{"title":"我们如何解决低质量系统综述的激增及其对期刊高退稿率的影响?","authors":"Marilina Santero, Samanta Díaz Menai","doi":"10.25100/cm.v55i4.6597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Journals have experienced a significant rise in submissions of systematic reviews and other types of reviews that often fall short of acceptable quality standards. These shortcomings typically stem from insufficient rigor in their methodology, reporting, or critical appraisal. As a result, these submissions are frequently rejected raising concerns about the standards authors are following when preparing such work. This growing trend of low-quality reviews not only places a burden on editorial teams but also poses a risk to the scientific community by potentially disseminating flawed or unreliable conclusions. Ensuring that articles maintain high standards is crucial for preserving the integrity of the scientific literature and facilitating evidence-based decision-making. In an effort to address this problem, this viewpoint editorial aims to offer concepts and recommendations on available tools for future authors to improve the quality of their reviews, as well as to guide readers and potential journal reviewers on how to critically interpret these articles.</p>","PeriodicalId":50667,"journal":{"name":"Colombia Medica","volume":"55 4","pages":"e4006597"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12087455/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How can we address the surge of low-quality systematic reviews and their impact on high journal rejection rates?\",\"authors\":\"Marilina Santero, Samanta Díaz Menai\",\"doi\":\"10.25100/cm.v55i4.6597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Journals have experienced a significant rise in submissions of systematic reviews and other types of reviews that often fall short of acceptable quality standards. These shortcomings typically stem from insufficient rigor in their methodology, reporting, or critical appraisal. As a result, these submissions are frequently rejected raising concerns about the standards authors are following when preparing such work. This growing trend of low-quality reviews not only places a burden on editorial teams but also poses a risk to the scientific community by potentially disseminating flawed or unreliable conclusions. Ensuring that articles maintain high standards is crucial for preserving the integrity of the scientific literature and facilitating evidence-based decision-making. In an effort to address this problem, this viewpoint editorial aims to offer concepts and recommendations on available tools for future authors to improve the quality of their reviews, as well as to guide readers and potential journal reviewers on how to critically interpret these articles.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50667,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Colombia Medica\",\"volume\":\"55 4\",\"pages\":\"e4006597\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12087455/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Colombia Medica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25100/cm.v55i4.6597\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Colombia Medica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25100/cm.v55i4.6597","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
How can we address the surge of low-quality systematic reviews and their impact on high journal rejection rates?
Journals have experienced a significant rise in submissions of systematic reviews and other types of reviews that often fall short of acceptable quality standards. These shortcomings typically stem from insufficient rigor in their methodology, reporting, or critical appraisal. As a result, these submissions are frequently rejected raising concerns about the standards authors are following when preparing such work. This growing trend of low-quality reviews not only places a burden on editorial teams but also poses a risk to the scientific community by potentially disseminating flawed or unreliable conclusions. Ensuring that articles maintain high standards is crucial for preserving the integrity of the scientific literature and facilitating evidence-based decision-making. In an effort to address this problem, this viewpoint editorial aims to offer concepts and recommendations on available tools for future authors to improve the quality of their reviews, as well as to guide readers and potential journal reviewers on how to critically interpret these articles.
期刊介绍:
Colombia Médica is an international peer-reviewed medical journal that will consider any original contribution that advances or illuminates medical science or practice, or that educates to the journal''s’ readers.The journal is owned by a non-profit organization, Universidad del Valle, and serves the scientific community strictly following the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) recommendations of policies on publication ethics policies for medical journals.
Colombia Médica publishes original research articles, viewpoints and reviews in all areas of medical science and clinical practice. However, Colombia Médica gives the highest priority to papers on general and internal medicine, public health and primary health care.