Decision making processes underlying avoidance of mandatory child vaccination in Croatia - a qualitative study.

Despite extensive research evidencing child vaccination is safe and effective, we are witnessing a trend of increasing vaccine hesitancy which is listed among the top ten global health threats. Although some countries incorporate mandatory vaccination programs, no particularly efficient strategies for addressing vaccine avoidance have so far been identified. Within this study we investigated perceptions and reasoning of vaccine hesitant parents from Croatia where child vaccination is mandatory. The aims were to reveal different strategies by which they avoid mandatory vaccination schedules and hypothetical situations in which they would reconsider vaccinating, as well as to identify features of related decision-making. We conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with vaccine hesitant parents and analyzed the data using the framework of thematic analyses. The identified themes were related to the parents' decision-making process, reflection as well as justification of their decision, avoidance behavior of mandatory vaccination schedules and related consequences, dealing with outcomes of the decision and reconsidering vaccinating. The results support and extend previous findings regarding vaccine reasoning, linking hesitancy with the experientially intuitive thinking style and social intuitionist model of moral reasoning. The findings provide important insights into vaccination avoidance and potential for reconsideration, as well as dealing with related risks. Furthermore, we offer a general framework as well as practical guidelines that may help the development of strategies aimed at increasing vaccination rates.

Cognitive levels in testing knowledge in evidence-based medicine: a cross sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge assessment in evidence-based medicine (EBM) is usually performed by the measurement of memorised facts, understanding of EBM concepts and application of learned knowledge in familiar situations, all of which are considered lower-level educational objectives. The aim of this study was to assess EBM knowledge both on higher and lower cognitive levels across EBM topics. METHODS: In order to assess knowledge on different EBM topics across learning levels, we created a knowledge test (Six Progressive Levels in Testing - SPLIT instrument), which consists of 36 multiple choice items and measures knowledge in EBM at six cognitive levels (Remembering, Understanding, Applying, Analysing, Evaluating and Creating) and addresses six EBM topics (Evidence-based practice, Internal validity, Clinical importance, Study design, Sources of evidence, Diagnostic studies). Three independent assessors defined the minimum passing score (MPS) for the overall test, based on the first-year course content and educational objectives. The instrument was assessed in a sample of first- (n = 119) and third-year medical students (n = 70) and EBM experts (n = 14). RESULTS: The MPS was 16 correct answers out of total 36 questions, and was achieved by 21 out of 119 first-year students, 14 out of 70 third-year students and 9 out of 14 EBM experts (χ2 = 13.3; P < 0.001, with significantly higher proportion of experts passing compared to students). Although experts had the highest scores overall, none of the groups outperformed others on individual cognitive levels, but the experts outperformed students in EBM topics of Study design and Sources of evidence (P = 0.002 and 0.004, respectively, Kruskal-Wallis test). First- and third-year students performed better on specific course topics taught in that study year (Diagnostic studies and Clinical relevance, respectively). CONCLUSION: EBM knowledge of students and experts differ according to the specificities of their education/expertise, but neither group had excellent knowledge in all areas. It may be difficult to develop a knowledge test that includes different EBM topics at different cognitive levels to follow the development of specific and general aspects of EBM knowledge.

Perception of Organizational Ethical Climate by University Staff and Students in Medicine and Humanities: A Cross Sectional Study.

We assessed students' and employees' perception of ethical climate at a university school of medicine compared to that of social sciences and humanities, as well as temporal changes in the employees' perception of ethical climate. We also explored potential predictors of ethical climate, including moral foundations. This cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted at the University of Split School of Medicine and the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, in Croatia, from April to September 2019. We used 36-item Ethical Climate Questionnaire and 22-item Moral Foundation Questionnaire to survey employees, senior and doctoral students. We collected responses using ballot boxes as well as online survey. We collected 449 complete responses (response rate 36.8%). The dominant ethical climates at two schools were "Company rules and procedures" and "Laws and professional codes". We compared our results with a study conducted in 2012 and found that the perception of ethical climate had not changed dramatically in last 8 years. Ethical climate, or shared social and work-related behaviours, does not seem to change in these institutions even when students and staff are included with faculty in surveys. We provide further discussion of why this seems to be the case.

A scoping review on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals.

BACKGROUND: Although peer reviewers play a key role in the manuscript review process, their roles and tasks are poorly defined. Clarity around this issue is important as it may influence the quality of peer reviewer reports. This scoping review explored the roles and tasks of peer reviewers of biomedical journals. METHODS: Comprehensive literature searches were conducted in Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Educational Resources Information Center, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science from inception up to May 2017. There were no date and language restrictions. We also searched for grey literature. Studies with statements mentioning roles, tasks and competencies pertaining to the role of peer reviewers in biomedical journals were eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers independently performed study screening and selection. Relevant statements were extracted, collated and classified into themes. RESULTS: After screening 2763 citations and 600 full-text papers, 209 articles and 13 grey literature sources were included. A total of 1426 statements related to roles were extracted, resulting in 76 unique statements. These were grouped into 13 emergent themes: proficient experts in their field (3 items), dutiful/altruistic towards scientific community (7 items), familiar with journal (2 items), unbiased and ethical professionals (18 items), self-critical professionals (4 items), reliable professionals (7 items), skilled critics (15 items), respectful communicators (6 items), gatekeepers (2 items), educators (2 items), advocates for author/editor/reader (3 items) and advisors to editors (2 items). Roles that do not fall within the remit of peer reviewers were also identified (5 items). We also extracted 2026 statements related to peer reviewers' tasks, resulting in 73 unique statements. These were grouped under six themes: organisation and approach to reviewing (10 items), make general comments (10 items), assess and address content for each section of the manuscript (36 items), address ethical aspects (5 items), assess manuscript presentation (8 items) and provide recommendations (4 items). CONCLUSIONS: Peer reviewers are expected to perform a large number of roles and tasks for biomedical journals. These warrant further discussion and clarification in order not to overburden these key actors.

Languages for different health information readers: multitrait-multimethod content analysis of Cochrane systematic reviews textual summary formats.

BACKGROUND: Although subjective expressions and linguistic fluency have been shown as important factors in processing and interpreting textual facts, analyses of these traits in textual health information for different audiences are lacking. We analyzed the readability and linguistic psychological and emotional characteristics of different textual summary formats of Cochrane systematic reviews. METHODS: We performed a multitrait-multimethod cross-sectional study of Press releases available at Cochrane web site (n = 162) and corresponding Scientific abstracts (n = 158), Cochrane Clinical Answers (n = 35) and Plain language summaries in English (n = 156), French (n = 101), German (n = 41) and Croatian (n = 156). We used SMOG index to assess text readability of all text formats, and natural language processing tools (IBM Watson Tone Analyzer, Stanford NLP Sentiment Analysis and Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count) to examine the affective states and subjective information in texts of Scientific abstracts, Plain language summaries and Press releases. RESULTS: All text formats had low readability, with SMOG index ranging from a median of 15.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) 15.3-15.9) for Scientific abstracts to 14.7 (95% CI 14.4-15.0) for Plain language summaries. In all text formats, "Sadness" was the most dominantly perceived emotional tone and the style of writing was perceived as "Analytical" and "Tentative". At the psychological level, all text formats exhibited the predominant "Openness" tone, and Press releases scored higher on the scales of "Conscientiousness", "Agreeableness" and "Emotional range". Press releases had significantly higher scores than Scientific abstracts and Plain language summaries on the dimensions of "Clout", and "Emotional tone". CONCLUSIONS: Although the readability of Plain language summaries was higher than that of text formats targeting more expert audiences, the required literacy was much higher than the recommended US 6th grade level. The language of Press releases was generally more engaging than that of Scientific abstracts and Plain language summaries, which are written by the authors of systematic reviews. Preparation of textual summaries about health evidence for different audiences should take into account readers' subjective experiences to encourage cognitive processing and reaction to the provided information.

Tools used to assess the quality of peer review reports: a methodological systematic review.

