Chapter

Dermatoethics

pp 221-225

Date:

Hiding Behind the Curtain: Anonomyous Versus Open Peer Review

  • Andrea L. SuárezAffiliated withDepartment of Dermatology, School of Medicine, Denver VA Medical Center, University of Colorado Denver
  • , Jeffrey D. BernhardAffiliated withUniversity of Massachusetts Medical School
  • , Robert P. DellavalleAffiliated withDepartment of Dermatology, School of Medicine, Denver VA Medical Center, University of Colorado DenverDepartment of Epidemiology, Colorado School of Public HealthDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Dermatology Service, Eastern Colorado Health Care System Email author 

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access

Abstract

For more than 50 years peer review has guided the decision-making process of editors regarding the merit of publishing scientific work. Peer reviews can be influenced by knowledge of the authors’ identities as well as anonymity of the referee. The value of the current peer review system apparently offsets areas of dissatisfaction that include: (a) reviewer bias as a result of knowing author identity, (b) unequal valuation of reviewer versus author anonymity, (c) resource expense for authors, reviewers, editors, and journals, and (d) inhibition of free communication. This chapter discusses the merits of hiding reviewer and author identity in the peer review process as well as the increasing importance of post publication review.