Differences in review quality and recommendations for publication between peer reviewers suggested by authors or by editors.
about
Do author-suggested reviewers rate submissions more favorably than editor-suggested reviewers? A study on atmospheric chemistry and physicsCoping with the Conflict-of-Interest Pandemic by Listening to and Doubting Everyone, Including YourselfEditorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care?Funding grant proposals for scientific research: retrospective analysis of scores by members of grant review panelProblems with traditional science publishing and finding a wider niche for post-publication peer review.Are reviewers suggested by authors as good as those chosen by editors? Results of a rater-blinded, retrospective studyA multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer reviewNon-financial conflicts of interest in academic grant evaluation: a qualitative study of multiple stakeholders in FranceRetrospective analysis of the quality of reports by author-suggested and non-author-suggested reviewers in journals operating on open or single-blind peer review modelsConflicts of interest among authors of medical guidelines: an analysis of guidelines produced by German specialist societies.Update in critical care 2006.The scholarship of critical review: improving quality and relevance.Predictive validity evidence for medical education research study quality instrument scores: quality of submissions to JGIM's Medical Education Special Issue.Reviewing scientific manuscripts.Effect of recommendations from reviewers suggested or excluded by authors.Becoming a peer reviewer to medical education journals.Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journalsSupporting and enhancing peer review in the BJGP.Should Authors be Requested to Suggest Peer Reviewers?Evolutionary change: the new face of Annals of Cardiac Anesthesia.Making sense of non-financial competing interests.Conflict of Interest in Journal Peer Review.Twelve tips for getting your manuscript published.Peer review: past, present, and future.Author-suggested reviewers: gender differences and influences on the peer review process at an ecology journalPeer Review: Recent Experience and Future Directions
P2860
Q21091101-B5B9CE41-08B2-4C04-BD97-45B797D92504Q24289482-A37EA7B9-BC32-4578-8AFA-04D85C106149Q28752655-53611D82-E5B6-49A7-BD4F-B3A97C99AC1FQ29580352-E4120C73-B0FE-430A-A901-EE5C0F067529Q30487340-34DF7DC1-90F6-4747-AB77-459C594E3BB6Q33245151-A37DBC25-70DF-4503-9BE4-012760EF75AFQ33269085-5A911ADC-9BF6-48B2-A3B6-3556287F5A00Q34230558-8067F052-BEA5-4CEE-8088-0C406EE6BB0AQ35794330-9070208A-CE12-45A3-8A52-2CBBB0DC5382Q36469499-7898AEB5-7EDC-41F2-830D-E2AAA2C90C5FQ36769694-807282A7-D6A5-4FAE-BDE7-A5920A87F316Q37004438-35BF2807-A57F-410B-8905-1C9A56CBD3E4Q37210957-F802853F-A1F9-477A-98DB-10A75F655F42Q37909548-AF297409-9FA0-4D6C-A266-903482A2D1B9Q37919700-3D43B8DE-D5EB-42D7-B867-AED074F2C1CEQ38014155-24069234-A263-4AB9-94C7-29624369B849Q38036603-BCA34D72-3FE3-4531-A13D-A916E78777CAQ38225109-BCA2677F-A1D4-4981-8E6F-A839F88A5BE6Q38982634-7D6051ED-136D-4940-A119-635A72DAD03CQ42735985-6D4A105C-4E3B-4966-92E5-F3B30EFECFD5Q42954266-A117010C-F05A-4DF1-93A2-0BED4BAB2027Q48140100-EC97B803-AE03-4714-9991-430A30581A68Q50561335-82E3CCD7-AA4F-4C9A-909B-F9809E915B35Q51621304-1934385E-57CF-4BDA-AB5A-6120D74CEDC2Q58042235-D51E3164-2B7F-4460-9D1E-1F270EE04871Q58533985-AA38CF48-1230-4DF3-95D3-3447F676C801
P2860
Differences in review quality and recommendations for publication between peer reviewers suggested by authors or by editors.
description
2006 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2006年の論文
@ja
2006年学术文章
@wuu
2006年学术文章
@zh-cn
2006年学术文章
@zh-hans
2006年学术文章
@zh-my
2006年学术文章
@zh-sg
2006年學術文章
@yue
2006年學術文章
@zh
2006年學術文章
@zh-hant
name
Differences in review quality ...... sted by authors or by editors.
@ast
Differences in review quality ...... sted by authors or by editors.
@en
type
label
Differences in review quality ...... sted by authors or by editors.
@ast
Differences in review quality ...... sted by authors or by editors.
@en
prefLabel
Differences in review quality ...... sted by authors or by editors.
@ast
Differences in review quality ...... sted by authors or by editors.
@en
P2093
P356
P1476
Differences in review quality ...... sted by authors or by editors.
@en
P2093
Andrew Hutchings
Leanne Tite
Nick Black
P304
P356
10.1001/JAMA.295.3.314
P407
P577
2006-01-01T00:00:00Z