February’s meeting was an informal peer review session. Participants were encouraged to bring something they had written, which was then read for comment by another participant.
Keith Nockels from the Clinical Librarian Service facilitated this informal peer review by providing a checklist of things to look for, but participants did all the peer reviewing. It was good to see writers providing personalised and positive feedback to other writers.
We also talked about the ethics of peer reviewing, if you are reviewing for a journal. What to do if you suspect fraud or bad practice, and guarding against using information or insights from the paper you are reviewing, were two of the issues.
Some useful resources about peer review:
- Hall, G.M. (2013), How to write a paper, 5th ed. (the library has this book, which has a chapter on peer reviewing, as well as chapters on writing different types of article)
- Reporting guidelines – find them via Equator Network. This was the subject of the previous Writing Club – see elsewhere on this blog for details, or contact us.
- Sense about Science: Peer Review – the Nuts and Bolts
- COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
We also talked about language and style. Watch for another posting about that.
Watch for the next informal peer review session, something we plan to do again.