Preserving Confidentiality in the Peer Review Process

The future of Asian Cardiovascular Annals: Goals and quality

“…As said, it seems clear that the peer review process is the foundation of the scientific journals aiming at ensuring integrity in the times of the Internet as wisely highlighted by Dunning. 30 It may not be a perfect system to review a scientific research contribution, subjected to inaccuracies, inappropriateness or even leaking information; 38 however, clinicians, authors, reviewers and patients should understand the value of peer review as a structured platform to pursue the mentioned goals of the review, 30 quality and integrity.…”

Basic Elements of Toxicology

“…. given the strong policy behind preserving confidentiality in the peer review process, the Court finds any probative value would be outweighed by the burden imposed on the Journals in invading the sanctity of that process' (DeAngelis and Thornton, 2008;Keys, 2008). Also relevant to the peer-review process is the possibility for breach of reviewer confidentiality by the reviewer communicating review-related information to parties other than the journal for whom a review was conducted (Editorial, 2008).…”

More on Peer Review

“…Shortly after I wrote my April editorial about peer review, I read the editorial from JAMA (DeAngelis & Thornton, 2008). This editorial focused on a recent event involving JAMA that addressed the importance of preserving the peer review process.…”

“…The basis of this litigation revolved around reports about medications that Pfizer had developed (celecoxib and valdecoxib). Subpoenas were issued around four broad categories of information, including “the decision to accept or reject manuscripts, copies of rejected manuscripts, the identities of peer reviewers and the manuscripts they reviewed, and the comments by and among peer reviewers and editors regarding manuscripts, revisions, and publication decisions” (DeAngelis & Thornton, 2008, ¶ 3). In essence, Pfizer was asking for information that historically has been protected through the peer review process.…”