Effect of Monetary Incentives on Peer Review Acceptance and Completion: A Quasi-Randomized Interventional Trial
Authors' conclusion
Providing cash incentive for completing peer review reports resulted in a modest increase in the share of invited reviewers who complete reviews for a specialty medical journal.
Study context
- Population
- Reviewers receiving requests from Critical Care Medicine to review research articles, September 2023 to March 2024
- Participants
- 715 reviewer invitations
- Comparison
- Incentive vs Control
- Incentiven = 414
- Controln = 301reference
- Primary endpoint
- Invitation-to-completed-review conversion rate (reviews submitted / reviewer invitations sent)
Methodological detailsblinded, alternating treatment design, 2-week blocks
- Blinded
- Alternating treatment design
- 2-week blocks
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
P = 0.04
Secondary outcomes
Invitation acceptance
| Outcome | Incentive | Control | Cox proportional HR (CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time to review fulfilment (survival analysis)Fulfilled faster on average | 11 d | 12 d | 1.30 (1.04–1.62) | P = 0.02 | |
| 0.512Cox proportional HR (log scale) |
Review quality (205 of 333 reports assessed by editors)
- No difference in review quality between study arms
Original publication
Effect of Monetary Incentives on Peer Review Acceptance and Completion: A Quasi-Randomized Interventional Trial. Crit Care Med. Published 6 March 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →