Volume 12, Issue 2 (4-2013)                   JRUMS 2013, 12(2): 127-136 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Vazirinejad R, Rezaeian M, Taghavi M. Assessing Peer Reviewer Comments on a Persian Language Manuscript Sent to an Iranian Scientific Journal, 2010. JRUMS. 2013; 12 (2) :127-136
URL: http://journal.rums.ac.ir/article-1-1690-en.html

Abstract:   (10478 Views)

  Background and Objectives: Final corrections on a manuscript sent for publication in a scientific journal are suggested by reviewers. So this qualifies the paper with the least errors for publication. The present study aimed to assess the Persian language peer reviewers' comments on a manuscript sent to an Iranian Scientific Journal (journal of Rafsanjan university of medical sciences), 2010.

  Materials and Methods: In this descriptive study, a manuscript which was sent to a scientific journal for publication was sent to 30 peer reviewers to obtain their comments. This approach was the routine method of the journal in peer reviewing the manuscripts. When peer reviewers' comments come back to the editorial office, a trained expert recorded the information on an anonymous checklist. The checklist included a list of nine items which were expected to be reported by peer reviewers as their comments. Data were analyzed using SPSS.

  Results: Fourteen respondents (about 50%) sent their comments back in due date. Of these, five were affiliated with other universities and nine were affiliated to the journal university. Nine were female (64%) and 5 were males (%35/7). With one exception, peer reviewers inside the journal university were more successful than peer reviewers outside the journal university in distinguishing the other eight general items. No a peer reviewer reported all of the nine items. Among the nine items, "sample size" was reported by the highest proportion (64%) of peer reviewers.

  Conclusion: Peer reviewing should be improved among peer reviewers of the scientific journal of this study and proper interventions should be conducted. More investigations are needed to cover more scientific journals and more peer reviewers.

  Key words: Precision, Peer Reviewer, Scientific, Journal, Manuscripts

  

  Funding: This research was funded by Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Occupational Environment Research Centre .

  Conflict interest: None declared.

  Ethical approval: The Ethics Committee of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences.

  

  How to cite this article : Vazirinejad R, Rezaeian M, Taghavi M. Assessing Peer Reviewer Comments on a Persian Language Manuscript Sent to an Iranian Scientific Journal, 2010. J Rafsanjan Univ Med Scie 2013 12(2): 127-136. [Farsi]

Full-Text [PDF 177 kb]   (969 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Community Medicine
Received: 2013/04/16 | Accepted: 2013/04/21 | Published: 2013/04/21

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
Write the security code in the box

Send email to the article author


© 2015 All Rights Reserved | Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb