TY - JOUR
T1 - Peer review of clinical and translational research manuscripts
T2 - Perspectives from statistical collaborators
AU - Schulte, Phillip J.
AU - Goldberg, Judith D.
AU - Oster, Robert A.
AU - Ambrosius, Walter T.
AU - Bonner, Lauren Balmert
AU - Cabral, Howard
AU - Carter, Rickey E.
AU - Chen, Ye
AU - Desai, Manisha
AU - Li, Dongmei
AU - Lindsell, Christopher J.
AU - Pomann, Gina Maria
AU - Slade, Emily
AU - Tosteson, Tor D.
AU - Yu, Fang
AU - Spratt, Heidi
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Association for Clinical and Translational Science.
PY - 2024/1/4
Y1 - 2024/1/4
N2 - Research articles in the clinical and translational science literature commonly use quantitative data to inform evaluation of interventions, learn about the etiology of disease, or develop methods for diagnostic testing or risk prediction of future events. The peer review process must evaluate the methodology used therein, including use of quantitative statistical methods. In this manuscript, we provide guidance for peer reviewers tasked with assessing quantitative methodology, intended to complement guidelines and recommendations that exist for manuscript authors. We describe components of clinical and translational science research manuscripts that require assessment including study design and hypothesis evaluation, sampling and data acquisition, interventions (for studies that include an intervention), measurement of data, statistical analysis methods, presentation of the study results, and interpretation of the study results. For each component, we describe what reviewers should look for and assess; how reviewers should provide helpful comments for fixable errors or omissions; and how reviewers should communicate uncorrectable and irreparable errors. We then discuss the critical concepts of transparency and acceptance/revision guidelines when communicating with responsible journal editors.
AB - Research articles in the clinical and translational science literature commonly use quantitative data to inform evaluation of interventions, learn about the etiology of disease, or develop methods for diagnostic testing or risk prediction of future events. The peer review process must evaluate the methodology used therein, including use of quantitative statistical methods. In this manuscript, we provide guidance for peer reviewers tasked with assessing quantitative methodology, intended to complement guidelines and recommendations that exist for manuscript authors. We describe components of clinical and translational science research manuscripts that require assessment including study design and hypothesis evaluation, sampling and data acquisition, interventions (for studies that include an intervention), measurement of data, statistical analysis methods, presentation of the study results, and interpretation of the study results. For each component, we describe what reviewers should look for and assess; how reviewers should provide helpful comments for fixable errors or omissions; and how reviewers should communicate uncorrectable and irreparable errors. We then discuss the critical concepts of transparency and acceptance/revision guidelines when communicating with responsible journal editors.
KW - Biostatistics
KW - clinical and translational science
KW - peer review
KW - reviewer guidance
KW - study design
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85181827935&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85181827935&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/cts.2023.707
DO - 10.1017/cts.2023.707
M3 - Review article
C2 - 38384899
AN - SCOPUS:85181827935
SN - 2059-8661
VL - 8
JO - Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
JF - Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
IS - 1
M1 - e20
ER -