Masking author identity in peer review - What factors influence masking success?
Masking author identity in peer review - What factors influence masking success?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1001/jama.280.3.243
复制
发表时间：
1998-07-15
影响因子：
120.7
通讯作者：
Rennie, D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cho, MK;Justice, AC;Rennie, D
上下文。在之前的一项研究中，我们发现，对审稿人和作者身份进行掩盖的期刊的掩盖成功率更高。我们假设掩蔽政策或其他因素可能与掩蔽成功有关。-评估7种生物医学期刊在掩盖审稿人和作者身份方面的成功差异，并确定与这些差异相关的因素。如文字questionnaire.Participants。-有长期屏蔽作者身份政策的3个期刊（《急诊医学年鉴》、《流行病学》和《美国老年医学会杂志》）和4个没有屏蔽作者身份政策的期刊（《内科学年鉴》、《美国医学会杂志》、《妇产科学》和《眼科》）的审稿人。主要结果测量。-屏蔽成功（成功屏蔽审稿人的百分比）和与屏蔽结果相关的审稿人特征。-有屏蔽策略的期刊（60%）和没有屏蔽策略的期刊（58%）在屏蔽成功率上没有显著差异（P= 0.92）。当调整审稿人的年龄、性别、审稿经验年数、发表文章数量、审稿数量、研究时间百分比、编辑经验或学术排名等特征时，我们发现掩盖成功与掩盖政策之间没有关联（优势比[or]为1.3；95%可信区间[CI]为0.64-2.8；P= 0.43）。在对审稿人特征的多变量分析中，审稿人在研究中花费的时间越多，被成功掩盖的可能性越小（OR, 1.01;95% CI, 1.00-1.02） （P= 0.04）。-屏蔽成功似乎与期刊的屏蔽政策无关，但与审稿人的研究经验有关，并可能受到其他特征的影响。使用研究较少和审查经验较少的审稿人可能会增加掩蔽成功，但对审查质量的影响是未知的。
Context.-In a previous study, we found that masking success was higher at a journal that masked reviewers to author identity. We hypothesized that masking policy or other factors could be associated with masking success.Objectives.-To evaluate differences in success of masking reviewers to author identity at 7 biomedical journals and to identify factors associated with these differences.Design.-Written questionnaire.Participants.-Reviewers at 3 journals with a long-standing policy of masking author identity (Annals of Emergency Medicine, Epidemiology, and Journal of the American Geriatrics Society) and 4 journals without a policy of masking author identity (Annals of Infernal Medicine, JAMA, Obstetrics & Gynecology, and Ophthalmology).Main Outcome Measures.-Masking success (percentage of reviewers successfully masked) and reviewer characteristics associated with masking.Results.-There was no significant difference in masking success between journals with a policy of masking (60%) and those without (58%) (P=.92). We found no association between masking success and a policy of masking when adjusted for the reviewer characteristics of age, sex, years of reviewing experience, number of articles published, number of articles reviewed, percentage of time spent in research, editorial experience, or academic rank (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64-2.8; P=.43). In multivariable analysis of reviewer characteristics, reviewers spending a greater percentage of time in research, the only significant predictor of masking success, were less likely to be successfully masked (OR, 1.01;95% CI, 1.00-1.02) (P=.04).Conclusions.-Masking success appears unrelated to a journal policy of masking, but is associated with reviewers' research experience and could be affected by other characteristics. Using reviewers with less research and reviewing experience might increase masking success, but the effect on review quality is unknown.