7 Conclusions
277. Peer review in scholarly
publishing, in one form or another, is crucial to the reputation
and reliability of scientific research. Pre-publication peer review
has evolved in a piecemeal and haphazard way to meet the needs
of individual scientific communities. The process, as used by
most traditional journals prior to publication, is not perfect,
and it is clear that considerable differences in quality exist.
However, despite the many criticisms and the little solid evidence
on its efficacy, editorial peer review is considered by many as
important and not something that can be dispensed with.
278. In order for current peer-review
practices to be optimised and innovative approaches introduced,
publishers, research funders and the users of research outputs
(such as industry and government) must work together. There is
much that can be done to improve the quality of pre-publication
peer review across the board and to better equip the key players
to carry out their roles. We note that new innovations in pre-publication
review are being introduced that have the potential to accelerate
the pace of research communication and avoid duplication of effort
by the research community, with the consequent drain on resources.
Publishers can learn much from one another and should share best
practice where possible—particularly in relation to the
ways in which data are managed and in terms of promoting publication
ethics and research integrity. It is clear that breaches in the
latter damage both the scientific record and public confidence
in science.
279. The publication of peer-reviewed
articles is not only important in terms of maintaining a robust
scientific record, it also has an impact on the careers of researchers
and the reputations of research institutions. We have been assured
by research funders that they do not use journal Impact Factor
as a proxy measure for the quality of research or of individual
articles. However, representatives of research institutions have
suggested that publication in a high-impact journal is still an
important consideration when assessing individuals for career
progression. We consider that research institutions should be
cautious about this approach, because as we have previously noted,
there is no substitute for reading the article itself in assessing
the worth of a piece of research.
280. While pre-publication peer
review continues to play an important role, the growth of post-publication
peer review and commentary represents an enormous opportunity
for experimentation with new media and social networking tools.
Online communications allow the widespread sharing of links to
articles, ensuring that interesting research is spread across
the world, facilitating rapid commentary and review by the global
audience. They also have a valuable role to play in alerting the
community to deficiencies and problems with published work. We
encourage the prudent use of online tools for post-publication
review and commentary as a means of supplementing pre-publication
review.
|
