More Evidence Peer Review is Broken
More than half of peer reviewers receive industry payments.
Two years ago, we discussed the lack of evidence supporting the idea that peer review improves the quality of scientific research.
Peer review is meant to guarantee the publication of high-quality research and enhance the quality of published manuscripts. The process should involve independent experts evaluating and assessing research for its quality and reliability.
However, a recent JAMA publication questions the integrity and independence of peer review. The research letter addresses the Payments by Drug and Medical Device Manufacturers to US Peer Reviewers of Major Medical Journals.
The authors identified peer reviewers for The BMJ, JAMA, The Lancet, and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) using each journal’s 2022 reviewer list. They then used a US Open payments database to identify whether reviewers had received industry payments.
What did they find?
Between 2020 and 2022, 1155/1962 peer reviewers (59%) received at least one industry payment. More than half (54%) accepted ge…
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Trust the Evidence to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.