BACKGROUND: A strong need exists for a validated tool that clearly defines peer review report quality in biomedical research, as it will allow evaluating interventions aimed at improving the peer review process in well-performed trials. We aim to identify and describe existing tools for assessing the quality of peer review reports in biomedical research. METHODS: We conducted a methodological systematic review by searching PubMed, EMBASE (via Ovid) and The Cochrane Methodology Register (via The Cochrane Library) as well as Google® for all reports in English describing a tool for assessing the quality of a peer review report in biomedical research. Data extraction was performed in duplicate using a standardized data extraction form. We extracted information on the structure, development and validation of each tool. We also identified quality components across tools using a systematic multi-step approach and we investigated quality domain similarities among tools by performing hierarchical, complete-linkage clustering analysis. RESULTS: We identified a total number of 24 tools: 23 scales and 1 checklist. Six tools consisted of a single item and 18 had several items ranging from 4 to 26. None of the tools reported a definition of 'quality'. Only 1 tool described the scale development and 10 provided measures of validity and reliability. Five tools were used as an outcome in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Moreover, we classified the quality components of the 18 tools with more than one item into 9 main quality domains and 11 subdomains. The tools contained from two to seven quality domains. Some domains and subdomains were considered in most tools such as the detailed/thorough (11/18) nature of reviewer's comments. Others were rarely considered, such as whether or not the reviewer made comments on the statistical methods (1/18). CONCLUSION: Several tools are available to assess the quality of peer review reports; however, the development and validation process is questionable and the concepts evaluated by these tools vary widely. The results from this study and from further investigations will inform the development of a new tool for assessing the quality of peer review reports in biomedical research.

Sport injuries in international masters rowers: a cross-sectional study.

AIM: To estimate the frequency and localization of acute (traumatic) and chronic (overuse) injuries in a population of masters rowers with respect to their age subgroups and assess the association between injury occurrence and different training modalities, rowing experience, previous competition level, and current rowing practice. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 743 masters rowers who participated in the 34th International Federation of Rowing Associations (Fédération Internationale des Sociétés d'Aviron, FISA) World Rowing Masters Regatta held in Zagreb, September 2-9, 2007. A rowing-specific questionnaire was used, followed by an interview about the injuries sustained during the 12-month period before the competition. RESULTS: The mean injury rate per year was 0.48 injuries/masters rower (2.25 injuries/1000 training sessions/rower). The majority of injuries were chronic injuries (the ratio of acute to chronic injuries was 1:1.7), and did not lead to the loss of training/competition time. Of all acute injuries, 49.6% were acquired during rowing-specific training, 43.7% during cross-training, and 6.7% in the gym. The most commonly affected region was the low back (32.6%), followed by the knee (14.2%), shoulder/upper arm, and elbow (10.6% each). CONCLUSION: International masters rowers sustained predominantly chronic injuries of low severity, and the most commonly injured region was the low back. The mean injury rate per rower per year was lower than the rates previously reported for juniors and seniors.

Acute and chronic injuries among senior international rowers: a cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to define the types of musculoskeletal injuries present in senior international rowers. According to the literature, no such study has been performed in this group. METHODS: Injury data were obtained from a total of 634 rowers (33 % female, 67 % male) who completed a 12-month retrospective questionnaire on injury incidence while participating in the Senior World Rowing Championships in Munich, Germany, in 2007. RESULTS: The mean injury rate per one year was 0.92 injuries per rower (1.75 injuries per 1,000 training sessions per rower). The vast majority of self-reported injuries were chronic injuries (acute vs chronic ratio was 1:2.63), and the majority of reported injuries did not result in loss of time from training or competition. Of all acute injuries, 58.1 % were sustained during rowing-specific training, with 20.6 % injuries sustained in the gym and 21.3 % during cross-training. The most common site of injury was the low back followed by the knee and the chest/thoracic spine. Senior open weight rowers who sustained chronic injuries achieved significantly better final ranking at the 2007 Senior World Rowing Championships compared to the same group of rowers who did not sustain any injury. CONCLUSION: Senior international rowers participating in World Rowing Championships sustained predominantly chronic (overuse) injuries during the rowing season studied. Those were mainly low severity injuries, with the low back being the most frequently injured site. This study may will help in prevention and early diagnosis of eventual injuries in top-level rowers.

Five-step authorship framework to improve transparency in disclosing contributors to industry-sponsored clinical trial publications.

