Skip to main content

Table 3 Views on biomedical journal peer review (all respondents, n = 1,340)

From: Views on the peer review system of biomedical journals: an online survey of academics from high-ranking universities

How much do you agree with the following statements?* Strongly disagree/disagree
n (%)
Neutral
n (%)
Strongly agree/agree
n (%)
I) Positive views of the review process    
Biomedical journal peer review is fair. 304 (22.7) 387 (28.9) 649 (48.4)
Biomedical journal peer review is transparent. 610 (45.5) 393 (29.3) 337 (25.1)
Biomedical journal peer review is scientific. 304 (22.) 399 (29.8) 637 (47.5)
Authors should remain anonymous. 296 (22.1) 264 (19.7) 780 (58.2)
Reviewers should remain anonymous. 271 (20.2) 204 (15.2) 865 (64.4)
Reviewers are competent in general. 306 (22.8) 503 (37.5) 531 (39.6)
II) Conflict of interest (COI)    
Reviewers are not required to declare COI. 1125 (84.0) 100 (7.5) 115 (8.6)
The journal review process ensures my article to be free from interference of competitors and people with COI. 659 (49.2) 426 (31.8) 255 (19.0)
III) Communication    
After receiving an article, the editors should give every article a fair chance by sending to peer review and avoiding personal bias. 244 (18.2) 506 (37.8) 590 (44.0%)
After receiving reviewers’ feedbacks, editors should screen for unfair reviewers’ comments. 285 (21.3) 446 (33.3) 609 (45.4)
Every biomedical journal should provide an appeal system for authors when their articles are unfairly rejected. 198 (14.8) 235 (17.5) 907 (67.7)
  1. Items are presented in the order of appearance in the questionnaire.
  2. Percentages sum to 100%.
  3. *Responses on a 5-point Likert Scale: 1, very rare; 2, infrequent; 3, sometimes; 4, frequent; 5, All the time.