The role of correspondence sections in post-publication peer review: A bibliometric study of general and internal medicine journals

Letter writing assignment for exercise physiology students

Letters to the editor are an important part of democratic societies. In academic journals, letters serve as a form of postpublication review and thus permit continued discussion and debate of scientific ideas. However, letters and their importance are rarely taught to university students. Therefore, the aim of the present paper is to propose a lecture and an assignment that introduce the exercise physiology student to letters. The lecture includes an overview of the history of letters, the definition and purposes of letters, letter themes, examples of letters published in exercise physiology journals, and a search method for discovering letters. The student is then assigned a project comprised of two parts. Part 1 requires the student to independently discover a letter exchange in a scientific journal, including the original research article, the letter commenting on the article, and the reply to the letter. The student then writes a report that summarizes the exchange. The report includes an analysis of the letter's themes and the validity of the arguments made. Part 2 of the assignment requires the student to independently discover an article published in the past year that they believe requires comment. The student then writes a letter, commenting on the article. Students who write convincing letters can be encouraged to submit their letter to the journal. The assignment should help prepare the next generation of journal editors, reviewers, and readers for the task of preserving and participating in a practice that serves to refine knowledge.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Letters to the editor are a form of postpublication review and thus help to refine knowledge through discussion and debate, yet exercise physiology students are rarely introduced to letters in their formal education. Here, the author proposes a lecture and an assignment that the university educator can use to help students understand the importance of letters. In the assignment, the student, among other tasks, critiques an existing letter exchange and writes a letter for potential publication.

Post-publication critique at top-ranked journals across scientific disciplines: a cross-sectional assessment of policies and practice

Journals exert considerable control over letters, commentaries and online comments that criticize prior research (post-publication critique). We assessed policies (Study One) and practice (Study Two) related to post-publication critique at 15 top-ranked journals in each of 22 scientific disciplines (N = 330 journals). Two-hundred and seven (63%) journals accepted post-publication critique and often imposed limits on length (median 1000, interquartile range (IQR) 500-1200 words) and time-to-submit (median 12, IQR 4-26 weeks). The most restrictive limits were 175 words and two weeks; some policies imposed no limits. Of 2066 randomly sampled research articles published in 2018 by journals accepting post-publication critique, 39 (1.9%, 95% confidence interval [1.4, 2.6]) were linked to at least one post-publication critique (there were 58 post-publication critiques in total). Of the 58 post-publication critiques, 44 received an author reply, of which 41 asserted that original conclusions were unchanged. Clinical Medicine had the most active culture of post-publication critique: all journals accepted post-publication critique and published the most post-publication critique overall, but also imposed the strictest limits on length (median 400, IQR 400-550 words) and time-to-submit (median 4, IQR 4-6 weeks). Our findings suggest that top-ranked academic journals often pose serious barriers to the cultivation, documentation and dissemination of post-publication critique.

What do letters to the editor publish about randomized controlled trials? A cross-sectional study

Background

To identify published letters to the editor (LTE) written in response to randomized controlled trials (RCTs), determine the topics addressed in the letters, and to examine if these topics were affected by the characteristics and results of the RCTs.

Methods

Comparative cross-sectional study of a representative sample of RCTs from a set of high-impact medical journals (BMJ, Lancet, NEJM, JAMA, and Annals of Internal Medicine). RCTs and their published LTE were searched from these 5 journals in 2007. Data were collected on RCTs and their characteristics (author affiliation, funding source, intervention, and effect on the primary outcome) and the topics addressed in published LTE related to these RCTs. Analysis included chi-square and regression analysis (RCT characteristics) and thematic analysis (LTE topics).

Results

Of 334 identified RCTs, 175 trials had at least one LTE. Of these, 381 published LTE were identified. Most RCTs, tested drug interventions (68%), were funded by government (54%) or industry (33%), and described an intervention that had a positive impact on the primary outcome (62%). RCT authors were primarily affiliated with an academic centre (78%). Ninety percent of the 623 LTE topics concerned methodological issues regarding the analysis, intervention, and population in the RCT. There was a significant association between funding source and impact on outcomes (p = 0.002) or type of intervention tested (p = 0.001) in these trials. Clinical and “Other” LTE topics were more likely to be published in response to a government funded RCT (p = 0.005 and p = 0.033, respectively); no other comparisons were significant.

Conclusions

This study showed that most LTE are about methodological topics, but found little evidence to support that these topics are affected by the characteristics or results of the RCTs. The lack of association may be explained by editorial censorship as a small proportion of LTE that are submitted are actually published.