Background: Peer review is at the heart of the scientific process. With the advent of digitisation, journals started to offer electronic articles or publishing online only. A new philosophy regarding the peer review process found its way into academia: the open peer review. Open peer review as practiced by BioMed Central (BMC) is a type of peer review where the names of authors and reviewers are disclosed and reviewer comments are published alongside the article. A number of articles have been published to assess peer reviews using quantitative research. However, no studies exist that used qualitative methods to analyse the content of reviewers’ comments. Methods: A focused mapping review and synthesis (FMRS) was undertaken of manuscripts reporting qualitative research submitted to BMC open access journals from 1 January – 31 March 2018. Free-text reviewer comments were extracted from peer review reports using a 77-item classification system organised according to three key dimensions that represented common themes and sub-themes. A two stage analysis process was employed. First, frequency counts were undertaken that allowed revealing patterns across themes/sub-themes. Second, thematic analysis was conducted on selected themes of the narrative portion of reviewer reports. Results: A total of 107 manuscripts submitted to nine open-access journals were included in the FMRS. The frequency analysis revealed that among the 30 most frequently employed themes “writing criteria” (dimension II) is the top ranking theme, followed by comments in relation to the “methods” (dimension I). Besides that, some results suggest an underlying quantitative mindset of reviewers. Results are compared and contrasted in relation to established reporting guidelines for qualitative research to inform reviewers and authors of frequent feedback offered to enhance the quality of manuscripts. Conclusions: This FMRS has highlighted some important issues that hold lessons for authors, reviewers and editors. We suggest modifying the current reporting guidelines by including a further item called “Degree of data transformation” to prompt authors and reviewers to make a judgment about the appropriateness of the degree of data transformation in relation to the chosen analysis method. Besides, we suggest that completion of a reporting checklist on submission becomes a requirement.
MULTIFILE
Abstract: Teledentistry offers possibilities for improving efficiency and quality of care and supporting cost-effective healthcare systems. This umbrella review aims to synthesize existing systematic reviews on teledentistry and provide a summary of evidence of its clinical- and cost-effectiveness. A comprehensive search strategy involving various teledentistry-related terms, across seven databases, was conducted. Articles published until 24 April 2023 were considered. Two researchers independently reviewed titles, abstracts and full-text articles. The quality of the included reviews was critically appraised with the AMSTAR-2 checklist. Out of 749 studies identified, 10 were included in this umbrella review. Two reviews focusing on oral-health outcomes revealed that, despite positive findings, there is not yet enough evidence for the long-term clinical effectiveness of teledentistry. Ten reviews reported on economic evaluations or costs, indicating that teledentistry is cost-saving. However, these conclusions were based on assumptions due to insufficient evidence on cost-effectiveness. The main limitation of our umbrella review was the critically low quality of the included reviews according to AMSTAR-2 criteria, with many of these reviews basing their conclusions on low-quality studies. This highlights the need for high-quality experimental studies (e.g., RCTs, factorial designs, stepped-wedge designs, SMARTs and MRTs) to assess teledentistry’s clinical- and cost-effectiveness.
DOCUMENT
The rising rate of preprints and publications, combined with persistent inadequate reporting practices and problems with study design and execution, have strained the traditional peer review system. Automated screening tools could potentially enhance peer review by helping authors, journal editors, and reviewers to identify beneficial practices and common problems in preprints or submitted manuscripts. Tools can screen many papers quickly, and may be particularly helpful in assessing compliance with journal policies and with straightforward items in reporting guidelines. However, existing tools cannot understand or interpret the paper in the context of the scientific literature. Tools cannot yet determine whether the methods used are suitable to answer the research question, or whether the data support the authors’ conclusions. Editors and peer reviewers are essential for assessing journal fit and the overall quality of a paper, including the experimental design, the soundness of the study’s conclusions, potential impact and innovation. Automated screening tools cannot replace peer review, but may aid authors, reviewers, and editors in improving scientific papers. Strategies for responsible use of automated tools in peer review may include setting performance criteria for tools, transparently reporting tool performance and use, and training users to interpret reports.
DOCUMENT
Ruim 10% van de Nederlandse bevolking heeft chronische nierschade. Jaarlijks komen er zo’n 2.000 patiënten met nierfalen bij. Bij terminaal nierfalen is uiteindelijk nierfunctie vervangende therapie noodzakelijk (1, 2). Nierfalen en nierfunctievervangende therapie hebben grote invloed op de voedingstoestand van de patiënt wat leidt tot ondervoeding wat zich uit in verlies van spiermassa, spierkracht, verminderde zelfredzaamheid, verminderd fysiek functioneren, hogere mortaliteit, meer ziekenhuis opnames en een lagere kwaliteit van leven (3). Gezien deze associatie kan een interventie die het verlies van spiermassa kan voorkomen, grote impact hebben voor nierpatiënten. Echter is er nog geen informatie over de voedselinname van de Nederlandse hemodialysepatiënt. Dit belemmert de diëtetiek in het optimaal behandelen van hemodialysepatiënten. In samenwerking met het kennisnetwerk Diëtisten Nierziekten Nederland (DNN) en MKB hebben wij de volgende vragen gedefinieerd: 1) Wat is de huidige dagelijkse inname van macro- en micronutriënten van hemodialysepatiënten en 2) Bestaan er effectieve interventies op het gebeid van voeding en beweging om spiermassa verlies te voorkomen en/of te behandelen? Samenvattend bestaat dit voorstel uit de volgende activiteiten: Werkpakket 1: Landelijk multicenter studie naar de huidige inname van macro- en micronutriënten van hemodialysepatiënten, Werkpakket 2: Formeren van (inter)nationaal netwerk van professionals en wetenschappers die zich focussen op de rol van voeding en beweging bij nierziekten aangevuld met patiënten perspectief vanuit de patiëntenverenigingen, Werkpakket 3: Systematic review naar effectieve voedings- en beweeginterventies bij patiënten met nierfalen en Werkpakket 4: Het schrijven van een projectvoorstel dat de behoefte, rol en implementatie van eiwitrijke voeding en beweging onderzoekt op het behoud en/of verbeteren van spiermassa, fysiek functioneren en kwaliteit van leven van mensen met een nierziekte.
