Does peer review improve the statistical content of manuscripts? A study on 27 467 submissions to four journals

Abstract

Improving the methodological rigour and the quality of data analysis in manuscripts submitted to journals is key to ensure the validity of scientific claims. However, there is scant knowledge of how manuscripts change throughout the review process in academic journals. Here, we examined 27 467 manuscripts submitted to four journals from the Royal Society (2006–2017) and analysed the effect of peer review on the amount of statistical content of manuscripts, i.e. one of the most important aspects to assess the methodological rigour of manuscripts. We found that manuscripts with both initial low or high levels of statistical content increased their statistical content during peer review. The availability of guidelines on statistics in the review forms of journals was associated with an initial similarity of statistical content of manuscripts but did not have any relevant implications on manuscript change during peer review. We found that when reports were more concentrated on statistical content, there was a higher probability that these manuscripts were eventually rejected by editors.

Appreciation for Peer Review and Peer Reviewers in Academic Medicine

“…These reviewers provide insights of tremendous value in editorial decision making, and they assist our authors in strengthening the rigor, quality, and presentation of their scholarship. 1 The intention of peer review is to foster excellence, which it achieves by a significant investment of expertise and time. For these reasons, peer review is generative, generous, and highly deserving of our appreciation.…”

“…These reviewers provide insights of tremendous value in editorial decision making, and they assist our authors in strengthening the rigor, quality, and presentation of their scholarship. 1…”