Peer review often elicits strong feelings among editors, authors, and reviewers. Many people have experienced the author and reviewer parts of the equation with both good and bad experiences. Flashback to when I was a newly minted Ph.D., I was thrilled with every request I received and diligently tried to provide useful reviews. However, I was often uncertain about what should go into a review and how to make it effective. During the pandemic, I received a ton of review requests as did many people I know. It was challenging to keep up with the workload and I had to turn down many reviews that I was qualified for because I just didn’t have the time. To address both these issues, Medical Care has launched a Peer Review Mentoring Program.
Medical Care’s Peer Review Mentoring Program matches qualified students and early-career researchers with experienced peer reviewers. Mentees complete the basic version of Peer Reviewer Training offered by Wolters Kluwer (publisher of Medical Care) and Editage and are then matched with experienced reviewers. Deputy Editors assign the mentees papers based on their interests and the availability of submitted manuscripts. After drafting their review, the mentee meets with the mentor to talk through the review. Mentees submit the final review to the editorial office. The goal of the program is to provide high-quality and timely reviews for manuscripts now and in years to come.
Progress
The initial program announcement was hugely successful. Over 150 individuals applied to be mentees from all across the U.S. and many different backgrounds. Potential mentees are requested to fill out a short form before taking the peer review course. Once the course is complete, mentees reach out to me to being the matching process. Mentees get a letter of completion, the opportunity to network with more established researchers, and improved reviewing skills. We are eagerly seeking mentees in health services and health economics research. We are also hoping to grow the number of mentees who are interested in machine learning and other techniques for big data. Please apply if you are interested in learning about peer review in these areas! 
Next, we compiled a list of excellent peer reviewers who had done a recent review for the journal. After reaching out to them directly, many signed up to be mentors in this program. So far, mentors have found the experience to be valuable and have enjoyed getting to know the mentees. They have also enjoyed being able to contribute to the peer review process without the added work of having to write the review themselves. We recognize mentors who are able to assist at least one mentee per year with a letter of thanks. For those who are able to do 3 of these reviews per year, we will additionally offer the title of Distinguished Mentor in recognition of their generous service to the field. If you are a reviewer and are interested in participating, please fill out the short inquiry here.
Next Steps
As we grow and refine the program, we hope to measure its impacts on time to review and review quality. We also hope to bring in even more mentees from different disciplinary and life backgrounds, to improve the quality and salience of reviews. I’m excited about the possibilities of the program. What are your favorite tips for peer reviewers? Let us know in the comments below.
Jess Williams