The Price of Consensus: Reviewer Disagreement, Editorial Dynamics, and Impact in Thoracic Oncology Publishing
Reviewer consensus is uncommon in thoracic oncology submissions. However, greater reviewer engagement-both in number and iteration-was independently associated with improved bibliometric impact. These findings suggest that structured diversity of reviewer perspectives may enrich peer review and enhance scholarly dissemination, provided that editorial efficiency is preserved. This supports the view that disagreement among reviewers, when properly managed, may act as a catalyst rather than a constraint in scientific dissemination.
Authors
- Luca Bertolaccini (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1153-3334)
- Pierre‐Emmanuel Falcoz (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5915-5512)
Institutions
- University of Milan (IT)
- Regenerative NanoMedicine (FR)
- Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg (FR)
- Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT)
- Hôpital Civil, Strasbourg (FR)
- European Institute of Oncology (IT)
- Université de Strasbourg (FR)
Publication Details
- Journal
- European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery
- Published
- 2025-10-28
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1093/ejcts/ezaf375
- Primary Topic
- Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00