This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Peer Reviews (221)

Published on in Vol 3, No 3 (2022): Jul-Sep

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/39860, first published .
Peer Review of “Representing Physician Suicide Claims as Nanopublications: Proof-of-Concept Study Creating Claim Networks”

Peer Review of “Representing Physician Suicide Claims as Nanopublications: Proof-of-Concept Study Creating Claim Networks”

Peer Review of “Representing Physician Suicide Claims as Nanopublications: Proof-of-Concept Study Creating Claim Networks”

Authors of this article:

Anonymous1
Article Authors Cited by (1) Tweetations (2) Metrics

    Peer-Review Report

    Related ArticlesPreprint (medRxiv): https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.16.20101881v1
    Preprint (JMIR Preprints): https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/34979
    Authors' Response to Peer-Review Reports: https://med.jmirx.org/2022/3/e40158/
    Published Article: https://med.jmirx.org/3/e34979/
    JMIRx Med 2022;3(3):e39860

    doi:10.2196/39860

    Keywords

    physician suicide; suicide; suicide prevention; physician well-being; physician mental health; nanopublication; physician; doctor; mental health; semantic publishing; bibliometrics; claim network; information distortion; misinformation 

    This is a peer-review report submitted for the paper “Representing Physician Suicide Claims as Nanopublications: Proof-of-Concept Study Creating Claim Networks.”


    General Comments

    This paper [1] tries to address a myth that has been and continues to be perpetuated around the number of US physician suicides. It tries to put forward an approach to addressing myths in a way to better inform specific populations (ie, in this case, physicians) of the reality of suicide in the profession.

    Specific Comments

    Major Comments

    1. This is an important effort and should be applauded.

    2. This confirms that the myth remains in existence, despite minor changes to it, and should be either verified or dispelled.

    3. The approach presented to address situations as described is one that has merit and can be useful to many where there is interest and desire. The paper was well written, clear, data driven, and of a good length. I would have liked a bit more in the discussion section (eg, implications could be stronger) and a simple conclusion statement at the end.

    Conflicts of Interest

    None declared.

    1. Leung TI, Kuhn T, Dumontier M. Representing Physician Suicide Claims as Nanopublications: Proof-of-Concept Study Creating Claim Networks. JMIRx Med 2022;3(3):e34979 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef]

    Edited by E Meinert; This is a non–peer-reviewed article. submitted 25.05.22; accepted 25.05.22; published 01.07.22

    Copyright

    © Anonymous. Originally published in JMIRx Med (https://med.jmirx.org), 01.07.2022.

    This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIRx Med, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://med.jmirx.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.