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