Abstract Details

The peer review process is an essential component of scientific publishing. However, reviewing manuscripts is not a formal part of neurology training, resulting in variable review quality and fewer available reviewers.

To develop a mentored program for training residents and fellows to conduct high-quality peer review.

From 2015-2020, the Neurology® Resident & Fellow Section (RFS) piloted five successive cohorts of residents and fellows in a mentored peer reviewer program with senior fellows and junior faculty. Mentors and mentees were provided with iteratively refined, focused training resources on how to review a manuscript and evaluate a peer review.  Three cohorts with a total of 24 mentor/mentee pairs completed pre- and/or post-program surveys to evaluate their experience with research, publishing, and reviewing. Responses were recorded using a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Each mentor/mentee reviewed two manuscripts. 20 mentees completed the pre-program survey. The mean score for understanding the review process was 3.5, understanding the editorial process was 3.1, and confidence with independent review of scientific and non-scientific manuscripts was 2.8 and 2.85, respectively. Thematic analysis of 71 goals from 20 mentees identified five categories: learn about the review process (n=8), improve writing (n=7), career development (n=3), specific reviewer skills (n=38) and other (n=15). Within reviewing skills common goals included how to provide feedback to authors (n=12), general reviewing skills (n=10) and how to evaluate study design (n=5). Four mentor/mentee pairs completed the post-program survey. Mentees reported high satisfaction and improved understanding of the review process (4.25), while mentors enjoyed the program and would participate again (4.5).