Letters Section Editor: Robert M. Golub, MD, Senior Editor.
In Reply: We believe that the absence of a direct assessment and comparison of the quality of all submitted research abstracts is not a critical limitation of our study. Variations in overall submission abstract quality could have confounded our results if either the quality of categorized abstracts submitted was significantly different during blinded review than during open review or there were significant changes in the proportion of categorized abstracts submitted during each peer review period. However, because our sample consisted of large numbers of abstracts examined over a short study period, quality variations within categories of submitted abstracts during each peer review period are likely to be negligible. Therefore, for variation in abstract quality to explain our findings, there would need to be meaningful variations in the proportion of submitted abstracts among categories during each peer review period.
Ross JS, Krumholz HM. Abstract Acceptance and Blinded Peer Review—Reply. JAMA. 2006;296(10):1230–1231. doi:10.1001/jama.296.10.1230-c
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: