review has also has come under fire for adding to the publication time of manuscripts, perpetuating invalid practices, and limiting the dissemination of new research.4-7 However, a review of the literature would seem to indicate that, in this century, peer review can be credited with increasing the overall accuracy and reliability of medical articles, in addition to directing manuscripts to more appropriate journals.2,4,8,9 Roughly three-quarters of major scientific journals use some form of peer review10: "the assessment by experts (peers) of material submitted for publication in scientific and technical periodicals."9 As each journal strives to establish its unique identity in the expanding milieu of scientific publications, the prospective author will almost surely be confronted with several variations on the peer reviewing theme.11,12 This realization has led several journals, their sponsoring organizations, and many a disgruntled author to call for disclosures of the process of peer review. In 1975, the Scientific Information Committee of London's Royal Society published a set of eight guidelines (Table) for peer review.1 Disagreeing with three of the guidelines (numbers two, four, and eight), the editors of Nature argued against the uniformity inherent in the Society's guidelines, and instead, urged publication by each journal of its review process.13 This, the editors argued, would help prospective authors understand the process with which their manuscripts were being judged. The journal also proposed to update its procedure statement annually. Several other scientific journals have made public their review methods. In 1975, the editors of Science stated that all manuscripts are sent to members of its Board of Reviewing Editors, who rate each manuscript on a scale from 1 to 10. On that basis, 60% of all manuscripts submitted are rejected outright.14 The editors of The New England Journal of Medicine also penned a detailed description of its review process, stating that only 10% to 12% of all unsolicited manuscripts make their way onto the pages of its publication. The journal also outlined its procedures for accepting and rejecting solicited manuscripts