Original Research
Sunday, November 12, 2023
12:45 PM–02:15 PM
Abstract
Introduction: The peer review process remains an integral part of academic publishing, although increasing requests places significant demand on reviewers, including pharmacy practice faculty who often have clinical responsibilities.
Research Question or Hypothesis: To characterize faculty response to peer review invitations and evaluate barriers to accepting review invitations
Study Design: Prospective, non-interventional study
Methods: Full-time pharmacy practice faculty at 9 U.S. colleges and schools of pharmacy (C/SOP) were invited to participate in a 1-year (1/1/2022 – 12/31/2022) prospective study characterizing responses to peer review invitations. Following IRB approval, site investigators assigned unique identifiers to participating faculty. Participants were asked to complete an electronic data collection form through REDCap® in real-time for each peer review invitation received, regardless of acceptance. Faculty completed a baseline and post-participation survey through REDCap® to collect demographics, perceived barriers, and reviewer incentives.
Results: A total of 83 faculty completed the baseline form. Faculty were primarily non-tenure track (75%) and in academia for a mean of 11 (±9) years. Among 806 peer review invitations received, the documented acceptance rate was 35%. Faculty received an average of 9.7 invitations (min=0, max=122). Non-pharmacy journals constituted 60% (578) of the invitations. The acceptance rate for pharmacy journal invitations was significantly higher compared to non-pharmacy journals (50% vs. 25%, p<0.01). Faculty who received 10 or more invitations had a significantly lower acceptance rate (30% vs. 53%, p<0.01). Twenty-four (29%) faculty reported = 1 peer review invitation. Trainees were included on 16% of completed reviews. Lack of time and lack of invitations were the most common barriers reported. A primary incentive desired by faculty, but not frequently offered, was formal recognition of peer reviews by C/SOP.
Conclusion: There is significant variability in volume of peer review invitations among pharmacy practice faculty. Acceptance rates and inclusion of trainees are generally low. Formal emphasis on peer reviews by C/SOP may enhance future acceptance.
Presenting Author
P. Brandon Bookstaver PharmDUniversity of South Carolina College of Pharmacy
Authors
Elias Chahine PharmD
Palm Beach Atlantic University Lloyd L. Gregory School of Pharmacy
Reagan K. Barfield PharmD
University of South Carolina College of Pharmacy
Wesley Kufel PharmD
Binghamton University School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences
Joanna Hudson PharmD
The University of Tennessee
Brooke Hudspeth PharmD
University of Kentucky College of Pharmacy
Elizabeth Covington PharmD
Auburn University Harrison School of Pharmacy
Lea Eiland PharmD
Auburn University Harrison School of Pharmacy
Sarah Eudaley PharmD
LECOM School of Pharmacy, Bradenton Campus
Mary Douglass Smith PharmD
Presbyterian College School of Pharmacy
Kayla R. Stover PharmD, BCIDP, BCPS, FCCP, FIDSA
University of Mississippi School of Pharmacy