Tag Archives: peer review

Rethinking peer review in medicine: From trust to transformation

Dan Longrois¹, Sacha Rozencwaig², Pierre-Grégoire Guinot³

1 Departments of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bichat-Claude Bernard and Louis Mourier Hospitals, Assistance Publique–Hôpitaux de Paris, University Paris Cité, INSERM 1148, Paris, France
² Anesthesiology and Perioperative Department, Marie Lannelongue Hospital, Le Plessis-Robinson, Paris Saclay University, France
³ Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Dijon University Hospital, University of Burgundy, INSERM UMR1231, CTM Lipness Team, Dijon, France

DOI: 10.2478/jccm-2025-0035

At the heart of biomedical publishing integrity lies peer review—long regarded as the “gold standard” of scientific validation. Yet, despite its foundational role, peer review today reveals critical shortcomings: inconsistency, lack of transparency, slow turnaround, and susceptibility to bias. As the scientific landscape evolves with rising submission volumes, data complexity, and urgency for rapid knowledge dissemination, it is no longer enough to refine peer review; it must be reimagined.
As editors and long-time participants in academic publishing, we have consistently faced the challenges of writing, reviewing, and managing peer evaluations. Identifying qualified reviewers and synthesizing their feedback into fair editorial decisions remains a formidable task. This editorial outlines our concerns and envisions how artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance—not replace—peer review in medicine. Over 90% of the initial text was generated with ChatGPT Scholar using structured prompts; it has since been extensively revised by the authors. [More]

Keywords: , ,
Full text: PDF

The Peer Review Process: Underwriting Manuscript Quality & Validity

Ario Santini1,2

1 University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Tîrgu Mureș, Romania
2 Hon Fellow, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom

DOI: 10.2478/jccm-2018-0020

Evidence-based practice is the first step in underpinning and shaping how the profession delivers patient care. The Oxford Dictionary defines evidence as: ‘the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid’. The majority of evidence, though not all, is provided by research studies published in professional journals. Best evidence should be of high quality and is thus founded on the status of publishing journals and the process by which journals, editors and the editorial team separate out the “good” from both the “mediocre” and the “bad”.
This is undertaken by the process of Peer reviewing or refereeing; it is the practice of critically examining an author’s submitted research manuscript by experts in the same field before a paper is accepted for publishing in a journal. When well done, it confers a stamp of approval to the substance, authenticity, and value of articles and therefore is a crucial element, integral to scholarly research and the validation of published evidence. [More]

Keywords: ,
Full text: PDF