A Paramedicine.com experiment in crowd-sourced peer-review - Adult Anaphylaxis Ariticle. Join in!
- Paramedicine.com
- Sep 5, 2020
- 1 min read
Hello everyone! We'd like to try something new with all of you and we hope you're interested. A team of us have authored a paper that is just about ready for publication. We've been reading a lot about what is called 'Crowd Sourced Peer Review', which involves sending out an article on social media before you submit it for publication and seeking feedback from 'the crowd'.
So we've attached the article as a pdf for you to have a look at ... if you'd like to. We'd love to hear your thoughts about it. We've created a post on the paramedicine.com Facebook webpage here: facebook.com/wwwparamedicine.com asking for you to give us your feedback.
So please consider this a formal invitation to have a look at our paper and offer any comments you want to. You don't have to read the whole thing, and you don't have to offer a detailed, comprehensive review. Let us know if it reads well. We'd like to know that. Let us know if think it's interesting or boring. Again - we'd love to hear whatever you have to say. We'll be watching our Facebook page and hoping to see some comments, so please don't be shy.
If you're curious, there's a fair bit of research and support for crowd-based peer-review. See for example: Crowd-based peer review can be good and fast
This is a great idea — crowd-sourced peer review could really help catch the practical gaps that formal reviewers miss, especially for something as time-critical as adult anaphylaxis. I’d love to see the authors’ take on managing refractory cases post-epinephrine. I’ve been using https://vo3-ai.net
This is a great idea—crowd-sourcing peer review could really speed up catching the practical gaps that formal reviewers miss. I’m curious how you’ll handle the anaphylaxis dosing tables for pediatric patients, since that’s always the trickiest part to get right in the field. I’ve been using https://printables.cloud
This is a great use of the format—getting real-world paramedic input before publication beats waiting for post-print corrections. I’ve been using a similar review template for our protocols, check out https://muse-video.pro
Crowd-sourced peer review is such a smart move for a field where protocols evolve fast—curious how you handled the tricky biphasic reaction timing in the downloadable PDF. I’ve been using https://aimusic-video.com
This is a really interesting approach to peer review. Open sourcing the feedback process like this feels like a great way to bridge the gap between academic research and the people actually working on the ground. I think it makes the information a lot more practical and accessible. I recently saw a discussion on https://englandderbyshire.co.uk/ about how collaborative community efforts can lead to better local outcomes, and this experiment with anaphylaxis research seems to hit that same mark. Definitely going to give the PDF a look and see how it reads. Good luck with the publication.