Inclusive peer review: Reflections on an adapted citizens' jury with people with learning disabilities

Abstract

Background

Inclusive research is widely accepted as an essential part of the process to democratise knowledge creation and dissemination. However, while peer review is an important part of academic publishing, the potential to include people with learning disabilities in this element of the research process has not previously been explored using a deliberative approach.

Methods

Accessibility adaptations were made to the citizens' jury approach enabling people with learning disabilities to participate. Sixteen adults with mild to moderate learning disabilities were recruited to participate in the adapted citizens' jury. Jury members took part in capacity-building workshops to develop their knowledge of research and research processes. Six expert witnesses presented evidence to the citizens' jury and were questioned on aspects of inclusive research, representation, peer review and academic publishing processes. Facilitators supported citizens' jury members to reflect on the evidence presented and to develop recommendations for inclusive peer review.

Findings

The citizens' jury was an effective inclusive research approach in this case. Jurors made recommendations related to the question of inclusive peer review: inclusive reviews should be done by groups rather than individuals; the research under review must be in accessible formats and on relevant topics; reviewers need sufficient time to conduct reviews; and diverse groups of people with learning disabilities should be involved.

Conclusions

People with learning disabilities appreciate the importance of peer review but do not necessarily want to participate in it. This jury suggested creative approaches to disseminating, reviewing and engaging with research, including building more opportunities for dialogue between researchers and self-advocates. The adapted citizens' jury was a novel and effective method of supporting deliberation on this topic but other approaches to including the views and experiences of those with more severe learning disabilities should be explored.