‘‘ G


Getting involved in peer review is a great way of developing or having an opportunity to use transferable skills...


INSIGHT


Health Libraries Group The beginners guide to peer review – part II


ETTING invited to review a piece of writing can be the first time you really engage with the idea of peer review, what it is,


and whether you consider you’re best placed to review the work of others. You can read the first part of this series in Information Professional (June 2024), and CILIP members can read it on the CILIP app, or at https://tinyurl.com/3xpk8h6z. I emphasised the peer aspect of peer


review and highlighted that peer review is usually a team effort meaning that responsibility doesn’t lie solely on your shoulders to spot or advise on any problems.


What to expect when invited to write a review


Any invitation you received will typically include the title of the piece of writing and an abstract. Assuming this information piques your interest, what does accepting an invitation to peer review actually entail? When you agree to review some writing,


you’ll typically receive a full copy of the text, some guidance on what to look for when reviewing it, and an indication of when your comments would ideally be received. This is usually around three weeks. Often, you’ll also be offered a checklist of key questions about the information presented. For example, is the reporting concise? Is the presentation logical? Or is the bibliography complete and up to date? This checklist is used by the editorial team to gain an overview of the overall clarity, quality and scope of the writing alongside any confidential comments you share with the team.


Alongside the checklist, you’ll be invited to provide some narrative feedback to writers. This narrative is your opportunity to provide a constructive commentary on the writing, to ask for clarification or expansion of the text, and to highlight key materials or perspectives that are absent. Your aim is to support the authors in


September 2024


giving the best possible account of their work, so your feedback may be quite lengthy if you have notes or queries on each section of the writing. If you have any doubts about whether you’ve got the right balance a quick email exchange with the editorial team can be very reassuring. And, once you’re reasonably happy with your review, you cut and paste the text into the submission system along with a recommendation to accept, minor or major revisions, or reject. Again, there’s usually notes available on how each of these terms is being used. Remember, you’re only making a recommendation which will be read alongside the comments of a second reviewer, and discussed by the editorial team before a final decision is made.


Expressing an interest in reviewing As mentioned in the first part of this series, rather than wait to be invited, you can proactively register your areas of interest and possible topics to review with your journal of choice. Most journals use an electronic submission system and, selecting from a keyword list, this is where you can register your interests. Alternatively, you can contact the Assistant Editor or Editorial Office to ask how you can get involved in reviewing for their publication. And while you’re waiting to receive an invitation to review, practice your critical appraisal skills in local journal clubs, or asynchronous online journal clubs such as the quarterly https://hilj.club/, or sign up for some free training such as the Web of Science Academy’s on course on peer review.


How to evidence your involvement Getting involved in peer review is a great way of developing or having an opportunity to use transferable skills such as providing written feedback or working to externally set deadlines. One way to evidence your involvement is to register your contributions on services such as ORCiD Peer Review or a Web of Science Researcher Profile.


Dr Maria Grant, (MariaJGrantFCLIP@outlook.com, X @MariaJGrant) Editor-in-Chief of the CILIP Health Libraries Group publication the Health Information & Libraries Journal (https://shorturl. at/aswzQ), also a self-employed trainer spe- cialising in research and writing in the health and social care and library and information sectors (https://shorturl.at/crBS1).


Both services provide an authenticated way to track, verify, and showcase your peer review activity anonymously. For example, the number of reviews you’ve undertaken are recorded but not the specific writing you’ve reviewed. You’ll typically be offered an opportunity to opt into or out of registering your contribution as part of uploading your review.


Next time… In the final part of this series, a range of librarians share how they got involved with peer review and how they have benefitted from the process.


Acknowledgements


Thank you to Hong-Anh Nguyen and Paul Cannon of the CILIP Health Libraries Group CPD Co-Leads for their invaluable input in defining the potential scope and focus on this series. Also, for their constructive feedback, in the form informal peer review, on early drafts. IP


References Clarivate. (2024) Web of Science Academy. Available at: https://clarivate.com/web-of-science-academy/.


Clarivate. (2024) Web of Science researcher profiles. Available at: https://clarivate.com/products/scientific-and-academic- research/research-discovery-and-workflow-solutions/researcher-profiles/.


Grant MJ (2024) Are you peer review curious? Information Professional.


ORCID Inc. (2024) Peer reviews. Available at: https://support. orcid.org/hc/en-us/articles/360006971333-Peer-Reviews.


INFORMATION PROFESSIONAL 33


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56