Peer review

About the ARI Group Peer Review process

Our Peer Review process (including Diagnostic Test Accuracy Reviews) is conducted according to the Cochrane Peer Review Policy.

Peer Review timeline

Peer Reviewer assessment and comment on drafts is invited within three weeks of receiving drafts. The ARI Group is always willing to negotiate timeline windows, but aims to conduct the process promptly.  

Peer Review roles

ARI editorial base team

  • Managing Editors manage the Peer Review process and are the contact point between Peer Reviewers and authors. Specific tasks are: identify Peer Reviewers and invite their participation; keep track of timelines; collate Peer Reviewers' comments and assessments by Consumer Reviewers; invite Contact Editors to assess and provide further comment; send collated comments to authors to invite response and amendment; check responses and amendments before sending on to the Contact Editor for further input.
  • Information specialist. Checks submitted drafts to ensure compliance with Cochrane searching and search-related reporting policies.

ARI Group Editors (external to the editorial base team)

The ARI Group Contact Editor provides guidance about draft readiness before Peer Review as required. The Contact Editor adds comments to the collated Peer Reviewer and Consumer comments that aim to clarify, harmonise and prioritise all feedback comments.

The ARI Group Statistics Editor assesses review methods and statistical analyses, provides guidance to authors and validates methods.

External Peer and Consumer Reviewers

The ARI Group aims to obtain assessments from:

  • at least one, but preferably two, Peer Reviewers who are clinical experts in the review topic.
  • at least one, but preferably two, Consumer Reviewers who have interest or experience in the review topic.

Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Review Peer Review

Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Review (DTAR) draft protocols, reviews, and review updates are also assessed by Peer Reviewers in a separate process managed by the DTAR editorial team.

Declarations of conflicts of interest by Peer Reviewers and Consumer Reviewers

All reviewers are requested to provide statements of conflicts of interest which are provided with collated reviewers' comments for authors. Conflicts of interest declarations of Cochrane editors and staff are available here.

Guidance for Peer Reviewers who suspect misconduct

Peer and Consumer Reviewers who have any concerns about draft manuscripts or the Peer Review process should contact the ARI Group Managing Editor to discuss their concerns. All drafts are checked for unacknowledged use of the work of others before entering the peer review process.

Acknowledgement of Peer Reviewers

We gratefully acknowledge the contributions of all peer and consumer reviewers. The following people have contributed to reviews and protocols published in 2020:

Clinical Reviewers:

Australia: Anne Chang, David Isaacs, Craig Mellis
Brazil: Márcia Alves Galvãom, Linjie Zhang
Canada: Anneliese Spinks
India: Rashmi Das, Kana Ram Jat, Sushil Kabra, Rakesh Lodha
New Zealand: Tim Kenealy
Nigeria: Olabisi Oduwole
UK: Nicolette Bishop, Christopher Cates, David Elliman, Simon Nadel, Knut Schroeder
USA: Mark Ebell, Leonard Krilov

Consumer Reviewers:

Australia: Janet Wale
Canada: Stephana Cherak, Anne Lyddiatt, Durhane Wong-Rieger
India: Vinutha Shetty, Lenny Vasanthan 
UK: U Hla Htay, Amanda Roberts
USA: Ann Fonfa, Dee Shneiderman, Theresa Wrangham

We also wish to acknowledge reviewers who have chosen to remain anonymous.