Skip navigation

Is peer review sufficient for journal CME?

Anne Taylor-Vaisey, my co-blogger, sent along this link to an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education, which is a fascinating piece. Titled, "Scholar Sends Sham Papers to Social-Work Journals

to Show Weakness of Peer Review," the article points out the potential problems of relying on peer review.

Back when I was editing an environmental chemistry magazine, I relied on an advisory panel for the technical correctness of what we published and, judging by the scathing letters we sometimes got refuting the science, they didn't always do a great job. But even I could have caught one of the more egregious errors cited in the article, the one where he got the math wrong. I'll never be an Einstein, but I do know how to subtract!

Anyway, read it soon because the link's only good for five days (unless you're a regular subscriber: then you can see it anytime here).

To comment on this post, click on "comments" below. To receive a weekly update, e-mail Sue.

Hide comments


  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.