Authorship guidelines have established criteria to guide author selection based on significance of contribution and helped to define associated responsibilities and accountabilities for the published findings. However, low awareness, variable interpretation, and inconsistent application of these guidelines can lead to confusion and a lack of transparency when recognizing those who merit authorship. This article describes a research project led by the Medical Publishing Insights and Practices (MPIP) Initiative to identify current challenges when determining authorship for industry-sponsored clinical trials and develop an improved approach to facilitate decision-making when recognizing authors from related publications. A total of 498 clinical investigators, journal editors, publication professionals and medical writers were surveyed to understand better how they would adjudicate challenging, real-world authorship case scenarios, determine the perceived frequency of each scenario and rate their confidence in the responses provided. Multiple rounds of discussions about these results with journal editors, clinical investigators and industry representatives led to the development of key recommendations intended to enhance transparency when determining authorship. These included forming a representative group to establish authorship criteria early in a trial, having all trial contributors agree to these criteria and documenting trial contributions to objectively determine who warrants an invitation to participate in the manuscript development process. The resulting Five-step Authorship Framework is designed to create a more standardized approach when determining authorship for clinical trial publications. Overall, these recommendations aim to facilitate more transparent authorship decisions and help readers better assess the credibility of results and perspectives of the authors for medical research more broadly. Please see related article: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/214.

Attitudes of European psychiatrists on psychedelics: a qualitative study.

Introduction and aim: It is important to understand how mental health practitioners view recent findings on psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy (PAP) as there is potential this treatment may be incorporated into clinical practice. The aim of our study was to explore how psychiatrists who are not involved in psychedelic research and who are located in the European region perceive psychedelics and PAP. Methods: We conducted online semi-structured interviews with 12 psychiatry specialists and psychiatry trainees from 8 European countries. Data were analyzed using a general inductive approach informed by codebook thematic analysis. Results: Based on the interviews, we developed four main themes and 14 sub-themes, including (1) Psychedelics hold potential, (2) Psychedelics are dangerous, (3) Future of psychedelics is uncertain, and (4) Psychiatry is ambivalent toward psychedelics. Discussion: Our respondents-psychiatrists acknowledged the potential of PAP but remained cautious and did not yet perceive its evidence base as robust enough. Education on psychedelics is lacking in medical and psychiatric training and should be improved to facilitate the involvement of mental health experts in decision-making on PAP.

Medical students' decisions about authorship in disputable situations: intervention study.

In medicine, professional behavior and ethics are often rule-based. We assessed whether instruction on formal criteria of authorship affected the decision of students about authorship dilemmas and whether they perceive authorship as a conventional or moral concept. A prospective non-randomized intervention study involved 203s year medical students who did (n = 107) or did not (n = 96) received a lecture on International Committee of Medical Journal editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria. Both groups had to read 3 vignettes and answer 4 questions related to the distinction between conventional and moral domains. Written justification of student' choices whether the authorship in a vignette was right or wrong was rated by 4 independent raters as based on justice or a rule. Formal instruction had no effect on students' decisions on authorship in the vignettes (44, 34 and 39% ICMJE-consistent answers for 3 vignettes, respectively, by students receiving instruction vs. 38, 42 and 30% for those without instruction; P > 0.161 for all vignettes). For all dilemmas, more students decided contrary to ICMJE criteria and considered their decisions to be a matter of obligation and not a choice and to be general across situations and sciences. They were willing to change their decision if a rule was different only for peer situations but not for mentor-mentee situations. The number of students who used rule-based justification of their ICMJE criteria-consistent decisions was significantly higher in the instructed than in the uninstructed group. Instruction about formal authorship criteria had no effect on student's decisions about authorship dilemmas and their decisions were related to the moral rather than a conventional domain. Teaching about authorship and other professionalism and integrity issues may benefit from interventions that bring intuitive processes into awareness instead of those fostering rule-based reasoning.

A visual object naming task standardized for the Croatian language: a tool for research and clinical practice.

The aim of the present study was to provide normative data for the Croatian language using 346 visually presented objects (Cycowicz, Friedman, Rothstein, & Snodgrass Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 65:171-237, 1997; Roach, Schwartz, Martin, Grewal, & Brecher Clinical Aphasiology 24:121-133, 1996; Snodgrass & Vanderwart Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory 6:174-215, 1980). Picture naming was standardized according to seven variables: naming latency, name agreement, familiarity, visual complexity, word length, number of syllables, and word frequency. The descriptive statistics and correlation pattern of the variables collected in the present study were consistent with normative studies in other languages. These normative data for pictorial stimuli named by young healthy Croatian native speakers will be useful in studies of perception, language, and memory, as well as for preoperative and intraoperative mapping of speech and language brain areas.

