Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The present article focuses on ways to make the peer-review and editorial process more efficient and more equitable for authors. In particular, we focus on the role of editors and action editors in the process of selecting and managing reviewers, balancing their own impressions of the manuscript with the reviewers' feedback, and rendering a fair and equitable editorial decision. We advance several recommendations to conserve reviewer time, provide authors with appropriate recourse when their papers are rejected unfairly, and expedite the processing of manuscripts that do not meet the standards of the journal to which they have been submitted.
Schwartz et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: