Origin Editorial

Reviewer Training as a Form of Engagement: A Summary of Training Programs


   Melecia Miller, MPH
   Scholarly Support and Engagement Coordinator, Origin Editorial 
   ORCID: 0009-0005-7747-9747




Jason Roberts, PhD
Senior Partner, Origin Editorial
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jasonrobertsorigin
ORCID: 0000-0001-9054-4180

Take Home Points:

  1. Although willing and able peer reviewers are increasingly hard to find, journals can engage with the reviewers that they already have by offering rewards for participating in reviewer training programs.
  2. The best-resourced journals are likely to take the lead in developing training initiatives.
  3. This blog post presents a brief summary of publicly advertised reviewer training programs, the majority of which operate under a mentor-mentee model and are designed for early-career researchers.
  4.  Editorial offices, journals, and societies can use the lists presented here to help develop or refine their own reviewer training programs.

In this second of three posts on the theme of reviewer training as a form of engagement to both increase reviewer invitation acceptance rates and elevate review standards, we look at a variety of training programs that have already been implemented. This endeavor was not a methodologically driven academic exercise. Instead, the purpose of this post is simply to collate some potentially inspiring programs that journals and societies may consider emulating. The final post in this series will reflect upon the issues associated with implementing a peer reviewer-training program.

As many of the training programs listed in this blog post note, willing and able peer reviewers are increasingly hard to find. As similarly posited in the initial post on training as a form of reviewer engagement, there is a sense that if you offer a tangible educational benefit, especially one that involves direct interaction with trainees, such as a mentorship program, there is a possibility you can build loyalty while simultaneously inculcating the values of effective peer review.  After reviewing multiple peer reviewer training programs, it is fair to say this concept is not especially radical or original. For instance, while seeking a course provider for their peer reviewer training course, the European Geosciences Union explicitly linked training to boosting the number of qualified reviewers.

As journals express frustration regarding the difficulties of securing reviewers and as publishers and industry service providers scramble to find better, algorithmically driven, ways to identify reviewers, it is fair to say many journals do not do a good job of connecting and engaging with the reviewers they already have. An annual shout out is always good, and should be done, but probably only marginally fosters goodwill or boosts a sense of collaboration and brand loyalty between a journal and its constituents.

Naturally, there is a tendency for the best-resourced journals to take the lead in developing training initiatives. It is also likely, in a good number of cases, that they are the journals least in need of remedial efforts. Smaller or newer journals will be confronted with either a lack of resources to develop training or no obvious community to call upon and mold into a pool of engaged potential reviewers, especially if those journals are not backed by a supporting society. Nevertheless, that does not mean such journals should exclude themselves from training efforts. As some of the examples presented in this post illustrate, there are multiple ways to train reviewers. Many present similarly themed training materials that can be adapted and redeployed in a variety of journal contexts. Some organizations, such as publishers and industry service providers offer training that could be linked to or co-opted into some sort of supporting arrangement. Yet more examples see societies support their journals by providing training programs as a member benefit, rather than leaving the journal to fend for itself. Furthermore, there is nothing stopping journals from banding together and jointly offering resources or training programs. In short, the wheel does not need to be invented journal by journal.

One problem in devising any manner of training program, however, is that little- to no- research has been undertaken to determine collective reviewer core competencies, making this systematic review preprint by Willis et al. a rare source of information. Furthermore, there is no definitive evidence that peer review training works, though, of course, there is a vast, general, corpus of literature on the effectiveness of training, especially with regards to mentorship, beyond the narrow confines of peer review training. That reviewers need training at all has still never been scientifically confirmed though, anecdotally, most journal editors would agree that just because a researcher is a subject expert, it does not make them a skilled peer reviewer. Indeed, though researchers often learn by doing and reflecting upon what they learned, what is really needed is a structured training program that provides feedback and, to some degree, modeling of good practice. It is also likely impossible to train a general subject matter expert, such as a clinician, to be a strong methodological reviewer as well. This may suggest any training program will work best if it trains reviewers to be skilled in some tasks and self-aware in others to know they are at the limits of their knowledge base and to raise the flag for specialist reviewers, such as statisticians or patient reviewers to take over with a closer look. In a similar theme, Jigisha Patel’s opinion piece on providing specific training to review Randomized Controlled Trials is spot on with its assertion that specialized training, backed with skills appraisals and revalidation, could elevate standards. One could also contend that such specializing in training could posit a sense of clear purposefulness for reviewers, who would understand clearly both the task in front of them and why they were being asked in the first place.

Ultimately, as this is a blog post, our intent is to provide a short cut to several peer reviewer training resources for editorial offices, journals and societies that are looking to develop their own programs or refine what they are already doing. Likely, there are probably many more journals that are undertaking semi-structured or informal training behind closed doors. Some programs focus on highly technical matters or journal-specific needs. Others, plainly, are generic and may provide useful foundations upon which to build more specific resources. To aid comprehension, the resources have been grouped into several different categories. Membership of the category is not exclusive, and the program offered may well be the result of collaborative efforts from several different actors. 

What we now attempt to do is review some of the most well-known, readily accessible and discoverable reviewer training programs broken down by the type of program provider. Within each section, the programs are roughly listed in order of comprehensiveness, with the top of the list prioritizing programs that provide general information, evidence-based training, a tangible reward, multiple methods of training, mentee recruitment through invited reviewer recommendation and participation as a mentor; and the list ends with programs for physician residents, and other student- / trainer-led programs.  

Examples of Journal-Specific Training

The following list contains training programs that are typically resource driven – such as lecture slides, reviewer guidelines and reading materials. Some mentor-driven programs appear to have evolved from the unofficial practice whereby assigned reviewers pass on the job of completing a review to a student, often without credit, into a more formalized program of mentor-mentee instruction while completing peer review on a manuscript undergoing review.

A detailed tabular summary of these training resources has been placed here. You will be able to download the table from that link.

