Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Peer review is integral to the ongoing publication of high quality research. In pursuit of this aim, reviewers are expected to provide constructive feedback that helps authors improve their manuscripts. All too often, however, peer reviewers fall into the trap of harsh criticism rather than critical evaluation. Common pitfalls include reviews that are overly negative or incredibly brief, give little acknowledgment of the strengths of the manuscript, and use an unfriendly or insulting tone

More information Original publication

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o2886

Type

Journal article

Journal

BMJ Open

Issue

BMJ 2022;379:o2886

Publisher

BMJ Publishing Group Ltd

Publication Date

29/11/2022

Addresses

Funded by the Three NIHR Research Schools Mental Health Programme (MHF027 and MHF018)