First-year nursing students' attitudes towards artificial intelligence: Cross-sectional multi-center study.

AIM: To assess the attitudes of nursing students toward artificial intelligence. BACKGROUND: Possible applications of artificial intelligence-powered systems in nursing cover all aspects of nursing care, from patient care to risk management. Although the final acceptance of artificial intelligence in practice will depend on positive 'nurses' attitudes toward artificial intelligence, those attitudes have gained little attention so far. DESIGN: A cross-sectional multicenter study. METHODS: The study was performed at nursing schools of four Croatian universities, surveying a total of 336 first-year nursing students (response rate 69.7%) enrolled in 2021. A validated instrument, the General Attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence Scale, consisting of 20 Likert-type items, was chosen for the study. Where applicable, the items were contextualized for nursing. Four sub-scales were identified based on the outcomes of the factor analysis. RESULTS: The average attitude score was (mean ± standard deviation) 64.5 ± 11.7, out of a maximum of 100, which was significantly higher than the neutral score of 60.0 (p < 0.001). The attitude towards AI did not differ across the universities and was not associated with students' age. Male students scored slightly higher than their female colleagues. Scores on subscales "Benefits of artificial intelligence in nursing", "Willingness to use artificial intelligence in nursing practice", and "Dangers of artificial intelligence" were favorable of artificial intelligence-based solutions. However, scores on the subscale "Practical advantages of artificial intelligence" were somewhat unfavorable. CONCLUSIONS: First-year nursing students had slightly positive attitudes towards artificial intelligence in nursing, which should make it easier for the new generations of nurses to embrace and implement artificial intelligence systems. Reservations about artificial intelligence in daily nursing practice indicate that nursing students might benefit from education focused specifically on applications of artificial intelligence in nursing.

Mystical and Affective Aspects of Psychedelic Use in a Naturalistic Setting: A Linguistic Analysis of Online Experience Reports.

Analyzing online retrospective experience reports of psychedelic use can provide valuable insight into their acute subjective effects. Such reports are unexplored in relation to mystical states, which are thought to be a therapeutic mechanism within psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. We created a set of words that, when encountered in an experience report, indicate the occurrence of mystical elements within the experience. We used the Shroomery.org website to retrieve 7317 publicly available retrospective psychedelic experience reports of psychedelic use, primarily of psilocybin, and have a designated experience intensity level self-assessed by the text authors during submission of the report. We counted the mystical language words using Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software and additionally performed sentiment analysis of all reports. We found that the occurrence of mystical language grew with increased self-reported experience intensity. We also found that negative sentiment increased, and positive sentiment decreased as self-reported psychedelic experience intensity increased. These two findings raise the question of whether mystical experiences can co-exist with challenging elements within the psychedelic experience, a consideration for future qualitative studies. We present a new mystical language dictionary measure for further use and expansion, with some suggestions on how it can be used in future studies.

Validation of a new instrument for assessing attitudes on psychedelics in the general population.

Although there is research interest to assess attitudes on psychedelics, no validated instrument exists for this purpose. We aimed to develop and examine the psychometric properties of the Attitudes on Psychedelics Questionnaire (APQ) in a sample of the Croatian general population. A cross-sectional, web-based survey among the general population was conducted on 1153 participants (62.1% female, 77.7% with a graduate or high school degree, 15.1% health care workers). We assessed participants' ability to recognize psychedelic substances using a short knowledge test. The APQ consists of 20 items with four sub-scales: Legal Use of Psychedelics, Effects of Psychedelics, Risk Assessment of Psychedelics, and Openness to Psychedelics. This model demonstrated best fit in a confirmatory factor analysis. Total scale reliability was excellent (McDonald's ω = 0.949, 95% CI = 0.944-0.953). A strong correlation with a similar unvalidated measure (r = 0.885, P < 0.001) demonstrated convergent validity. We observed an association between attitudes and knowledge on psychedelics (r = 0.494, P < 0.001). Younger age, male gender, and lower educational status were associated with higher APQ scores. The APQ is valid, reliable, and could be applied in assessing educational interventions, patients' treatment outcomes, and the attitudes of different groups of experts. We encourage further validation of the APQ in English.

