Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Peer Review in Health Sciences.
  1. Richard Thomson
  1. Professor of Epidemology and Public Health, School of Health Sciences, Neweastle University, The Medical School, Neweastle upon Tyne NE2 4HH, UK

    Statistics from

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    F Godlee, T Jefferson (Pp 271; £30.00). London: BMJ Books, 1999. ISBN 0 7279 1181 3

    Discussing the merits or otherwise of peer review in the health sciences is very similar to discussing the merits or otherwise of the jury system in the legal process of the courts. Each is surprisingly lacking in evidence upon which to make clear decisions, but each is concerned with systems for judging or rating the evidence, each has a history—and almost certainly a future—of policy crafted by values and opinion. The strongest critics and the strongest defenders are often one and the same. Part of the problem may be that we expect too much of both systems, more than they can ever truly deliver. We therefore create an inevitable expectations/reality gap. One clear example …

    View Full Text