Resumen

ROBAINA CASTELLANOS, Gerardo Rogelio  y  SEMPER GONZALEZ, Abel Iván. Ethics of peer reviewing in scientific publications. Rev.Med.Electrón. [online]. 2019, vol.41, n.6, pp. 1533-1549.  Epub 31-Dic-2019. ISSN 1684-1824.

Peer reviews guarantee published materials be as valid and reliable as it be possible. Recognize reviewers’ work importance on scientific medical publication as well as the ethics issues to be accomplished during their performance. Development: Peer reviews could be single blind, double blind or open, each one with its advantages and disadvantages. During scientific research results publications, peer reviewer biases could be occurred. Some peer reviewer biases are related to ethical mistakes: no fulfillment of time limits, superficial evaluations, offense languages against editors or authors, at will cognitive cronyism and “ego bias”, among others. Nevertheless, measures’ implementation to minimize biases related to ethical mistakes is possible. The reviewers’ work is suitable to be recognized, taking into account it is done almost all the times on free time, without financial compensation and by researchers with recognized prestige. In the present word, even when this work has been threat by predatory journals spreads, some intent to do it justice and promotion are highlight, as do the website Publons. Multiple factors, contradictory sometime, are involved in the reviewers’ work: interests, duties, rights; but all of them should be pondering over the base of a solid ethic education and behavior.

Palabras clave : Peer review; scientific research; ethics; publication ethics; integrity; scientific misconduct; open science.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )