Ethical concerns of nursing reviewers

An international survey

Marion Broome, Molly C. Dougherty, Margaret C. Freda, Margaret H. Kearney, Judith Baggs

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    12 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Editors of scientific literature rely heavily on peer reviewers to evaluate the integrity of research conduct and validity of findings in manuscript submissions. The purpose of this study was to describe the ethical concerns of reviewers of nursing journals. This descriptive cross-sectional study was an anonymous online survey. The findings reported here were part of a larger investigation of experiences of reviewers. Fifty-two editors of nursing journals (six outside the USA) agreed to invite their review panels to participate. A 69-item forced-choice and open-ended survey developed by the authors based on the literature was pilot tested with 18 reviewers before being entered into SurveyMonkeyTM. A total of 1675 reviewers responded with useable surveys. Six questions elicited responses about ethical issues, such as conflict of interest, protection of human research participants, plagiarism, duplicate publication, misrepresentation of data and 'other'. The reviewers indicated whether they had experienced such a concern and notified the editor, and how satisfied they were with the outcome. They provided specific examples. Approximately 20% of the reviewers had experienced various ethical dilemmas. Although the majority reported their concerns to the editor, not all did so, and not all were satisfied with the outcomes. The most commonly reported concern perceived was inadequate protection of human participants. The least common was plagiarism, but this was most often reported to the editor and least often led to a satisfactory outcome. Qualitative responses at the end of the survey indicate this lack of satisfaction was most commonly related to feedback provided on resolution by the editor. The findings from this study suggest several areas that editors should note, including follow up with reviewers when they identify ethical concerns about a manuscript.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)741-748
    Number of pages8
    JournalNursing Ethics
    Volume17
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Nov 2010

    Fingerprint

    Nursing
    Plagiarism
    Manuscripts
    Duplicate Publication
    Literature
    Conflict of Interest
    Research
    Ethics
    Cross-Sectional Studies
    Surveys and Questionnaires

    Keywords

    • ethical concerns
    • nursing journals
    • online survey
    • peer reviewers

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Issues, ethics and legal aspects

    Cite this

    Broome, M., Dougherty, M. C., Freda, M. C., Kearney, M. H., & Baggs, J. (2010). Ethical concerns of nursing reviewers: An international survey. Nursing Ethics, 17(6), 741-748. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733010379177

    Ethical concerns of nursing reviewers : An international survey. / Broome, Marion; Dougherty, Molly C.; Freda, Margaret C.; Kearney, Margaret H.; Baggs, Judith.

    In: Nursing Ethics, Vol. 17, No. 6, 11.2010, p. 741-748.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Broome, M, Dougherty, MC, Freda, MC, Kearney, MH & Baggs, J 2010, 'Ethical concerns of nursing reviewers: An international survey', Nursing Ethics, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 741-748. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733010379177
    Broome, Marion ; Dougherty, Molly C. ; Freda, Margaret C. ; Kearney, Margaret H. ; Baggs, Judith. / Ethical concerns of nursing reviewers : An international survey. In: Nursing Ethics. 2010 ; Vol. 17, No. 6. pp. 741-748.
    @article{ff28a97a9859470eb6964c8680c68da9,
    title = "Ethical concerns of nursing reviewers: An international survey",
    abstract = "Editors of scientific literature rely heavily on peer reviewers to evaluate the integrity of research conduct and validity of findings in manuscript submissions. The purpose of this study was to describe the ethical concerns of reviewers of nursing journals. This descriptive cross-sectional study was an anonymous online survey. The findings reported here were part of a larger investigation of experiences of reviewers. Fifty-two editors of nursing journals (six outside the USA) agreed to invite their review panels to participate. A 69-item forced-choice and open-ended survey developed by the authors based on the literature was pilot tested with 18 reviewers before being entered into SurveyMonkeyTM. A total of 1675 reviewers responded with useable surveys. Six questions elicited responses about ethical issues, such as conflict of interest, protection of human research participants, plagiarism, duplicate publication, misrepresentation of data and 'other'. The reviewers indicated whether they had experienced such a concern and notified the editor, and how satisfied they were with the outcome. They provided specific examples. Approximately 20{\%} of the reviewers had experienced various ethical dilemmas. Although the majority reported their concerns to the editor, not all did so, and not all were satisfied with the outcomes. The most commonly reported concern perceived was inadequate protection of human participants. The least common was plagiarism, but this was most often reported to the editor and least often led to a satisfactory outcome. Qualitative responses at the end of the survey indicate this lack of satisfaction was most commonly related to feedback provided on resolution by the editor. The findings from this study suggest several areas that editors should note, including follow up with reviewers when they identify ethical concerns about a manuscript.",
    keywords = "ethical concerns, nursing journals, online survey, peer reviewers",
    author = "Marion Broome and Dougherty, {Molly C.} and Freda, {Margaret C.} and Kearney, {Margaret H.} and Judith Baggs",
    year = "2010",
    month = "11",
    doi = "10.1177/0969733010379177",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "17",
    pages = "741--748",
    journal = "Nursing Ethics",
    issn = "0969-7330",
    publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
    number = "6",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Ethical concerns of nursing reviewers