Large volume leukapheresis: Efficacy and safety of processing patient's total blood volume six times.

Large-volume leukapheresis (LVL) differs from standard leukapheresis by increased blood flow and an altered anticoagulation regimen. An open issue is to what degree a further increase in processed blood volume is reasonable in terms of higher yields and safety. In 30 LVL performed in patients with hematologic malignancies, 6 total blood volumes were processed. LVL resulted in a higher CD34+ cell yield without a change in graft quality. Although a marked platelet decrease can be expected, LVL is safe and can be recommended as the standard procedure for patients who mobilize low numbers of CD34+ cells and when high number of CD34+ cells are required.

Body size changes in elite junior rowers: 1997 to 2007.

The aim of this study was to determine whether elite international junior rowers in 2007 were heavier and taller than those evaluated in 1997, and to compare this change among finalists and non-finalists, and sweep rowers and scullers. Body weight and height data obtained by a questionnaire from a total of 398 rowers (42% female, 58% male) at the Junior World Rowing Championships in Beijing, People's Republic of China, in 2007 (65.9% of all competitors), were compared with data from 603 rowers measured at the Junior World Rowing Championships in Hazewinkel, Belgium in 1997 (36.5% female, 63.5% male, representing 90% and 89% of all competitors, respectively, by gender). Male and female rowers in 2007 were significantly taller compared to those in 1997 (1.0 cm, p = 0.009 and 2.1 cm, p < 0.001, respectively; one-sample t-test). No statistically significant difference was found for body mass. The finalists and sweep rowers were taller and heavier compared to nonfinalists and scullers at both Championships respectively. The heights of elite level junior rowers increased significantly over the decade. The finalists at World Junior Rowing Championships were again taller and heavier compared to the nonfinalists.

A retrospective analysis of the peer review of more than 75,000 Marie Curie proposals between 2007 and 2018.

Most funding agencies rely on peer review to evaluate grant applications and proposals, but research into the use of this process by funding agencies has been limited. Here we explore if two changes to the organization of peer review for proposals submitted to various funding actions by the European Union has an influence on the outcome of the peer review process. Based on an analysis of more than 75,000 applications to three actions of the Marie Curie programme over a period of 12 years, we find that the changes - a reduction in the number of evaluation criteria used by reviewers and a move from in-person to virtual meetings - had little impact on the outcome of the peer review process. Our results indicate that other factors, such as the type of grant or area of research, have a larger impact on the outcome.

Journal editors' perspectives on the communication practices in biomedical journals: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To generate an understanding of the communication practices that might influence the peer-review process in biomedical journals. METHOD: Recruitment was based on purposive maximum variation sampling. We conducted semistructured interviews. Data were analysed using thematic analysis method. PARTICIPANTS: 56 journal editors from general medicine (n=13) and specialty (n=43) biomedical journals. Most were editor-in-chiefs (n=39), men (n=40) and worked part time (n=50). RESULTS: Our analysis generated four themes (1) providing minimal guidance to peer reviewers-two subthemes described the way journal editors rationalised their behaviour: (a) peer reviewers should know without guidelines how to review and (b) detailed guidance and structure might have a negative effect; (2) communication strategies of engagement with peer reviewers-two opposing strategies that journal editors employed to handle peer reviewers: (a) use of direct and personal communication to motivate peer reviewers and (b) use of indirect communication to avoid conflict; (3) concerns about impact of review model on communication-maintenance of anonymity as a means of facilitating critical and unburdened communication and minimising biases and (4) different practices in the moderation of communication between authors and peer reviewers-some journal editors actively interjected themselves into the communication chain to guide authors through peer reviewers' comments, others remained at a distance, leaving it to the authors to work through peer reviewers' comments. CONCLUSIONS: These journal editors' descriptions reveal several communication practices that might have a significant impact on the peer-review process. Editorial strategies to manage miscommunication are discussed. Further research on these proposed strategies and on communication practices from the point of view of authors and peer reviewers is warranted.