Automated Statistical Support for Journals and Authors

The problem is lack of expertise in peer review

• Most peer reviewers are not formally trained and thus may have limited ability to detect relevant, or sometimes even simple errors in manuscripts. It has been observed that despite their good intentions, peer reviewers often provide inaccurate methodological, including statistical, criticism or advice to submitting authors (Altman, 2002; Cicchetti, 1991).
• Because most medical researchers are themselves not methodologists, they often lack the expertise to evaluate critically their own approach to the analysis or do not possess the skills to effectively respond to the reviewer’s assessment of it.
• Only a very small fraction of journals, usually the top tier journals, employ a professional statistician to assist in the review process or to arbitrate the conflicting advice that is received by authors.
• A simple lack of qualified/unbiased reviewers who have time to volunteer for conducting peer review. The best scientists are often the busiest and rarely have time to volunteer for peer review.

Standardized reporting guidelines have not solved the problem

Although standardized reporting guidelines such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) brings expert level information about the best practices in research to authors and reviewers (http://www.consort-statement.org), many reviewers do not take the time to fully consider these elements. Furthermore, many authors think they have provided the relevant information but do not have the expertise to completely satisfy the best practices outlined in the reporting guidelines. Sadly, despite their unlimited potential, the existence of these guidelines has not stemmed the tide of poorly reported research since their inception more than 15 years ago.

Introducing StatReviewer

StatReviewer is an automated review of statistical and reporting integrity for scientific manuscripts. Manuscripts are scanned and a report is generated. The report will either resemble an actual peer review, or checklist, depending on the guidelines specified by the journal.

StatReviewer is built to integrate into your existing document handling workflow, and stay out of the way. It can be used on every manuscript to ensure consistent integrity, or use it only when needed.

Manuscripts can be checked to meet one of many common reporting guidelines, such as:

• CONSORT 2010
• STROBE
• STARD
• ARRIVE
• The Uniform Requirements for Medical Journals

It's fast

Submit and receive within minutes, not weeks.

It's reliable

Use on an as-needed basis, or automatically scan every manuscript to ensure quality.

It's custom

Customizable by journals, to control what's important to you.