about
The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigationUsing simplified peer review processes to fund research: a prospective studyMeasuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeepingCost of the NSERC Science Grant Peer Review System Exceeds the Cost of Giving Every Qualified Researcher a Baseline GrantPeer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted againResearch Funding: the Case for a Modified LotteryPeer review for improving the quality of grant applicationsHow peer-review constrains cognition: on the frontline in the knowledge sectorTracking replicability as a method of post-publication open evaluationThe validation of peer review through research impact measures and the implications for funding strategiesAn efficient system to fund science: from proposal review to peer-to-peer distributions.Governing ScienceThe Influence of Peer Reviewer Expertise on the Evaluation of Research Funding ApplicationsQuality control of epidemiological lectures online: scientific evaluation of peer reviewFunding grant proposals for scientific research: retrospective analysis of scores by members of grant review panelDoes the committee peer review select the best applicants for funding? An investigation of the selection process for two European molecular biology organization programmes.The calculus of committee composition.Peer review, program officers and science fundingProductivity of medical research in Switzerland.Is expert peer review obsolete? A model suggests that post-publication reader review may exceed the accuracy of traditional peer review.Peer review and journal impact factor: the two pillars of contemporary medical publishingThe nonuse of psychological research at two federal agencies.Menage a quoi? Optimal number of peer reviewers.Scientific misconduct as a dilemma for nursing.An examination of sources of peer-review bias.Peering into the bowels of the MRC. II: Review systems.Problems with peer review and alternatives.Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science.The responsible conduct of bioethics research.The vanishing physician scientist: a critical review and analysis.Research funding. Big names or big ideas: do peer-review panels select the best science proposals?The Air We Breathe: A Critical Look at Practices and Alternatives in the Peer-Review Process.Scientific publications from departments of clinical physiology and nuclear medicine in Denmark. A bibliometric analysis of "impact' in the years 1989-1994.Quality, quantity, and age: the careers of ten distinguished psychologists.Academic judgments under uncertainty: A study of collective anchoring effects in Swedish Research Council panel groups.'Your comments are meaner than your score': score calibration talk influences intra- and inter-panel variability during scientific grant peer review.Peer review: the continual need for reassessment.Chance, concurrence, and clustering. Analysis of reviewers' recommendations on 1,000 submissions to the Journal of Clinical Investigation.Prescriptions for medical research II--Is medical research well served by peer review?Peer review weighed in the balance.
P2860
Q21606688-F50A5B57-442D-42A7-9DA4-4E34858E75D9Q21686059-7B46E7C2-F0F9-4DD6-BDA2-EAEBE3FD8E3AQ21686060-CAEEAD1E-8121-4774-8757-1076B638975BQ21710773-16F6B728-4DFB-4CBF-8E22-C9437E2AA4D2Q22162552-343D0668-2D18-47B2-8EB8-86E2FF481E9AQ24048946-F1467D62-B193-4AFB-B656-13BADCE6658FQ24245580-54CD5419-F6CF-4EEC-80D4-603CE9B655E1Q24273320-11B0A318-1425-4883-B9CE-B7D65D336173Q24273360-54C9A73A-1513-44AB-BEA1-40DCFFBB7844Q24288679-F8C2593C-BAB8-4D0A-9445-438C840CC708Q26822676-7C1EE444-27EE-467A-BC92-7170CB3BE1A6Q27890375-08A40C37-4F69-42F0-8D14-6D8168256EDBQ28109661-B0C5734E-A73E-4F00-BE47-C9CF29E4B8F2Q28760685-32610DBF-4F3C-46D6-84AD-CBB4AD936D36Q29580352-194C940F-7760-442A-AE64-0C960154349CQ33378479-4428E583-F3E7-4BCF-B0AB-79F2CA6D0C5AQ33705065-4CE14BBC-4DB3-4A61-815A-EA9DA3A44A02Q33886867-05AEBE91-0A21-4A80-85B8-BECB8C223AB2Q34161054-59B136BD-7AF3-4D19-8E23-8514A0A93B77Q34164639-48256FD6-5491-4D46-B610-C8BA20C71787Q34627290-FC550AE5-2C3B-48EA-896C-452E2DED8CB4Q35058855-6EC75A2F-E987-47A7-A5A0-31189F2E0055Q35591706-487F57C2-37B9-4141-BA48-479933B97F02Q35899042-DB3953B1-0833-4E5E-A5BE-550FEEC47DF9Q36472972-904AE26A-E3CD-4B77-9108-D5DECF3E647FQ36895082-AEC59FEA-C146-4B84-B6ED-98420AD04D79Q36895465-63629717-552F-4B40-AAE9-D3B51F290D5BQ37335818-5E0565E7-15EA-4CFB-A454-E7B29743A127Q37851425-B4EE229D-01B1-4CC2-AA81-8F422A6ADAA4Q37989186-6A5DE705-F0D9-43E8-825F-BC566FC08184Q38440296-CF7ABA26-73F8-4446-8EA3-750D039154CCQ38544406-0868DEA7-8122-4AEF-B0A0-B27CAAD316B9Q38561118-FA6174EE-FE00-417C-B00B-24614DD7E646Q38591833-A30FB73B-9806-4D99-ABBD-24A7049F066AQ39134661-B0776491-0A7A-411D-8D96-780EEE6F4C23Q39274088-474302C5-3A8C-45A3-BB82-E6327A054793Q40220517-3E372208-5EB2-402A-ADDB-7DA4311E0D51Q40336211-C3650B1C-807E-48F5-A30E-CCF0FA868DBAQ40392490-29D2AA20-EAA7-41B1-A6D8-DB22A4431B46Q42332150-693EBD86-9457-4F08-B85F-DCF94CBA5D0E
P2860
description
1981 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
1981 թուականի Նոյեմբերին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած
@hyw
1981 թվականի նոյեմբերին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված
@hy
1981年の論文
@ja
1981年論文
@yue
1981年論文
@zh-hant
1981年論文
@zh-hk
1981年論文
@zh-mo
1981年論文
@zh-tw
1981年论文
@wuu
name
Chance and consensus in peer review
@ast
Chance and consensus in peer review
@en
Chance and consensus in peer review
@en-gb
type
label
Chance and consensus in peer review
@ast
Chance and consensus in peer review
@en
Chance and consensus in peer review
@en-gb
prefLabel
Chance and consensus in peer review
@ast
Chance and consensus in peer review
@en
Chance and consensus in peer review
@en-gb
P2093
P3181
P356
P1433
P1476
Chance and consensus in peer review
@en
P2093
P304
P3181
P356
10.1126/SCIENCE.7302566
P407
P577
1981-11-20T00:00:00Z