Peer review is a cornerstone of biomedical publishing and is recognized as the foundation that safeguards the integrity and quality of scientific and scholarly research. Pharmacotherapy maintains a system of dedicated and committed editors, editorial board members, and reviewers who provide a critical evaluation of submitted manuscripts. Peer review acts as a filter to allow the best-quality articles to be published. Authors usually find that the peer review process results in an improved version of their original manuscript.
Scientific journals that use a peer review process depend on the generosity and commitment of reviewers to evaluate submitted manuscripts. The success of Pharmacotherapy's peer review process requires input from hundreds of individual reviewers each year. Reviewers are asked to provide thorough and timely recommendations on the suitability of the manuscripts submitted for publication. Traditionally, most journals recognize reviewers by publishing an annual list of individuals who provided manuscript reviews. Pharmacotherapy has implemented two additional methods of recognizing this form of service to the journal.
Beginning with the 2016 ACCP Annual Meeting in October, four "Outstanding Reviewers" who have made significant contributions to the peer review process over the past year will be recognized at the Town Hall Meeting on Sunday, October 23, 2:30 p.m. – 4:15 p.m. Subsequently, Pharmacotherapy's scientific editors and editor-in-chief will continue to recommend a few individuals each year to the Pharmacotherapy Board of Directors to be recognized as outstanding reviewers on the basis of their substantial contributions.
Objective criteria, including the number of manuscripts reviewed and the timeliness of the review, will be considered in identifying outstanding reviewers. Perhaps most important will be the thoroughness and insight provided to an editor to make an informed editorial decision. Although scientific editors have a deep understanding of research and clinical care in pharmacotherapy, an insightful comment by a manuscript reviewer often solidifies a confident editorial decision. Our scientific editors value comments that describe how an individual manuscript will contribute to advancing the understanding of a therapeutic issue. Each of the Outstanding Reviewers for 2016 has demonstrated the above characteristics in their reviews.
The following four individuals will be recognized at the 2016 Annual Meeting as Outstanding Reviewers: Stephen Kogut, Ph.D., Rhode Island College of Pharmacy; David Nix, Pharm.D., University of Arizona; Brent Reed, Pharm.D., University of Maryland; and Jennifer Trujillo, Pharm.D., University of Colorado. These reviewers have been selfless in contributing their time and expertise to enhancing the quality of the editorial review process for Pharmacotherapy. The readership is encouraged to thank the 2016 Outstanding Reviewers for their contribution to the journal's success.
The diversity of manuscript topics received by Pharmacotherapy requires that the database of reviewers continue to expand. For Annual Meeting attendees who are interested in becoming a manuscript reviewer for Pharmacotherapy or improving their skills, Stuart T. Haines, Pharm.D., one of the journal's scientific editors, will host a session titled Fundamentals of Providing Excellent Manuscript Peer Reviews. The program will be presented on Tuesday, October 25, from 10:15 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. in Regency Ballroom 2. The educational content will include an overview of the peer review process and will provide experience in constructing logically organized peer review reports. Haines will cover several aspects of the peer review process that will be helpful to attendees.
Another method of recognizing reviewer service to the journal is through Publons, a service provider in the biomedical industry that partners with Wiley-Blackwell, Pharmacotherapy's publisher. Reviewers now have the option of recording vital statistics about manuscript reviews submitted through ScholarOne, our publisher's manuscript handling software, in the Publons database. Data on manuscript reviews provided to numerous journals can be recorded and collated in this central data repository, where reviewer anonymity is preserved. The value is that individual reviewers for Pharmacotherapy can retrieve an objective record of their participation in the editorial review process. These data should be useful in documenting one’s service activities and applying for funding and promotion. As the number of participating journals increases, Publons should be a valuable asset to reviewers. Moreover, this service provides a means for better recognizing reviewer contributions.
Providing one's professional opinion on the quality of an unpublished manuscript, grant application, or other work of creative expression is regarded as an honor. The benefits are often subjective. Pharmacotherapy is working to ensure that contributors to the journal's success receive appropriate recognition.