A carefully structured report was sent to my editorial office and then transmitted to out-of-office consultants for editorial peer review. The detailed comments of the referees were submitted to the investigators; W. Y. Chen, PhD, of Denver, the distinguished senior author, responded on behalf of his colleagues with a revised manuscript and these comments, "We believe that the revised paper has been improved greatly after many of the suggestions of the referees were implemented. We hope that our readers will be as critical as our referees have been so that the quality of our studies can be continuously examined. Many thanks to you again for every effort you have made in improving this manuscript." Dr Chen's views of the process of a responsible, constructive editorial review and his reliance on a critical readership provide a number of insights into the indispensable role of peer review journals.
Clinicians are buffeted daily