·         BMJ Reviewer Training Resources – one of the most comprehensive sets of resources, originally developed for part of a randomized controlled trial and now being offered for individuals to pursue or for other publications to reference. –  https://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-reviewers/training-materials

·         Nature Masterclasses – subscription-based course only available to institutions. Individuals encouraged to refer the course to their institutions – https://masterclasses.nature.com/focus-on-peer-review-online-course/16605550

·         Analysis of Verbal Behavior – mentorship program whereby junior scholars were paired with mentor to provide feedback and modelling. – https://doi.org/10.1007/s40616-022-00172-x

·         Medical Care – mentor driven peer review with extensive array of online resources https://www.themedicalcareblog.com/peer-review-mentoring/

·         Journal of Cardiac Failure – mentorship program accompanied by didactic online sessions; trainees work on live manuscripts  – https://hfsa.org/jcf-reviewer-mentoring-program

·         American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education – mentorship program following completion of researcher/reviewer training programs provided by Elsevier (the publisher of the journal) and the Web of Science. Recognition of graduation from the training program – https://www.ajpe.org/page/AJPERMP

·         Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology – early career mentorship program that has collected resources on peer review and recorded training podcasts –  https://journals.lww.com/CJASN/Pages/traineepeerreview.aspx

·         Trials – declining reviewers can instead offer to mentor an early-career researcher to complete the review of a manuscript. –  https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/about/peer-review-mentoring

·         Advances in Nursing Science – mentorship program that acknowledges that to increase diversity and inclusion, the next generation of researchers must have a pathway towards being trained and recognized as reviewers; invited reviewers can offer to mentor a junior colleague to complete a review, thus intent is to model good practice – https://ansjournalblog.com/2019/01/02/ans-peer-review-mentoring-program/

·         Earth System Science Data – Sharing of manuscripts with instructors who then teach their research groups. These instructors may be reviewers and the manuscripts may be those currently under review at ESSD.  Journal stresses its open data as a helpful resource to encourage the complete validation of a study  – https://essd.copernicus.org/preprints/essd-2022-387/essd-2022-387-manuscript-version3.pdf

·         Gastrointestinal Endoscopy – selective mentorship program for junior researchers. Mentors are drawn from the highest performing reviewers. https://www.giejournal.org/article/S0016-5107(21)01724-7/fulltext

·         Genetics – Online course and mentorship, selective program following applications https://genetics-gsa.org/career-development/genetics-peer-review-training-program/

·         Clinical Microbiology and Infection – discusses the need to train researchers to conduct peer review, promotes mentorship as a superior method of training in comparison to self-directed learning, and introduces the journal’s model of mentorship in which reviewers who decline an invitation have the option to recommend a mentee as an alternate reviewerhttps://www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.com/article/S1198-743X(22)00367-6/fulltext

·         Clinical Practice in Pediatric Psychology – formalizing the process of a reviewer passing off a submission to a junior researcher to review – expectation is that the reviewer will review the peer review guideline with the junior reviewer first –  https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/cpp/reviewer-mentoring-program

·         JACC Case Reports – lectures and discussions accompanied by a mentorship program with practice on manuscripts currently under peer review https://www.jacc.org/doi/10.1016/j.jaccas.2021.06.020

·         International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics – Training program for residents; work on current submissions with feedback delivered on reviews completed; if 8 reviews completed in 2 years, participants will receive a certificate and their program directors will be notifiedhttps://www.redjournal.org/content/review

·         Neurology – typical mentor-mentee program for early career researchers from the leading journal in the field of neurologyhttps://blogs.neurology.org/rf/improving-peer-reviewing-through-paired-mentor-mentee-reviews-with-the-rfs/

·         Journal of Arthroplasty – Mentorship by the best reviewers as identified by the journal https://www.aahks.org/focal/joa-reviewer-mentorship-program/

·         American Journal of Psychiatry Residents’ Journal – launched a journal whereby the early career scientists can undertake experiential learning by actually doing the peer review job in a live setting with guidance, the participants actively forming part of the editorial boardhttps://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.15101267

·         Journal of Immunotherapy of Cancer (JITC) – training program for early career researchers including those with no peer reviewing experience with guidance provided one-on-one or in small groups – https://www.sitcancer.org/research/jitc-2/become-a-reviewer

·         Wilderness & Environmental Medicine Reviewer-in-Training (RIT) Program – Currently promoted via word of mouth; interested RITs are instructed to email the journal’s managing editor to be registered. RITs are invited as the third reviewer (journal standard is to have 2 reviewers). RITs are identified as such when reviews are sent to the author, and they may receive additional feedback about their reviews from the editor-in-chief and possibly from an associate or section editor. WEM is currently revamping the RIT program and when complete will post on its website.

Examples of Society-Generated Training

During our search we found some instances where the society, rather than a specific journal, appeared to offer training. The level at which this training was pitched ranged from a clear member benefit to a general offering to the entire field of study, be they members of the society or not. In some instances (e.g. the American Speech Language Hearing Association) it seems the society is providing the content to serve its portfolio of journals.

A detailed tabular summary of these training resources has been placed hereYou will be able to download the table from that link.

·         American Chemical Society Reviewer Lab – one of the most prominent reviewer training programs, modular training resources with self-assessment tests to conclude – https://institute.acs.org/courses/acs-reviewer-lab.html

·         American Aging Association – GeroScience Peer Review Training Program for early career, work on live manuscripts with a mentorhttps://www.americanagingassociation.org/geroscience-peer-review-training-program

·         American Society of Clinical Oncology – selective mentorship program with feedback on manuscript reviews; employed across all ASCO journals https://ascopubs.org/reviewers

·         American College of Clinical Pharmacy – selective mentorship program with online resources combined with mentor-feedback for two peer reviews completed https://www.accp.com/store/product.aspx?pc=PRT22

·         International Parkinson and Movement Disorders Society – mentorship program with extensive online resources – https://www.movementdisorders.org/MDS/Peer-Reviewing-Program.htm

·         American College of Rheumatology – selective mentorship program for their portfolio of journals with additional online instructional materials to be read before mentorship startshttps://rheumatology.org/acr-journals-peer-review-mentoring-program

·         American Speech Language Hearing Association – online, self-paced learning modules –  https://academy.pubs.asha.org/prep-the-asha-journals-peer-review-excellence-program/

·         American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America journals – after initial completion of free Web of Science modules, begin review of submissions with mentors providing feedback on the review generatedhttps://www.agronomy.org/publications/journals/peer-review-mentorship/

·         British Psychological Society – mentorship program with training videos and webinars provided by the Wiley Reviewer Academy – https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/journal-reviewer-mentoring

·         Society for Neuroscience – mentor-led program with certificate awarded upon completion https://www.jneurosci.org/rmp

·         American Society of Therapeutic and Radiation Oncology – two training programs offered for two different journals. See above for the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. For Practical Radiation Oncology, typical mentor driven program with feedback given for completed reviewshttps://www.astro.org/News-and-Publications/Journals/News/Reviewers

Publisher-based Training

Most of the major publishers offer training in some form or another. Much of it focuses on the core principles of good peer review that stretch across every field of study (be it art history or computational physics). The courses listed below appear to be free of charge unless otherwise stated:

·         Elsevier Certified Peer Reviewer Course – certification program that provides general introduction to peer review; course developed by academic editors and Elsevier staff, over 4 hours of learning modules with a self-assessment module at the end. Unrestricted access to the learning modules. https://researcheracademy.elsevier.com/navigating-peer-review/certified-peer-reviewer-course

·         Wiley – simple suite of training videos as part of a broader compendium of materials on reviewing articles; does not seem to be a discrete course in the manner delivered by Elsevier – https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/becoming-a-reviewer.html/peer-review-training.html

·         Wolters Kluwer (developed in association with Editage) – basic course with freely accessible training modules and an advanced course with extra topics covered, such as methods and statistics, self-assessment modules. Advanced course costs US$150 – https://wkauthorservices.editage.com/peer-reviewer-training-course/

·         Taylor and Francis – in-person or virtual workshops in English and Chinese, participants with the relevant skills and experience are then matched to journals (presumably Taylor and Francis journals); 6 online training modules are also offered –  https://editorresources.taylorandfrancis.com/reviewer-guidelines/peer-review-training/

·         Institute of Physics – peer reviewer certification following training delivered through a variety of media including examples of good and bad reviews https://ioppublishing.org/researchers/peer-review-excellence-online-course/

·        Sage Publishing – a series of three current, free peer reviewer training webinars, among other resources.  Part 1
      of the three part webinar was completed in May 2023 and a recording is available.  Reviewers can register for
parts 2 and 3 which are scheduled for October 18, 2023 and November 8, 2023.  https://us.sagepub.com/en-

·         Springer Nature Resources for Peer Reviewers – links to both Springer and BMC resources on how to evaluate a manuscript and a third link to the Nature Masterclasses. These Masterclasses were referenced under journal-based training above –   https://www.springernature.com/gp/reviewers?gclid=CjwKCAjwg-GjBhBnEiwAMUvNWzTxmJHNjN9BeQT-Xu5QZQdGFrbjxoly4IJQMmfGKq2tBWU8BTPm6RoCU08QAvD_BwE

·         BMC Peer review – tips for junior reviewershttps://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/peerreviewtips

·         BMC Blog series “How to Peer Review” – not a course per se, but a useful series of bits of information –  http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/tag/how-to-peer-review/

·         SPIE/Researcher.Life – course is led by R Upskill experts which is part of researcher.life which, in turn, is part of Cactus (who also owns Editage), offers same basic and advanced courses as Wolters Kluwer, through the advanced course, which appears to contain similar course materials – costs US$100 – https://researcher.life/partner/spie

Funder-led Programs

·         Canadian Institute of Health Research – participation by application in a mentor-driven program supplemented with online resources, recent Canadian federal grant recipients are eligible, each CIHR Project committee can host 2 mentees at a time; program is designed with Project grant review in mind, though with clear crossover appeal for general journal reviewer training https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/52323.html

Other Examples

·         Clarivate’s Web of Science Academy (incorporating the former Publons Academy – multiple learning modules with open enrollment, certification of completion, Publons Academy is often cited and linked to by other older training programs; modules on scholarly peer review, how to be a peer reviewer mentor, research integrityhttps://webofscienceacademy.clarivate.com/learn

·         University of Alberta – libraries could be a source of training with both on-site and virtual traininghttps://ualberta.libcal.com/event/3697965

·         University of Oxford, Mathematical, Physical and Life Sciences Division – university departments also likely offer in-person training, some more formalized than others if they are didactically driven rather than mentor-based; the Oxford course was selective and in-personhttps://www.mpls.ox.ac.uk/training/mpls-training/our-courses/mpls-research-courses/how-to-peer-review-journal-papers

·         Federation of societies special working group – EMEUNET (part of European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR)) – cross journal mentor-led program running since 2012; mentees work independently on a review under the guidance of a mentor. A research paper assessing the success of the program was published with helpful advice on how other journals could implement a training program – https://emeunet.eular.org/peer_review_mentoring_programme.cfm

·         EQUATOR Network – clearinghouse of useful resources training programs may wish to incorporate or link to in their training resourceshttps://www.equator-network.org/toolkits/peer-reviewing-research/peer-review-training-and-resources/

·         Cochrane – free, online course for biomedical reviewers provided by a special interest group of Cochrane; special focus on ophthalmology due to funding received from the National Eye Institute; course has been endorsed by 4 external-to-Cochrane journals; useful example of how a subject domain can collaborate to create training and elevate collective practice –  https://eyes.cochrane.org/free-online-course-journal-peer-review;

·         COPE – static document on all ethical aspects of peer review from what ethical issues to look for through to the ethics associated with conducting a review –  https://publicationethics.org/files/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers-v2_0.pdf

·         BMJ Books “How to Survive Peer Review” – classic, now freely available, book on how peer review is conducted that can be read from the perspective of an editor, author or reviewer –  https://www.bmj.com/sites/default/files/attachments/resources/2011/07/wager.pdf

·         CHAMP checklist for the assessment of medical papers – useful guide/resource for authors and reviewers; 30-item checklist related to the design and conduct, data analysis, reporting and presentation, and interpretation of a research paper for breaking down biomedical statistics issues https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33514559/

·         Sense About Science “Peer Review: the nuts and bolts” – summary, downloadable guide breaking down all aspects of peer reviewhttps://senseaboutscience.org/activities/peer-review-the-nuts-and-bolts-2/

·         PREreview (now supported by eLife) – interactive peer review mentoring program; “Mentees will be guided by their mentors in writing and posting preprint reviews that will be published with a digital object identifier”; strong emphasis on promoting DEI issues as part of the art of good peer review, rather than just focusing on methodology https://elifesciences.org/for-the-press/d04c6551/elife-supports-prereview-s-new-peer-review-mentoring-program-for-early-career-researchers

Common Characteristics of Reviewer Training Programs

Some of the programs, such as those developed by The BMJ, are designed to appeal to anyone interested in improving their peer review skills. Overwhelmingly, however, the programs originate with early career researchers in mind, often under a mentor-mentee, experiential learning model, sometimes including an evaluation of what editors/course directors have determined to be a good review. For example, The BMJ also provides examples of editor feedback on peer review comments and a sample manuscript for any interested individual to review. The courses may conclude with a self-assessment test.

The need for early career training is obvious, especially with no standardized training, as many researchers may be disadvantaged by not having access to learning opportunities. As the American Psychological Association notes, training at graduate or post-graduate level is not always provided. Some courses seek to formalize the already existing informal practice of reviewers passing off the job of reviewing to their students by suggesting the originally assigned reviewers offer some sort of mentorship while completing the review, with the student then receiving recognition for completing the review. Many of these programs also stress that participating in a course offers the opportunity to open up new career advancement possibilities.

While some journal programs do not mention a reward, several programs – such as the one devised by Elsevier – offer participants a certificate or letter of completion, whereas others offer recognition in the journal, integration into a journal reviewer pool or various combinations of these rewards.  Uniquely, the American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education conducts a formal graduation from their reviewer mentorship program, and the Journal of Immunotherapy of Cancer offers recognition at its society’s annual meeting as well as addition to the preferred reviewer database.  Some societies such as the American College of Clinical Pharmacy and the American Society of Therapeutic and Radiation Oncology offer continuing education credits, and the latter also offers the opportunity to become a fellow of the society.  In addition to a certificate of completion, the American Chemical Society offers training in English and in Chinese and offers reviewer trainees who pass the final assessment an identifying badge in their submission system.  As mentioned in the previous post, journals can choose to collaborate to provide reviewer training to researchers.  The American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America journals have done just that by uniting to provide mentorship to early career researchers, taking advantage of the Web of Science Academy curriculum as a basis for their program.  In return, participants receive credit on their Web of Science profile, in addition to a certificate of completion and enrollment as a peer reviewer by the appropriate journal. 

What is less clear is whether any of the courses were evidence-based in their design and, crucially, who trains the trainers. Some programs such as the ACS Reviewer Lab and the course offered by The BMJ seem to have been constructed upon published research that has studied the impact of peer review. Most programs, alternatively, seem to be led by subject thought leaders and/or known high-quality reviewers. While mentorship and experiential learning under the guidance of a mentor can be successful, there is the potential for it to accentuate bias or prolong entrenched hierarchical views (“listen to me/trust me, I am an expert”). The art of peer review, of course, is particularly susceptible to this as there are no agreed-upon core competencies, no definitive training resources and little research into what constitutes a good review. A pertinent question to ask, therefore, is who trains the trainers? The Web of Science Academy was one of the few resources that appeared to address the mentor rather than just the mentee with a suite of learning modules.  Willis et al recently wrote an article about a risk of bias tool that they developed to assess the extent to which reviewer training programs are evidence-based.  The tool assesses factors such as whether more than one stakeholder group was involved in developing the reviewer training program, data was gathered for training development, pilot testing was done, learning objectives were presented, and whether learning was evaluated, as well as the method of feedback used in evaluation. In lieu of/in the absence of a training program for trainers, such a tool may be helpful for journals seeking a training program for their reviewers in the interim.  


Training courses are somewhat commonplace and range in scale, knowledge delivery mechanism and intended audience. Many aim to combine didactic, self-paced, learning modules with mentorship. But, as this review of the courses shows, there are no uniform standards and no validation of the accuracy or appropriateness of what is taught. Nevertheless, many of these efforts offer possibilities to many that otherwise face no opportunity to learn, which in turn may impact on their overall success as a researcher by missing out on learning about key analytical skills. Interestingly, most of the programs tie training to both boosting the pool of available reviewers and raising collective skill levels, all concepts discussed in the first part of this blog series.

Nevertheless, many journals will struggle to develop their own resources, though setting up a network of mentors may be a more obtainable goal. The potential exists for collaboration. The most successful approach to collaboration may be at a cross-journal or subject matter level. Any higher level than that, such as publisher-led, though useful, may lack the specificity that is needed for domains of study because of their need to serve a general population. Perhaps the future lies in defining reviewer core competencies at a general level, establishing a code of ethics and then adding layers of subject specificity on top of those competencies. Journals can then add a further layer on top of that if they have very specific questions they wish their reviewers to address. Collaboration, of course, can collectively elevate a field while also allowing smaller journals to participate in training programs.Willis et al recently wrote an article about a risk of bias tool that they developed to assess the extent to which reviewer training programs are evidence-based.  The tool assesses factors such as whether more than one stakeholder group was involved in developing the reviewer training program, data was gathered for training development, pilot testing was done, learning objectives were presented, and whether learning was evaluated, as well as the method of feedback used in evaluation. In lieu of/in the absence of a training program for trainers, such a tool may be helpful for journals seeking a training program for their reviewers in the interim.  


Thanks to Stephanie Kinnan, Senior Managing Editor of Publications, American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy for her thoughts on the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy peer review training program.

Conflicts of Interst:

None to declare


Subscribe now to ORIGINal Thoughts.

Always keep up to date with new posts from ORIGINal Thoughts by receiving email alerts when new content is available.

Randy Townsend


Randy Townsend, MPS, (he, him, his) translates organizational vision and mission into clear priorities and practical goals to ensure alignment and collaboration. He has been a leader in policy implementation and publishing strategy. Randy is currently president of the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) and has served in leadership positions for the Council of Science Editors, AM&P Network’s Association Council, and co-chaired DEIA Committees for AM&P Network and SSP. He has actively supported C4DISC and contributed to the development of many of their freely available resources. Randy was the inaugural editor-in-chief for the GW Journal of Ethics in Publishing and is an Associate Professor of the MPS in Publishing program in the College of Professional Studies at George Washington University.

Christen Pruitt

Managing Director


Christen Pruitt contributes her experience as a Publisher, Consultant, and Business Development Manager in society publishing, membership management, and corporate sales to Origin’s solutions. For the past decade Christen has connected industry-leading professionals with data-driven initiatives from improving publishing operations to maximizing audience engagement. Her dedication to scholarly publishing, especially in the Life & Health sciences, makes her well-positioned to address challenges, identify opportunities, and align strategies for academic societies and professional organizations alike. Highly qualified in consultative solutions and uniquely effective in strategic planning, she finds few things more satisfying than providing research professionals with the tools to assess, analyze, and activate resources to realize their goals. Christen prides herself on delivering expertise to myriad stakeholders and is passionate about ensuring sustainable success that supports research publishing partners’ missions to increase their positive impact on the world.

Brook Simpson



Brook graduated from the University of Maryland, College Park with a Bachelor of Arts degree in English Language and Literature. She began her career in the scholarly publishing industry in 2006 and has enjoyed progressively responsible roles in managing peer review and journal production processes. Brook is currently a consultant at Origin Editorial. Prior to joining Origin, Brook worked at the American Gastroenterological Association as the managing editor of their flagship journal, Gastroenterology. Brook is a member of the International Society of Managing and Technical Editors (ISMTE) and currently serves on their Board of Directors.

Rebecca Meiser



Rebecca began her career in publishing with Mosby in St Louis, MO, in 1997. A 5-year editorial assistant position for Kidney International segued into a 15-year proofreading role for Wiley. She has proofread and copy edited for Graphic World, a publishing services company in St Louis, MO, and, more recently, she is a developmental copy editor for the Journal of Veterinary Emergency and Critical Care (Wiley) and a copy editor for TrueLearn, a testbank preparation tool for medical students. In 2019, Rebecca joined the Origin family as a contractor, working as an editorial assistant for the Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, as well as copy editor and proofreader of multiple projects.

Libby Morgan Beri



Libby contracts with Origin as a peer review manager for the National Academy of Medicine and editorial assistant for the American Institute of Physics and American Psychological Association. She is also a freelance academic manuscript editor and managing editor of the journals Policy and Society and Policy Design and Practice. In addition, Libby has significant experience in academic administration, through roles at the National University of Singapore (2015-2018) and the University of Pennsylvania (2006-2012). Her experience includes developing an assessment of faculty research output, quality and impact for annual review; designing and executing benchmarking against peer and aspirant schools; working with faculty and research centers on grant applications; and serving as a project manager for numerous international training programs funded by various U.S. government agencies.

Carolyn Sperry



Carolyn worked in book publishing and as a freelance writer before taking on her current role. She works on the Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and the Archives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation. Carolyn earned a BA in English from SUNY College at Cortland, studied at SUNY Binghamton, and later completed a Media Bistro Boot Camp for Journalists. She was proud to serve two-year terms on the boards of Camp Puzzle Peace (an organization that provides recreational opportunities to individuals with autism) and ISMTE. Carolyn lived in Chicago for many years and now lives in Rochester NY.

Detra Davis



Detra currently works at the ISPOR. Her title is Senior Manager, Publications. Since 2018, she has been a freelance managing editor for Origin Editorial. Detra has 20 years of scholarly publishing experience. She began her career at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, Michigan) at the Society of Research in Child Development (SRCD) as an editorial assistant. Within three years, she was promoted to Publications Manager at SRCD. In 2011, Detra relocated to her home state of Illinois to be closer to family and friends. Detra accepted a position at the American Academy of Dermatology as a managing editor for three journals from 2011 to 2021. Detra has a bachelor’s degree in business administration and two Master of Science degrees. One from Northwestern University in Managerial Communications. The other is from Pace University in Publishing. In 2021, she received a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion certificate from Florida State University. Detra has served on multiple committees for publishing organizations such as CSE and ISMTE. Detra is currently the Chair of the Workshop Committee for ISMTE. She has published two articles in scholarly publishing magazines: · Article title: "How to Acknowledge Your Reviewers" · Article title: "Using Metadata to Make Strategic Decisions for Your Journal." She has published two articles in scholarly publishing magazines: · Article title: "How to Acknowledge Your Reviewers" · Article title: "Using Metadata to Make Strategic Decisions for Your Journal"

Jennifer Mahar

Client Coordinator/Consultant


Jennifer has been in academic publishing for over 27 years. She began her journal career with the American Journal of Physiology: Renal Physiology which led her to cross the country from Boston to Vanderbilt to Yale with her EIC. She was a beta-tester for ScholarOne while at AJP: Renal. She then became the Publications Manager for the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology and managed the journal Neuropsychopharmacology (NPP). While moving home to Boston she took the position of internal Managing Editor for Evolution and Conservation Letters at John Wiley and Sons. She has been a freelance Managing Editor for JISAKOS, the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition and Oncogene. Currently Jennifer works with Origin Editorial on three projects; she is the Executive Peer Review Manager for the American Institutes for Physics Publishing contract and manages the Peer Review Process for over 18 journals. Jen also manages NPP and the Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. She is a System Admin expert level user of eJP and ScholarOne. Jen has been on the Editorial Policy Committee of the Council of Science Editors for over 15 years and is currently serving her third year on the Board of Directors for ISMTE and has been on the Peer Review Week Committee for two years. She was the inaugural recipient of the ISMTE Ira Salkin award in 2017. Jen is an expert at publishing policies and workflows. Jen received her BA in English from the University of Massachusetts.

Elizabeth (Liz) Zak, PhD


Liz has been supporting the Journal of Chemical Physics for over 13 years. With a background in journalism and library and information science, she has extensive knowledge in both editorial/publishing and systems administration. When she's not on the computer, Liz enjoys walking her dog, playing trivia with her boyfriend, and eating burritos.

Christine Urso



Christine’s experience in scholarly publishing spans over 25 years. She joined the Origin Editorial team in 2013 and currently manages the peer review of Biomicrofluidics, AIP Advances, Structural Dynamics, and the annual Magnetism and Magnetic Materials conferences, providing excellent editorial support to editors, reviewer, and authors. Before joining Origin, Christine worked as a data conversion specialist, troubleshooting and correcting author-submitted data files for the American Institute of Physics (AIP). She then became a production editor responsible for copyediting, proofreading, and preparing journals for publication and managing the peer review for four AIP-owned physics journals, Conference Proceedings Program, and three ASTM engineering journals and books series. She also pioneered a new open access journal, assisted in the setup of new journal test sites, and implemented and streamlined peer review processes to decrease time to publication. Christine is also a member of ISMTE.

Carolyn Sperry



Carolyn worked in book publishing and as a freelance writer before taking on her current role. She works on the Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and the Archives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation. Carolyn earned a BA in English from SUNY College at Cortland, studied at SUNY Binghamton, and later completed a Media Bistro Boot Camp for Journalists. She was proud to serve two-year terms on the boards of Camp Puzzle Peace (an organization that provides recreational opportunities to individuals with autism) and ISMTE. Carolyn lived in Chicago for many years and now lives in Rochester NY.

Laura Rempel



Laura started her career as a medical transcriptionist for an allergy and asthma clinic. In 2000, she began working as an Editorial Secretary for Applied Physics Letters. During this time, she was the lead in the setting up of the peer review and editorial management system, PXP, for the journal. She provided input in the development and implementation for the needs of the journal’s editorial team. She joined the Origin Editorial team in 2013 and continued to work for Applied Physics Letters as an Assistant Peer Review Manager. In 2015, she assisted in the launch of APL Photonics, managing the editorial office and assisting editors with the peer-review process, preparing manuscripts to send to production, and managing the peer-review database. More recently, she has added the role of Peer Review Manager for The Journal of Chemical Physics. Laura is also a member of ISMTE.

Linda Boniello



Linda has been in academic publishing her entire career. For the past 20+ years she has worked in peer review management and operations. At the American Institute of Physics (AIP) she managed peer review for five AIP-owned physics journals, three ASTM engineering journals, AIP Conference Proceedings, and the annual Magnetism and Magnetic Materials conference. She wrote and maintained a peer review manual and developed sample manuscripts for 13 journals published by AIP. In 2013 she joined Origin Editorial and currently manages peer review for three journals in the AIP Publishing portfolio. She is a member of several professional organizations, including ISMTE. Linda loves working in peer review because of the communication it allows with authors, reviewers, and editors from around the world. Earlier in her career, Linda was a copyeditor at AIP for several Physical Review journals. She wrote a copyediting manual for staff and was on the editorial team that updated the AIP Editorial Handbook, 2nd ed. She was instrumental in setting up the first freelance copyediting program at AIP and became a cottage employee herself for a while when her two boys were born. When she returned to work in-house, Linda was responsible for training and supervising overseas copyediting vendors and a large American cottage copyediting staff. She created two major copyediting style manuals for use by the cottage staff, independent contractors, and vendors. Linda also worked as a copyeditor for Pergamon Press, Aptara, and Cold Spring Harbor Labs. She received a BA in English from Adelphi University.

Benita Hammer



Benita has more than 30 years of experience in the scientific publishing world. She began her career as a proofreader, then copy editor for American Institute of Physics (AIP), working on 12 journals. She joined their newly formed Quality Assurance team and helped create the inaugural QA manual for outside vendors that is continued to be used. In 2010, Benita moved to peer review, providing editorial support to editors, reviewers, and authors. Joining Origin in 2013, Benita now manages the peer review of AIP Publishing’s Physics of Plasmas and Structural Dynamics, as well as management of the production-side of AIP Conference Proceedings. She also managed the submission-side of AIP Conference Proceedings and the Russian-translation journal, Low Temperature Physics. She is a member of several professional organizations, including ISMTE. Benita copyedits for Cold Spring Harbor Labs, her public library newsletters, as well as books and dissertations for people in her community. Outside of work, Benita remains involved in community service, raising awareness and funds for the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation. She is also a member of a scholarship committee that provides grants for further education to graduating high school students. Benita received her BA in English from Hofstra University.

Alexis Wynne Mogul



Alexis Wynne Mogul, a former physicist, has worked in the scientific publishing industry for nearly 20 years. She in an expert manager of people and editorial and production processes, and she specializes in supporting authors, reviewers, and editors. Alexis got her start in the industry as a copy editor for Science (AAAS), and has since worked as a production editor, managing editor, and editorial director for numerous scientific and medical journals. For six years she built and managed a large team that supported PLOS ONE during the height of their submission volume. Since joining Origin Editorial in 2017, Alexis has enjoyed working with a number of client journals and societies in various editorial roles. She now serves as the Author Services Manager for a large client, and she looks forward to offering her scientific and editing expertise to the awardee teams with an eye toward customer service and collaborative communication.

Jen Charat



Jen’s background is in trade publishing—mostly on the adult side, but she has worked on some young adult and juvenile books as well. Jen graduated from Harvard College with a degree in English and American Literature and Language and thereafter worked for New York-based publishing houses such as HarperCollins, Henry Holt and Co., and Harcourt, Inc. Jen ran her own editorial consulting shop, working with literary agents, trade publishing houses, web marketing firms, and private clients on projects ranging from books and articles to screenplays and SEO content. Jen is currently working as a project manager, a social media manager, and an annual conference coordinator for the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. She also provides editorial support to the editorial office of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association journals.

James Galipeau



James is the Assistant Managing Editor for the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (JACI). He has a Master’s Degree in Sport Psychology and a PhD in Education (Psychopedagogy) from the University of Ottawa. His doctoral research was focused on how to construct an informal learning environment in a small group setting (i.e., a “community of practice”). James worked for eight years as a Senior Clinical Research Associate at the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI) before joining the Origin team. His main focus there was on studying the effectiveness and improving the quality of training for authors, peer reviewers, and editors of biomedical journals. Since beginning at Origin, James has taken a keen interest in developing ways to leverage the remote working environment and flexibility within one’s workday to improve job performance and enhance self-care, particularly through physical activity and nature. In his free time, James competes internationally in the sport of adventure racing, traveling around the world to compete in Adventure Racing World Series events.

Judy Connors



Judy has worked in the scholarly publishing industry for over 30 years and has experience in almost every aspect of scholarly publishing from working with a variety of content providers, such as for- and not-for-profit entities, pharmaceutical companies, advertising agencies and trade publications to create and curate content to drive action and make an impact. A detail-oriented, approachable, and engaging communicator with strong interpersonal skills, she is an excellent team and individual contributor who has exceptional editorial and organizational skills.

Lynn Purdy



Lynn began her career in the Biological Research Division at Argonne National Laboratory for 10 years as group secretary for the Beagle Project typing manuscripts, research grant proposals, and inputting data tracking each dog’s history. She also served as the Administrative Secretary to the Assistant Division Director. In 1984 she transferred to the Review of Scientific Instruments Editorial Office as an Editorial Assistant managing the office and processing manuscripts through the entire peer-review system. She also attended national and international conferences interacting with the participants handling submissions through the peer-review process. She assisted in the development and testing of the journal’s original 4D data system and current PXP system. Lynn joined Origin Editorial in 2013 as an Assistant Peer Review Manager overseeing the editorial office and assisting editors on Review of Scientific Instruments. She has worked on the Journal of Applied Physics and is presently the APRM on Physics of Fluids. She has recently taken on the role of Peer Review Manager for AIPP. Lynn is a member of ISMTE.

Anita Bell



Anita began her career in the legal field working for various law firms. After graduating from college, she landed a job working for the American Heart Association as an editorial assistant. Currently, she is the Managing Editor for the Head & Neck journal. Anita enjoys volunteering for different organizations such as Baker Ripley American Cancer Society and many different church organizations. In her free time, she enjoys hanging out with her family, cruising, relaxing and enjoying life.

Erin Hernandez



Erin joined Origin in 2020 bringing decades of academic publishing experience. Erin is the managing editor for two journals owned by a large commercial publisher. She also works on Peer Review for various APA journals. Erin received her Bachelor of Arts in English specializing in Book Publishing from Hofstra University and also holds Project Manager Professional (PMP) certification.

Adam Etkin



Adam is an established leader in the scholarly publishing industry with over twenty years of experience and a proven track record of taking concepts, technology, and businesses from idea to reality. He is highly experienced with all aspects of the publishing environment including journals, books, submission and peer review, ethics, plagiarism, access models, funding mandates, budgeting, publishing and hosting platforms, metrics, XML, print and digital production, multimedia, mobile applications, all related technology and more. Adam founded PRE (Peer Review Evaluation), a suite of technology and data driven services designed to support and strengthen the peer-review process on behalf of researchers, publishers, and libraries. He is a highly regarded and sought-after speaker at many world-wide industry conferences and events with a true passion for technology and the publishing industry.

Meghan McDevitt



Meghan has spent her entire career in the scholarly publishing industry and is an experienced editorial office professional specializing in the efficient management of peer-reviewed publications. She is President of ISMTE (2022-2023) and has been an active member since 2011, including serving as the Editor of Editorial Office News (2014-2016) and as the society’s Treasurer (2017-2018). Meghan was the 2018 recipient of the ISMTE Award for Excellence. At Origin, she is the managing editor for a large client. Meghan began her career as an editorial assistant for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy at the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and later became the assistant manager of clinical publications where she oversaw the development of clinical practice guidelines. Prior to joining Origin, Meghan was the managing editor of The Journal of Pediatrics where she transitioned the editorial office to an electronic workflow, standardized the Editorial Board selection and onboarding processes, and worked with journal editors to evaluate the journal’s policies and practices in relation to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Meghan attended the University of Dayton in Dayton, Ohio and graduated with degrees in English and French

Meg Weist



Meg is dedicated to providing enhanced editorial support for editors, reviewers, and authors in a variety of STEM disciplines. Meg came to publishing through the sciences initially assisting in the development of Engineering and Computer Sciences texts. Moving to journal publications, Meg served as the Managing Editor for over a decade on the American Journal of Medical Genetics through its transition from a single entity to its current multipart format. In joining Origin Editorial, Meg brought experience in two of the major online peer review platforms, working in both academic and medical environments, in-house and in distributed editorial office operations. She has worked on several journals under the Origin auspices. She is a member of CSE, ISMTE, and EFA. She is a past ISMTE Board member and has served on several ISMTE committees, including Education & Standards and the annual Conference Workshop.

Megan Ventura



Megan earned her BA degrees in English Literature and French Language at the University of California, Santa Barbara. After graduation, she began working as an Editorial Assistant for Physics of Fluids. She later went on to earn her Masters in Writing and Publishing from Emerson College in Boston. Megan further refined her academic publishing skill set at SAGE Publishing where she served as an Associate Editor for the Education and Criminology/Criminal Justice lists. After joining Origin Editorial, she has assisted the teams for Physics of Fluids, Journal of Applied Physics, Applied Physics Letters, and Physics of Plasmas.

Ravi Govindaraj



Ravi is a peer-review management enthusiast and passionate to explore new frontiers in the Scientific journal publications. He holds M.Tech in Biotechnology from VIT University, Vellore, and B.Tech in Biotechnology from Anna University, Chennai. His research was focused on development of indigenous dialyser at Anna University, Chennai. He has worked on various research projects involving treatment of various industrial effluents, Bioethanol production and nano-drug delivery. His analytical skills in research were recognized with a ‘Best poster award’ for his project focused on development of polyphenol loaded avocado oil nanoemulsion for topical application in a national conference. In addition, he has received various awards like ‘Special Achiever award’, ‘Achiever award’ and ‘Excellent performer award’ for all-round outstanding performance in extracurricular, co-curricular and sports activities. His intellectual competence is outlined with his GATE, BEC-Vantage and NCAT qualifications. He has led national symposiums, NSS, and Chess teams. He has several years of experience in the editorial/publishing industry with prominent publishers like Springer Nature, Taylor and Francis and Scientific Scholar.

Alice Landwehr



Alice started her career in medical publishing and editing with The Journal of Pediatrics as an Editorial Assistant, becoming the journal’s first Senior Editorial Assistant and Press Release Writer, and eventually serving as its Managing Editor, when she transitioned the journal from a paper-based system to the online submission and review system Editorial Manager. She has provided publication management services for peer-reviewed journals such as Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology, and Medicine; Disability and Health Journal; Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology; Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology; Gastrointestinal Endoscopy; Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry; and others. She also worked for the American Board of Radiology as Senior Content Editor and Assistant Director of the Standards Division and for the University of Arizona Press, an academic and literary book publisher, as Art and Typesetting Assistant for the production department. Alice has a Bachelor’s of Arts in English from Northern Kentucky University and a Graduate Certificate in Professional Editing and Writing from the University of Cincinnati. She currently lives in Tucson, Arizona, and she leads fun and supportive low-impact Zumba Gold and EnerChi exercise classes for active older adults and beginners, currently online and in-person.

Wendy Krank



Wendy has worked in various professions and passions, including portrait photography and banking, before entering the field of medical publishing. Previously she worked at Mayo Clinic Arizona as a medical administrative assistant, credentialist, and general surgery residency coordinator for the Department of Medical Education. Wendy became managing editor for the neuroscience publications of Cephalalgia and Headache Currents. She joined the Origin Editorial team in March of 2018. At present, she supports the editorial office for ASHA journals. Wendy has previously provided editorial office management services for Restorative Medicine, Anesthesiology, and ILAR Journal. Wendy was a previous board member for ISMTE. She has database skills using these two platforms ScholarOne and Editorial Manager manuscript management systems.

Ann Casper



Ann is Editor-in-Chief of Penelope Institute—an institute for the profoundly gifted. She is also an academic editor with extensive journal experience as Managing/Copyeditor for Animal Sentience and Senior Editor/Editorial Intern Mentor for Society & Animals. She has 17 years of editorial experience, including as a photojournalist, ghostwriter, production editor, and editorial assistant. Ann has also tutored English Language Learners, classmates and colleagues at University of Wisconsin–Madison, graduate students in engineering, K–12 immigrants and refugees, and gifted students. In addition to editing publications in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities, Ann is also collaborating to build her own editing website and form a creative collective with fellow musicians, writers, filmmakers, and artists. Ann loves learning about architecture, psychology, and classical music. For fun, she writes poetry; hosts open mics and performs standup comedy at the local tea bar; practices vinyasa yoga; bikes; and ventures to parks, concerts, and museums. Ann also enjoys moonlighting as a cat and dog “Nanny” in Chicago.

Alicia Byrne



Alicia has been with Origin Editorial since 2014, when she joined the team as the Managing Editor for Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, the official journal of the Wilderness Medical Society. Alicia brings a background in editorial processes, copyediting, and proofreading to Origin. She also edits the biannual Origin newsletter and is a member of ISMTE.

Abbie Flynn



As part of the marketing team, Abbie maintains Origin Editorial's and Origin Reports' social media accounts. For Origin Reports, she coordinates webinars, handles client communications, and manages the company's blog. Abbie also creates product demonstration videos and updates the Origin Reports website.

Sherrie Hill



Sherrie has been with Origin Editorial since 2017. She has worked in the editorial office for several journals and is currently working as the Assistant Peer Review Manager for the American Journal of Audiology. Additionally, Sherrie is the Project Manager for the editorial office reporting software application, Origin Reports. She uses her background in engineering to help design the customized editorial office charts, tables, and reports available in the application. Sherrie also provides personalized customer support for all Origin Reports users with reporting issues or questions.

