Peer Reviewed Papers Are Not the Gold Standard?

[Guide]

There are many published peer reviewed papers on rosacea and it is important enough to have this article mentioned in a post to be able to refer to it later, since this points out some of the negative aspects of those who rely on peer reviewed papers. An article, published in The Washington Post, states about the peer reviewed process that 'It’s too easy for bad actors to exploit the process and mislead the public.' [1]

"Peer review is supposed to safeguard the quality of scientific research. When a journal receives a manuscript, the editors ask three or more experts in the field for comments. The reviewers’ written assessments may force revisions in a paper or prompt the journal to reject the work altogether. The system, widely adopted by medical journals in the middle of the 20th century, undergirds scientific discourse around the world...The reputation of these journals rests in large part on vigorous peer review. But the process is opaque and fallible: Journals generally do not disclose who reviewed a study, what they found, how long it took or even when a manuscript was submitted...Critics have long worried that the safeguards are cracking, and have called on medical journals to operate with greater transparency." [2]

We will continue to add more articles as we find them. If you would care to volunteer for the RRDi and add your comment we would appreciate it. Find the reply to this topic button, post your comment, and all that is required is an email address to begin the process. If you prefer commenting about this article without registering an account with the RRDi you may refer to this article in your comment (providing a link to it would help those who may have difficulty finding it) and join the RRDi to post. Volunteers may waive the subscription fee. 

End Notes

[1] Why we shouldn’t take peer review as the ‘gold standard’, by Paul D. Thacker and Jon Tennant, August 1, 2019, The Washington Post

[2] The Pandemic Claims New Victims: Prestigious Medical Journals, Roni Caryn Rabin, The New York Times