The maintenance of quality and integrity in clinical
and basic science research depends upon peer review. This process
has stood the test of time and has evolved to meet increasing work
loads, and ways of detecting fraud in the scientific community.
However, in the 21st century, the emphasis on evidence-based medicine
and good science has placed pressure on the ways in which the peer
review system is used by most journals. This paper reviews the peer review system and the problems it
faces in the digital age, and proposes possible solutions. Cite this article:
The use of journal clubs and, more recently,
case-based discussions in order to stimulate debate among orthopaedic
surgeons lies at the heart of orthopaedic training and education. A
virtual learning environment can be used as a platform to host virtual
journal clubs and case-based discussions. This has many advantages
in the current climate of constrained time and diminishing trainee
and consultant participation in such activities. The virtual environment
model opens up participation and improves access to journal clubs
and case-based discussions, provides reusable educational content,
establishes an electronic record of participation for individuals,
makes use of multimedia material (including clinical imaging and
photographs) for discussion, and finally, allows participants to
link case-based discussions with relevant papers in the journal
club. The Leicester experience highlights the many advantages and some
of the potential difficulties in setting up such a virtual system
and provides useful guidance for those considering such a system
in their own training programme. As a result of the virtual learning
environment, trainee participation has increased and there is a
trend for increased consultant input in the virtual journal club
and case-based discussions. It is likely that the use of virtual environments will expand
to encompass newer technological approaches to personal learning
and professional development.
