Measuring the Quality of Editorial Peer Review
http://jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v287n21/ffull/joc11816.html
  access restricted (by the publisher) to members/subscribers/customers only
  peer-reviewed

Jefferson, Tom, Elizabeth Wager and Frank Davidoff
JAMA
2002

Abstract:

The quality of a process can only be tested against its agreed objectives. Editorial peer-review is widely used, yet there appears to be little agreement about how to measure its effects or processes. Ten studies used a variety of instruments to assess the quality of articles that had undergone peer review. Only 1, nonrandomized study compared the quality of articles published in peer-reviewed and non–peer-reviewed journals. The others measured the effects of variations in the peer-review process or used a before-and-after design to measure the effects of standard peer review on accepted articles. Eighteen studies measured the quality of reviewers' reports under different conditions such as blinding or after training. One study compared the time and cost of different review processes.