How We Review a Medical Education Research Manuscript

Margaret M. Hayes, Henry E. Fessler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Peer review is a necessary and important component of scholarly publication. When done well, it benefits both the reviewer and authors and improves the science itself. However, the skills of effective peer review are rarely taught. In the adolescent field of medical education research, peer review is especially important to advance the scientific rigor of the field. From our experience reviewing biomedical and medical education research, we have found that a thorough review takes multiple readings and multiple hours. The first reading provides a general overview of the aims and methods. Subsequent readings focus on the details of the methodology, results, and interpretation. The written review should provide firm but gentle feedback that the authors can use to improve their work, even if we have recommended rejection for this submission. We hope that this description of our process for reviewing a medical education research manuscript will assist others and thereby advance the quality of publications in our field.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)38-47
Number of pages10
JournalATS Scholar
Volume3
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2022

Keywords

  • education
  • peer review
  • scholarship

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Education
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'How We Review a Medical Education Research Manuscript'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this