Diane Dunham Drexler

Client Coordinator/Consultant


Diane began as a chemistry and physics instructor, providing a seamless transition to academic publishing. She served as the Publications Manager for the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology and managed its premier journal Neuropsychopharmacology. Later, she steered the college’s new initiative, Neuropsychopharmacology Reviews, from its launch through the sixth volume, including liaising with the publisher’s medical illustrator to create NPPR’s signature graphics. Diane has worked closely with abstract management submission designers and production teams to create online meeting abstracts and eBooks. She is exceptionally skilled in eJP, EM, and believes in a collaborative effort. Joining Origin Editorial in 2012 as the Publications Director for the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine, she managed the Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation until her more recent role of Peer Review Manager for Applied Physics Letters at the American Institute of Physics. Additionally, she manages the Journal of Clinical Lipidology, a publication of the National Lipid Society. Diane serves on several committees at ISMTE and is a member of CSE. She has Diane received her undergraduate degree from The University of Mary Washington in Virginia and her MEd in Secondary Science from Converse University in South Carolina.

Steve Cavanaugh

Client Coordinator/Consultant


Steve got his start in publishing with Mosby Year-Book in Philadelphia in 1995, after working as a teacher, chef and various sundry jobs up and down the East Coast of the US. After returning to the Boston, Mass area, he worked in IT until returning to publishing with the journal Pharmacotherapy in 1999. He joined the Origin Editorial team in 2013 and has worked on a variety of journals in medicine, environmental science and physics.

Denise Kuo

Client Coordinator/Consultant


Denise is a highly accomplished journal operations professional with 20 years of experience in scientific publishing. She has expertise in team leadership, customer relationships, and leading successful complex projects to implement efficiencies for improved productivity and reduction in costs. Denise is respected as a strong people leader excelling at developing and mentoring teams in providing high-quality, meaningful insight to senior management and other stakeholders for positive results. Before coming to Origin, she served as Director of Journal Operations, Circulation Journals and JAHA at the American Heart Association where she was responsible for ensuring standardization and implementing workflow efficiencies across the 13-journal portfolio. She is a member of ISMTE and CSE. She has served as a CSE Mentor and as a member of the SSP Marketing and Communications Committee.

Glenn Collins

Client Coordinator/Consultant


Glenn graduated from Cornell University in 1991 with a BS in Biology. After working in a microbiology lab for a few years at Pall Corporation he started his STM publishing career at John Wiley and Sons in 1995. He left Wiley and moved to San Diego in 2000 where he first worked for the journal Brain Research before becoming the managing editor of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC). After twelve plus years as the Executive Managing Editor of the JACC journals Glenn moved to Origin Editorial where he assumed the role of Publications Director/Managing Editor for the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM). In this role he oversees the Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and its open access companion the Archives of Rehabilitation Research and Clinical Translation. In 2021 Glenn assumed the position of Director of Sales, Publications and Social Media for ACRM. Glenn has helped develop and launch five (and counting) new journals in the STM field. Glenn is a past president of ISMTE.

Dave Allen

Client Coordinator/Consultant


Dave has over 21 years of publishing experience. He started his publishing career with the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, which self-published a journal and textbook, eventually becoming the Director of Publications. He then moved to take editorial leadership of CIG Media Group, LLC, which operated eight clinical oncology journals. From there he became a Publisher for Elsevier, specializing in oncology and radiology, with a portfolio of 12 journals, overseeing their operations for seven years. Dave moved to Origin Editorial in 2018 where he continues to manage journals as well as provide consultations for scientific societies. His Origin clients have included the American Association of Thoracic Surgery, the American Heart Association, and Cochrane. Dave has recently started as the Editorial Director for a large client. Dave has extensive experience in project, people, and budget management in the private and non-profit sectors. His experience includes developing and implementing new initiatives; creating and managing complex workflows and processes; forecasting and developing budgets; supervising employees; and collaborating with commercial sponsors, governing boards, and society leaders. Dave is the vice chair of the ISMTE Sponsorship Committee.

Erin Landis

Managing Director


Erin has more than two decades of leadership, strategic planning, project management, and relationship-building experience. As the Managing Director of Origin Editorial, she guides strategy, business development, and operations. Before Origin, she was the Vice President of Publications for the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA), where she oversaw the editorial and financial operations, as well as the strategic direction of several GI-related publications, including five peer-reviewed journals. Erin recently served as the president of ISMTE and serves as the chair of the Global Event Oversight Committee and as a member on the Education & Standards Committee. She’s also a member of SSP and CSE where she has served as a mentor. Also, she is a current member of the CSE DEI Committee. She also served as co-chair of the Publishing Professional Peer Group for the Council of Medical Specialty Societies and was a member of the writing group for the C4DISC Toolkits for Equity Project’s “Antiracism Toolkit for Organizations.” Erin received her degree in psychology from The College of William & Mary in Williamsburg, VA.

Kristen Overstreet

Senior Partner


Kristen oversees operations for Origin Editorial and Origin Reports, including managing the process of finding experienced team members to provide services to Origin’s clients. Kristen is a Past President of the ISMTE Board of Directors and currently serves the ISMTE on the Early Career and North America Meeting committees. She is also a member of the CSE, recently serving on their IAB Task Force, and FORCE11, serving on the Research Data Publishing Ethics Working Group. For more than 20 years, Kristen has been known for elevating journal operations and improving journal and peer review management through use of effective policies and procedures. She provides consultation to Origin clients regarding effective peer review management and speaks regularly on peer review operations and ethics at industry meetings.

Jason Roberts, PhD

Senior Partner


Dr. Roberts is a globally recognized peer review management specialist, publisher and intermittent academic investigator on all matters related to the conduct of peer review. He is focused on improving the quality, rigorousness and successful delivery of scholarly communications, regardless of discipline. After earning a doctorate in Geography from Loughborough University in the United Kingdom, Dr. Roberts began a career in publishing at Blackwell Science in Oxford, England and then Boston, Massachusetts, eventually becoming a Senior Editor of US-based medical journals. In 2010, Dr. Roberts formed Origin Editorial, one of the first, and now largest, independently owned companies to offer professional peer review management for journals. Dr. Roberts is a past-president of ISMTE. Dr. Roberts has a particular interest in improving standards of reporting in biomedical journals and the monitoring of publication ethics issues. He has contributed book chapters and research articles on these topics and collaborated closely with the EQUATOR Network, the Ottawa Centre for Journalology and the Committee on Publication Ethics. Dr. Roberts is a co-author of Peer Review: Reform and Renewal in Scientific Publishing” (2017, Against the Grain Publishing). He currently sits on the editorial board of the journal Research Integrity and Peer Review and is a frequent reviewer for papers on the subject of peer review for Learned Publishing and The BMJ