Prodding Tardy Reviewers : A Randomized Comparison of Telephone, Fax, and e-mail.
Pitkin, Roy M. MD; Burmeister, Leon F. PhD
[Review] JAMA. PEER REVIEW CONGRESS IV http://www.jama.com. 287(21):2794-2795, June 5, 2002.

(Format: HTML, PDF)

Context: To compare telephone, fax, and e-mail methods of prodding tardy reviewers.

Methods: Randomized trial conducted January 1998 through June 1999 at the main editorial office of Obstetrics & Gynecology. Reviewers who had failed to file reviews by 28 days after being sent manuscripts (7 days after deadline) were sent identical messages in oral (telephone) or written (fax and e-mail) form inquiring as to the status of review, asking for its completion as soon as possible, and requesting it be sent by fax or e-mail.

Results: Of 378 reviewers, proportions returning reviews within 7 days were essentially identical: telephone, 85 (68%) of 125; fax, 86 (67%) of 129; and e-mail, 84 (67%) of 124 (P =.59). In the two thirds who responded, the mean time to return reviews did not differ among the 3 groups.

Conclusion: Contacting tardy reviewers resulted in a review being received within 7 days in about two thirds of cases, and it made no difference if the contact was made by telephone, fax, or e-mail.

JAMA.2002;287:2794-2795

Copyright 2002 by the American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use. American Medical Association, 515 N. State St, Chicago, IL 60610.