Skip to main content
Basic Formal IVT Commonly tested

peer review

noun

Pronunciation: /pɪər rɪˈvjuː/

A quality control process where experts in the field evaluate submitted manuscripts before publication

Full Definition

A systematic evaluation process conducted by independent experts in adult cardiology to assess the scientific merit, methodology, originality, and clinical relevance of submitted research manuscripts before publication in medical journals

Plain English

A system where other doctors who are experts in heart medicine check and approve research papers before they get published

In Editorial Context

The cornerstone quality assurance mechanism in cardiology publishing that ensures scientific rigor and clinical validity of published content

Etymology & History

Origin languageEnglish
Rootpeer + review
Original meaningevaluation by equals in rank or standing
First recorded use1967
Usage frequencyVery common

Formalized in medical publishing during the mid-20th century scientific revolution

Originally developed for general scientific publishing, adapted for medical journals in the 1960s

Usage

"The manuscript underwent rigorous peer review by three cardiologists before acceptance."

Usage note: Always hyphenated when used as an adjective (peer-reviewed)

Context: Editorial processes, manuscript submission, publication workflows

Region: global

Style guide notes: Hyphenate when used as adjective; capitalize when referring to specific journal processes

In Context

  • "The Journal of American Cardiology employs a double-blind peer review system."
  • "All clinical trials must undergo peer review before publication."
  • "The peer review comments requested additional echocardiographic data."

Also known as

expert review scholarly review editorial review

Contrasted with

self-publication unreviewed content

Don't confuse with

editorial review

Common mistake: Confusing peer review with editorial review or internal review processes

Related Terms

Broader term: quality assurance

Frequently Asked Questions

How long does peer review take in cardiology journals?

Typically 4-8 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.

What qualifications do cardiology peer reviewers need?

Usually MD/PhD with subspecialty training and active research/clinical practice in relevant cardiovascular area.

Why Test Candidates on This?

Essential for understanding cardiology publishing standards

Required skill level: Junior

Editors from these organisations have used our services since 1998

Reuters BBC Oxford University Press Penguin Random House Springer Microsoft Suncor Energy United Nations Fisher Investments IBM The Home Depot KODAK CHEVRON