No—editorials in medical journals are usually not externally peer-reviewed; some journals may apply internal or invited expert checks.
Readers ask this a lot: are editorials in medical journals peer-reviewed, or do they bypass outside scrutiny? Here’s the clear answer, plus how to tell what happened to a specific piece, what “reviewed” means in this context, and what weight you should give an editorial when you’re making a decision or citing it.
What Counts As A Medical Journal Editorial?
An editorial is an opinion-led article that interprets new research, points to implications, or calls attention to gaps in care, policy, or methods. It’s often short, written by invited experts or the journal’s editors, and tied to a study or a timely topic. It is not original research and doesn’t follow the full methods-results-discussion arc. Because the aim is context and judgment rather than new data, journals handle review differently than they do for research papers.
Are Editorials In Medical Journals Peer-Reviewed? (Exact Answer And Nuance)
Across leading titles, most editorials do not go through the same external peer review used for research articles. Many receive only editorial review inside the journal. A subset of journals sometimes sends invited editorials to outside experts, or they apply a lighter consultative check. Policies vary by title and by article type, and journals state these policies publicly.
Common Review Paths For Non-Research Content
To set expectations early, here’s a broad map of how major article types are typically handled. Always check the journal’s page for the exact rule on the piece you’re reading.
| Article Type | Typical Gatekeeping | What That Means For You |
|---|---|---|
| Original Research | External peer review by subject experts | Data and methods get independent critique before acceptance |
| Systematic Review/Meta-analysis | External peer review | Methods and synthesis steps are checked by specialists |
| Clinical Review/Education | External peer review in most journals | Practice guidance is vetted for accuracy and balance |
| Editorial | Editorial review; occasional external input at some journals | Opinion backed by evidence; review may be internal only |
| Perspective/Commentary | Editorial review; sometimes external peer review | Invited expert view; check article footers for review notes |
| News/Views | Editorial fact-checking | Reporting standard, not peer review |
| Letters/Correspondence | Editorial screening; occasional external check | Short critiques or clarifications; lighter process |
What Top Journals Say About Editorials
Policies are public. Two clear examples show the pattern:
- PLOS Medicine states: “All articles, with the exception of Editorials … are externally peer reviewed.” You’ll find this wording on the journal’s process page (PLOS Medicine editorial and peer review process).
- The BMJ explains that pieces “written by The BMJ’s own editors do not undergo external peer review.” That statement is in the journal’s publishing-model page (The BMJ publishing model).
Other large families (JAMA Network, NEJM, The Lancet group) emphasize rigorous external review for research and spell out that policies differ by article type. The key move is to look for the explicit line that tells you whether a given category—editorial, commentary, or perspective—was sent to outside reviewers or handled in-house.
Why Editorials Often Skip External Peer Review
Editorials are timely. Journals want fast context when landmark data lands or a policy shifts. External review adds weeks. An internal check by senior editors can confirm accuracy, tone, and references faster. Editorials also sit in the opinion space. They interpret the evidence rather than create it, so journals treat them as expert commentary backed by citations rather than as new studies that need a line-by-line methods audit.
Strengths And Limits Of Editorials
What Editorials Do Well
- Frame the importance of new evidence and point to practice or policy implications.
- Flag blind spots, real-world barriers, and unintended consequences that a trial didn’t track.
- Bring cross-disciplinary context that a methods-focused paper might not include.
What They Don’t Do
- They don’t present new datasets for statistical review.
- They don’t supply full protocols or registries for audit.
- They rarely include prespecified outcomes or risk-of-bias assessments.
How To Tell If A Specific Editorial Was Reviewed
Don’t guess—verify. Journals give you several breadcrumbs on the article page and in the site’s policy hub.
Where To Look On The Article Page
- Article category label near the title (“Editorial,” “Comment,” “Perspective”).
- Footers or sidebars that say “peer reviewed,” “externally peer reviewed,” or “not externally peer reviewed.”
- Linked policy pages describing peer review by article type.
- Prepublication history links in journals that post review reports for certain categories.
| Where To Look | What To Check | What It Tells You |
|---|---|---|
| Article Header | Content type label | Signals the expected review pathway |
| Article Footer | “Peer reviewed” or “Not externally peer reviewed” | Direct confirmation for that piece |
| Policy Hub | Peer-review policy by article type | Applies to all pieces in that category |
| Prepublication History | Posted reviewer reports (when available) | Evidence of external review for eligible categories |
| Editorial Board Page | Who handles non-research content | Shows the internal oversight model |
| Instructions For Authors | Which categories are sent to reviewers | Process details and exceptions |
| Competing Interests Section | Declarations by editorial authors | Transparency on potential biases |
Editorials In Medical Journals And Peer Review Rules (Close Variant)
This is the practical takeaway. When you cite an editorial or use it to guide practice, ask two questions: did the piece undergo any external scrutiny, and does the argument rest on peer-reviewed evidence? Even if an editorial didn’t get outside review, the citations usually point to work that did. Your job is to track the claim back to those sources.
How Editors Review Editorials Internally
Internal review is not a rubber stamp. Senior editors examine the logic and the references, check for balance across viewpoints, and request edits where the argument overreaches. Some journals also route invited editorials to an associate editor with content expertise, or they request a quick read from an ad hoc expert. This is lighter than the multi-reviewer, revise-and-resubmit cycle used for research, yet it still imposes standards on evidence use and tone.
How To Read An Editorial With The Right Weight
When An Editorial Is Enough
- You need a concise framing of why a new trial matters.
- You want context about policy signals or system-level barriers.
- You’re collecting viewpoints to set up a debate or grand rounds.
When You Need The Underlying Paper
- You’re changing a protocol, coverage policy, or care pathway.
- You’re building a guideline or a meta-analysis.
- You’re teaching study design or grading evidence strength.
Evidence Backing The Policy Statements
Two sources give you the clearest confirmations. PLOS Medicine’s process page spells out that editorials are exceptions to external peer review. The BMJ’s publishing-model page states that pieces written by its own editors are not sent for external review. These are authoritative, journal-level statements and reflect common practice across large publishers. Follow those links above and you’ll see the wording in plain text.
What To Do As An Author Of An Invited Editorial
If you’ve been invited to write an editorial, set a high bar even if the journal doesn’t plan external review for that category. Anchor your argument in peer-reviewed studies, state limits, disclose interests, and send a clean reference list. If the journal lets you suggest external readers, pick true content experts and ask for fast, focused comments. That way, you get the benefits of expert critique even under a short timeline.
Quick Answers To Frequent Questions
Does “Peer-Reviewed Journal” Mean Every Article Inside Is Peer-Reviewed?
No. The label applies to the journal’s research workflow. Inside the same issue you’ll find a mix of research (externally reviewed) and non-research content such as editorials, news, and letters that follow different checks.
Where Do Journals Say What’s Reviewed?
Policy hubs and “instructions for authors” pages. Many also display a plain line on each article page that states whether that piece was externally reviewed. When in doubt, scan the footer, then click through to the peer-review policy. Journals are urged by editorial bodies to make this obvious so readers can judge weight.
Putting It All Together
So, are editorials in medical journals peer-reviewed? The straightforward answer is no in most cases, with limited exceptions where editors seek an outside check. Treat editorials as expert commentary that interprets and assembles peer-reviewed evidence rather than as peer-reviewed evidence by themselves. Verify the policy for the particular journal and piece, then trace any take-home claim back to the underlying studies.
Method Note
This guide reviewed current journal policy pages and process notes from high-visibility medical publishers. Policies can differ by article type within the same title and can change over time. Always rely on the live policy page linked from the article you’re reading.