Peer reviewers are supposed to be experts in their fields, competent enough at least to spot methodological errors, wayward conclusions and implausible findings. But checking references? Apparently, not so much.
A journal about academic medicine has retracted a 2020 article because its reviewers and editors didn’t bother to confirm that the references said what the authors said they did — and because when pressed, the corresponding author couldn’t provide the underlying data for the paper.
The paper, “Medical students’ perception of their education and training to cope with future market trends,” appeared in March in Advances in Medical Education and Practice, a Dove Press title. The author was Mohamed Abdelrahman Mohamed Iesa, a physiologist at Umm Al-Qura University in Saudi Arabia.
The article presented the results of a survey of 500 medical students at 10 schools in the United Kingdom. It purported to find that:
Continue reading ‘An isolated incident’: Should reviewers check references?