournals
AT squazzoniflaminio doespeerreviewimprovethestatisticalcontentofmanuscriptsastudyon27467submissionstofourjournals
AT grimaldofrancisco doespeerreviewimprovethestatisticalcontentofmanuscriptsastudyon27467submissionstofourjournals