about
Cost of the NSERC Science Grant Peer Review System Exceeds the Cost of Giving Every Qualified Researcher a Baseline GrantThe academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based reviewScientific Utopia: I. Opening Scientific CommunicationEmerging trends in peer review-a surveyUsing science and psychology to improve the dissemination and evaluation of scientific workViews on the peer review system of biomedical journals: an online survey of academics from high-ranking universitiesLetting the daylight in: Reviewing the reviewers and other ways to maximize transparency in scienceMaintaining live discussion in two-stage open peer reviewA study of innovative features in scholarly open access journalsPersonal attributes of authors and reviewers, social bias and the outcomes of peer review: a case study.Systematic variation in reviewer practice according to country and gender in the field of ecology and evolutionQuality assessment of scientific outputs using the BWM.Publishing a master's thesis: a guide for novice authorsThe evolution of peer review as a basis for scientific publication: directional selection towards a robust discipline?Methods and Biostatistics: a concise guide for peer reviewers.Peer review and journal impact factor: the two pillars of contemporary medical publishingSystematic review of the effectiveness of training programs in writing for scholarly publication, journal editing, and manuscript peer review (protocol).'Scholarly peer reviewing': The art, its joys and woesTeaching undergraduates the process of peer review: learning by doing.Becoming a peer reviewer to medical education journals.Aggregating post-publication peer reviews and ratings.A laboratory course for teaching laboratory techniques, experimental design, statistical analysis, and peer review process to undergraduate science students.Free for service: the inadequate incentives for quality peer review.Peer review: rigor? Or rigor mortis?Advancing kinesiology through improved peer review.Evidence-based Medicine in Animal Reproduction.Peer-review policy and guidelines for Biochemia Medica Journal.Heterogeneity in European research integrity guidance: relying on values or norms?Doing peer review and receiving feedback: impact on scientific literacy and writing skills.Ancient texts to PubMed: a brief history of the peer-review process.Editorial behaviors in peer review.Testing the rebound peer review concept.Is peer review censorship?Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers.The history and practice of peer review.Do peer review models affect clinicians' trust in journals? A survey of junior doctors.2013 SSAT presidential address: Peer review.Reviewing the review: a qualitative assessment of the peer review process in surgical journals.The Dark Side of Peer ReviewAuthor-suggested reviewers: gender differences and influences on the peer review process at an ecology journal
P2860
Q21710773-872767AB-F8AD-4877-A6FA-D2BC36BDF5FEQ24049929-2EDF3B86-AAD7-4278-9FD4-E2A11E516130Q24273234-B50BD524-B2A2-4739-AA3E-1AA0757F05D2Q24273351-D1549B50-53C1-4072-A331-93399D788730Q24273358-7569BAFE-8988-49F6-AC3A-36F0EF0711A9Q24288964-877D5CEB-E895-4A85-A2B8-DE7C6CA6B5D5Q28730475-3CC73A4F-AFEF-4886-9526-64C1B3069574Q28731911-5E15EBDD-927A-4A5C-9C36-E56344DC3B6EQ28732128-38174FC2-96E5-4674-879D-752B447A33D8Q30488576-DB23D2AB-1743-4919-9CA9-4780DF6BEF7BQ33369057-0C498562-70C5-419D-AA1C-A894DCECC17AQ33841735-F9FF690B-1572-4A17-AD74-DB04753B1189Q33869579-E2682213-9F89-47E6-BE6A-BA2D3EA9FC02Q34471308-9DF099D9-F930-4FD7-83C3-BFF78DF9C834Q34627261-061E10E5-2EAD-4B94-9F34-2C1E585F9C40Q34627290-D45E1141-FE09-4684-84EB-1ED471EE06E1Q34774886-31FF3E62-0134-4C04-B24D-B4880E342894Q35999726-08A3FBEE-4C4F-4A47-A4D2-51E1BD955455Q37786456-AC8CFD7B-A5E6-45D6-ADE6-0FE268C871B5Q38014155-A2CFF5C2-70B7-45AA-8A20-BE640E8876A1Q38015820-1063238C-C065-4B17-B325-E38063EBCBDDQ38061101-4921CAE2-A7E9-480A-9EF3-B553891490FFQ38127364-82ECC32F-1343-4911-BE73-FE41966AAC57Q38227540-D998B4AB-54D4-473D-AA1C-BEC7EEF6C0AFQ38237401-FF22DA33-9DD9-493B-9191-83954403865DQ38249139-9B6A833F-60E0-4234-90DA-29980A03342AQ38263373-B4CE1E70-C4A7-4CEE-BE93-B69D04720E40Q38369208-D46AF4D3-7140-49C2-90AB-5C26EB43AF94Q38723588-D1965971-6F56-4614-B25A-AC51AEF669DEQ38794664-04C5CE6F-8032-4CEC-978A-D1D6714397BEQ38888604-0DC7AFF0-FECF-4028-A9EB-C1CFC8943104Q42549305-0E34B5A3-73C0-4EE8-A319-D4CA1975CF5AQ43153388-498E3407-B43D-4FA6-A3E9-133C0AEE3029Q47142072-C4BCD286-EBC4-4E62-8A54-2B526AF3B02FQ48130361-AEC67802-05C9-44B5-AB27-2A3827007A66Q49522900-5C71DE65-8D37-4079-9841-60E6B663F965Q54662464-82F08284-4C5E-41C0-A57D-E5C1FDBE655CQ55354441-12948E01-6338-4228-897C-6CA3322B93A8Q57775800-0094E988-AE79-4011-AA2B-A0412DC7C860Q58042235-5FF920E4-1FF5-430C-9766-97011224CB11
P2860
description
2007 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2007 թուականի Յունիսին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած
@hyw
2007 թվականի հունիսին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված
@hy
2007年の論文
@ja
2007年論文
@yue
2007年論文
@zh-hant
2007年論文
@zh-hk
2007年論文
@zh-mo
2007年論文
@zh-tw
2007年论文
@wuu
name
The ups and downs of peer review.
@ast
The ups and downs of peer review.
@en
The ups and downs of peer review.
@nl
type
label
The ups and downs of peer review.
@ast
The ups and downs of peer review.
@en
The ups and downs of peer review.
@nl
prefLabel
The ups and downs of peer review.
@ast
The ups and downs of peer review.
@en
The ups and downs of peer review.
@nl
P2093
P2860
P356
P1476
The ups and downs of peer review.
@en
P2093
Abigail Polter
Alexander Zotov
Amit Gaggar
Cristy Tower
Dale J Benos
David Mayhew
Edlira Bashari
Jason Stephenson
Jose M Chaves
Kevin Schultz
P2860
P304
P356
10.1152/ADVAN.00104.2006
P50
P577
2007-06-01T00:00:00Z