    T2 - An international survey

    AU - Broome, Marion

    AU - Dougherty, Molly C.

    AU - Freda, Margaret C.

    AU - Kearney, Margaret H.

    AU - Baggs, Judith

    PY - 2010/11

    Y1 - 2010/11

    N2 - Editors of scientific literature rely heavily on peer reviewers to evaluate the integrity of research conduct and validity of findings in manuscript submissions. The purpose of this study was to describe the ethical concerns of reviewers of nursing journals. This descriptive cross-sectional study was an anonymous online survey. The findings reported here were part of a larger investigation of experiences of reviewers. Fifty-two editors of nursing journals (six outside the USA) agreed to invite their review panels to participate. A 69-item forced-choice and open-ended survey developed by the authors based on the literature was pilot tested with 18 reviewers before being entered into SurveyMonkeyTM. A total of 1675 reviewers responded with useable surveys. Six questions elicited responses about ethical issues, such as conflict of interest, protection of human research participants, plagiarism, duplicate publication, misrepresentation of data and 'other'. The reviewers indicated whether they had experienced such a concern and notified the editor, and how satisfied they were with the outcome. They provided specific examples. Approximately 20% of the reviewers had experienced various ethical dilemmas. Although the majority reported their concerns to the editor, not all did so, and not all were satisfied with the outcomes. The most commonly reported concern perceived was inadequate protection of human participants. The least common was plagiarism, but this was most often reported to the editor and least often led to a satisfactory outcome. Qualitative responses at the end of the survey indicate this lack of satisfaction was most commonly related to feedback provided on resolution by the editor. The findings from this study suggest several areas that editors should note, including follow up with reviewers when they identify ethical concerns about a manuscript.

    AB - Editors of scientific literature rely heavily on peer reviewers to evaluate the integrity of research conduct and validity of findings in manuscript submissions. The purpose of this study was to describe the ethical concerns of reviewers of nursing journals. This descriptive cross-sectional study was an anonymous online survey. The findings reported here were part of a larger investigation of experiences of reviewers. Fifty-two editors of nursing journals (six outside the USA) agreed to invite their review panels to participate. A 69-item forced-choice and open-ended survey developed by the authors based on the literature was pilot tested with 18 reviewers before being entered into SurveyMonkeyTM. A total of 1675 reviewers responded with useable surveys. Six questions elicited responses about ethical issues, such as conflict of interest, protection of human research participants, plagiarism, duplicate publication, misrepresentation of data and 'other'. The reviewers indicated whether they had experienced such a concern and notified the editor, and how satisfied they were with the outcome. They provided specific examples. Approximately 20% of the reviewers had experienced various ethical dilemmas. Although the majority reported their concerns to the editor, not all did so, and not all were satisfied with the outcomes. The most commonly reported concern perceived was inadequate protection of human participants. The least common was plagiarism, but this was most often reported to the editor and least often led to a satisfactory outcome. Qualitative responses at the end of the survey indicate this lack of satisfaction was most commonly related to feedback provided on resolution by the editor. The findings from this study suggest several areas that editors should note, including follow up with reviewers when they identify ethical concerns about a manuscript.

    KW - ethical concerns

    KW - nursing journals

    KW - online survey

    KW - peer reviewers

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78649614762&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78649614762&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1177/0969733010379177

    DO - 10.1177/0969733010379177

    M3 - Article

    VL - 17

    SP - 741

    EP - 748

    JO - Nursing Ethics

    JF - Nursing Ethics

    SN - 0969-7330

    IS - 6

    ER -