SCCM Reviewer Academy. Thank you for participating in this next installment of the SCCM Reviewer Academy, The Reviewer. Please note the relevant disclosures. The objectives of this module focus upon the reviewer themselves. After completion of this session, participants will understand common attributes of a peer reviewer, identify expectations of a peer reviewer, discuss how peer review can be used for professional development and academic promotion. Since the work of the reviewer stands as the most important aspect of this process, we aim to train each reviewer with clear expectations. Those expectations begin with an understanding of the common attributes of an informed and educated reviewer. The common attributes of a good peer reviewer include being knowledgeable about the manuscript content, being able to provide timely feedback, and being unbiased and ethically sound in the review. Additionally, the reviewer should provide objective, constructive feedback to enhance the quality of the paper. There are many expectations of a reviewer. First, when a reviewer is contacted for potential participation in manuscript review, they must determine if there is any conflict or potential conflict of interest in their participation. If there is a conflict or potential conflict, the reviewer must disclose this prior to accepting the invitation. Should a reviewer decline, it is helpful to explain the conflict and to suggest a suitable replacement reviewer. Reviewers should be knowledgeable of the journal review guidelines, respectfully and clearly communicate throughout the process, and be able to identify both manuscript strengths and weaknesses. Reviewers should account for grammatical issues in the manuscript, but the review process is not an editorial process. The reviewer is not expected, nor is it desired, to provide editorial rewrites. Lastly, the reviewer acts as an advisor to the editor-in-chief and the associate editor by providing robust feedback on the manuscript. While journals and editors benefit from peer review services, the reviewers also benefit through professional development. For example, reviewers develop skills to critically evaluate the scientific literature and serve as a gatekeeper of the research literature. They also have the opportunity to develop a deeper knowledge of the disease state, research topic, and of the scientific methods. Those who provide peer review services may have the opportunity to aid in future research idea generation, as well as write editorials or commentaries for the journal. Finally, experienced peer reviewers may be asked to serve on a journal editorial board. Peer reviewers may also be rewarded for their services by being included in the journal's annual list of peer reviewers or with complementary access to the journal for a specific period of time. Additionally, peer review can provide another mentoring relationship for both junior and experienced reviewers. Furthermore, some departments may consider review activities as part of academic promotion. As stated previously, some reviewers may become part of the journal's editorial board. Consistent, high-quality patterns of review are a good way to progress towards the editorial board. The value to the editorial board comes from the fact that excellent reviewers provide cohesive, concise, and comprehensive guidance to editorial staff in a timely manner. Furthermore, the reviewer is an expert, publishing in both the journal they are reviewing for and others. The editor-in-chief and or the associate editor determine which manuscripts are published with an accompanying editorial. Manuscripts benefit from an editorial when their content is innovative, may be potentially controversial, or is likely to have significant impact. Editorials provide perspective and enhance comprehension of the manuscript and are usually published in the same issue of the journal. Peer reviewers may offer to write an editorial or suggest a colleague based on their expertise. In conclusion, peer reviewers commit to providing respectful communication regarding a manuscript's strengths and opportunities for improvement, are knowledgeable experts for the journal topic area, can benefit from professional development, may progress to the editorial board, provide input for accompanying editorials.

SCCM Reviewer Academy

peer reviewing

attributes of a peer reviewer

benefits of peer review

manuscript strengths and weaknesses