Category Archives: Education

How to Do a Peer Review: Part One

by Jose Rodriguez, MD, FAAFP, Meharry Medical College School of Medicine, Nashville, TN

As journal editors, we fundamentally believe in peer reviewing. Peer review helps make published papers higher quality. Objective experts and peers often see areas in a manuscript and research study that the authors and editors did not elucidate. Journals in general (and Family Medicine specifically) have a hard time finding peer reviewers. Doing a peer review takes time, is unpaid, and often feels like one more thing for already overwhelmed faculty. On behalf of the editorial team of Family Medicine, we are writing a series of blog posts about why we think you should sign up to be a peer reviewer (Family Medicine), how your expertise can contribute to the mission of the journal, and step-by-step instructions on how to construct a valuable peer review.

Why Was I Asked to Do This Review?
We often hear from early-career faculty that they don’t feel qualified to conduct peer reviews because they aren’t “experts.” Our Associate Editors aim to include a diversity of viewpoints in each manuscript. So, they may ask an expert to comment on the methodology or the statistics. But we also want input from our readers. Yes, you may not be a content area expert, but if you are a reader of the journal, your opinion is valuable. If you didn’t understand some of the paper, then other readers may also not understand. You should feel empowered to include comments to the editor about which aspects of the paper you feel qualified to comment on. I will often state, “I am not a statistician, but the numbers do not make sense to me.” If it doesn’t make sense to you, it may not make sense to others, so we want to know!

Getting Started
If you do not know where to start, go to the reviewer page on the journal’s website. There is a lot of material about how to do a peer review. Alternatively, you can ask a senior colleague or mentor for help. If you feel comfortable doing the review, then the first step is to read the paper. Most people recommend reading the paper through to the end the first time and not getting bogged down with comments or questions.

The first questions to ask yourself after you read the paper the first time are: 

1. Did this make sense?

2. Does it add to the field?

3. Does it matter?

4. Is it written well?

Often, we don’t notice if a paper is written well, but we do see if it is written in an unclear manner or if there are typos or grammatical errors. Those errors, while easily corrected, usually signal that the manuscript needs more work.

The Second Time Through  
After you have done a full read of the paper and answered some general questions to yourself, it is time to reread it. This time, when you read it, we want you to focus on all the details. We want reviewers to pay attention to the details of every section of the paper. The following two blogs will go section by section with descriptions of what to look for and how to provide feedback.

How to Organize Your Review
This is a matter of personal preference. Some reviewers organize their reviews by section. So, they start the review with comments on the title and continue with comments on the abstract, the introduction, the methods, the results, the discussion, the tables, the conclusion, and the references. Other reviewers prefer a more “free form” review, using bullet points or a numbered list to capture all the comments for each section. But, bottom line, we want reviewers to carefully assess all these sections of the paper. As editors, we must see in your review that you read the paper. A one-sentence review that is general, like “this was a great paper” or “this paper is not acceptable,” without comments on each section or other specific evaluative statements, is not helpful in the evaluation of a paper.

Tone and Goal of the Review
The overall goal of any peer review is to make the paper better. As such, we ask that you frame your feedback in a constructive manner and avoid disparaging comments. SS once had a reviewer say, “if the authors had only read the literature, they wouldn’t have made this mistake.” A better way of phrasing that same sentiment would be, “I suggest that the authors review these papers to get a different perspective on the subject.” These two phrases say essentially the same thing, but one is much more respectful. Remember, academic family medicine is a small community. Treat the authors as if they knew it was you writing the review, and keep your comments constructive and respectful.

The next two blogs will review how to evaluate specific sections of the paper in your review.

Writing With a Team

by Sarina Schrager, MD, MS,
Family Medicine Editor-in-Chief

Writing for publication is hard work, especially if you are doing it alone. I find that having a team to write papers with makes the experience easier and more engaging. But, in order to make the process move smoothly, it makes sense to spend a little bit of time at the outset to set some ground rules.

  • Delegation of responsibilities—There are a lot of details to address when writing a paper and I find that is pays off at the end to be clear about who is going to do what at the beginning.  My colleagues and I divide tasks, including being in charge of the reference manager, finding author instructions for potential journals, and delegating one person to be the “corresponding author”. The designated corresponding author will be responsible for sending calendar invites, Zoom meeting information, and reminders throughout the process.
  • Authorship guidelines—You want to avoid any misunderstandings about author order or even who is included in the author list. There are myriad ways to decide who will be the first author and the senior author. It is helpful to talk about this order at the beginning. There may also be decisions about who is going to be an author vs being acknowledged at the end of the paper. I have had situations where one of the co-authors ended up doing much more work than the person who was designated as the first author and the group had a conversation about reordering author lists.
  • Outline of paper—Before starting to write, the group should sit down and develop an outline of what needs to be covered. During this process, different authors may volunteer (or be assigned) different sections. You may elect to use a Google Doc or have people write their sections in Microsoft Word to be forwarded to one designated person to integrate each section into the whole document.
  • References—You may also want to decide how to designate references at this point. Should authors put citations into a comment?  Or at the end?  It is helpful to be clear about this at the beginning. Some people may want to number their references, but this makes integration more challenging, so I usually recommend writing the author’s name and a date in parentheses and just adding the citation somewhere in the document.   It is also helpful to decide at the beginning how you are going to manage references. It can be tricky to integrate several different reference lists from different (or even the same) reference managers. One way to manage this aspect of your paper is to assign someone at the beginning to be in charge of references and have each author forward citations to that person.
  • Deadlines—One thing I love about writing in a group is that everyone is accountable to each other. Unless you are planning to submit to a special issue with a rigid time frame , writing a paper comes with artificial deadlines. But, that said, setting firm deadlines and scheduling regular meetings can keep a project moving forward.
  • Editing—Once each author has written their first draft and the sections have been assembled into one unique document, one author may take the lead in making the paper sound like it has one voice. People write differently and it can be distracting to read a paper that is obviously written by different people. Each author will then want to edit for content and readability using track changes. Ultimately, the corresponding author will accept all track changes and finalize the paper.
  • Postwriting tasks—After you are finished writing the final draft of your paper, someone needs to take the lead and submit the paper to the desired journal. This process, even after reading the author instructions carefully, can take a couple of hours. The corresponding author (often the first author but sometimes the senior author or one of the other contributing authors) will need to upload information about each author, designate suggested reviewers (for some journals), and write a cover letter among other tasks.  Also, it is a great idea to discuss who will take the lead in revising the paper if you get a revision request from the journal and who will be responsible for resubmitting to a different journal if your paper is rejected.
  • Opportunities for mentoring—Writing in a team is an excellent way for more experienced authors to provide support and mentoring to more junior authors. By using clear communication and empowering junior faculty to take ownership of the writing process, mentors can role model a streamlined and effective way to write for publication.

See our recent FM Focus on this topic, “Team Writing Etiquette in Verse”  Team Writing Etiquette in VERSE

2024 STFM Conference Feedback Insights: A Message From Your 2025 STFM Conference on Practice & Quality Improvement Steering Committee

We wish to thank everyone who provided feedback on our 2024 STFM Conference on Practice & Quality Improvement. We carefully review all feedback to make adjustments and changes for future conferences. In the spirit of transparency, we would like to share some additional information with you about conference planning and respond to some of the reoccurring comments from you.

Why aren’t there more meals/snacks/refreshments available throughout the meeting day?

We do make every effort to provide meals/snacks/refreshments for conference attendees to enjoy and would love to be able to offer these items in unlimited amounts all day long. However, it is not financially possible without significantly raising the conference registration. Banquet pricing is much higher than what you would pay for the same items for household use. To give you some perspective, here is the pricing of a few items for a conference:

  • Gallon of Coffee/Tea: $150
  • Soda: $8 each
  • Continental Breakfast: $60
  • Granola bar: $7 each
  • Boxed lunch: $67

We also list all provided meals (including a list of the menu items) and refreshment breaks in the daily conference schedule so attendees know what to expect and can plan accordingly.

Where does my conference registration fee go?

The majority of revenue received from conference registration fees are used to pay the expenses of running a conference food and beverage, audio/video, conference app, and plenary speaker fees. STFM also relies on net revenue from conferences to support other missions of the organization. STFM has a $6 million operating budget, and revenue from membership brings in about $1.5 million. That means STFM needs to make up the difference in other non-dues revenue generating activities like conferences, journal advertising, subscription-based services to pay for other important expenses and initiatives like staff salaries, rent, IT infrastructure, advocacy efforts, our journals, and other key programs that don’t have a charge.

How does STFM choose conference locations?

Conference locations are booked many years in advance. Our venue options are limited due to conference size and the large amount of meeting space we require. Our STFM staff work hard to remain educated about properties around the country that bring the best value for the cost, and we negotiate the best contracts possible with hotels, including room rates, reduced food and beverage prices, complimentary meeting room space, and more. Our attendees travel from across the country; for this reason, STFM rotates location of the conference between central, east coast, and west coast

The conference app was difficult to use and had many technical issues.

In 2025, STFM will be introducing a new conference mobile app. The new app will offer new features that will improve user experience. The app will also offer attendees many ways to connect/network with each other within the app.   

Thank you again for attending the STFM Conference on Practice & Quality Improvement, continuing to complete your conference evaluations, and providing this valuable feedback. If you have any questions and comments, please reach out to STFM’s Director of Conferences Melissa Abuel, CMP, at mabuel@stfm.org