Handling of post-publication critiques

A journal receives a critique, or commentary, of an article previously published in the journal. The flowchart offers editors a step by step guide on how to handle this process.

The flowchart has been developed in collaboration with Wiley.

Key points

• Post-publication discussion usually begins with a reader’s critique of an article that a journal has published.
• When a formal critique is received, journals often invite the original authors of the critiqued article to write a reply. The critique and response may be peer reviewed.
• Critiques are often challenging and there are considerations that a journal might face, which are described in the guidance.
• Journals should have a transparent policy for considering critiques.
• Critiques should be reasonable and not contain libellous or defamatory content.
• Critiques should have evidence or data to support the claims.
• Journals must be clear with the authors of the critique and the published article on the timeline and the action to be taken.
• Amendments to the published article may need to be made (eg, correction or retraction).

Related resources

• Retraction guidelines
• When to conclude correspondence from reader about errors in a published article case, 2017
• Case discussion: repeated complaints about meta-analysis case discussion
• Addressing ethics complaints from complainants who submit multiple issues discussion document