about
sameAs
Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studiesPeer review and the publication processOn the lack of consensus over the meaning of openness: an empirical studyAlternatives to peer review: novel approaches for research evaluationQuality control of epidemiological lectures online: scientific evaluation of peer reviewImpact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysisPeer review: from recognition to improved practices.Characteristics of peer reviewed clinical medicine journals.A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer reviewThe evolution of peer review as a basis for scientific publication: directional selection towards a robust discipline?The ups and downs of peer review.Substantial agreement of referee recommendations at a general medical journal--a peer review evaluation at Deutsches Ärzteblatt International.A systematic review of peer review for scientific manuscriptsInterrater reliability of 1987-1991 Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport reviews.Information Quality in Regulatory Decision Making: Peer Review versus Good Laboratory Practice.Medical "publishing societies" in eighteenth-century Britain.Through a glass darkly: The present and the future of editorial peer review.Fraud and misconduct in science: the stem cell seduction: Implications for the peer-review process.Publishing your work in a journal: understanding the peer review process.The European Heart Journal on the move: can scientific publishing be further improved?The Air We Breathe: A Critical Look at Practices and Alternatives in the Peer-Review Process.Editors' Perspectives on Enhancing Manuscript Quality and Editorial Decisions Through Peer Review and Reviewer Development.Grand challenge: the emerging field of neurohospitalist medicine.Self-citation in publishing.A scoping review protocol on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals.Editorial: peer review and the editorial process--a look behind the curtain.Civil, sensible, and constructive peer review in APS journals.Civil, sensible, and constructive peer review in APS journals.Civil, sensible, and constructive peer review in APS journals.The perceived feasibility of methods to reduce publication bias.The history and practice of peer review.THE ROYAL SOCIETY AND THE PREHISTORY OF PEER REVIEW, 1665–1965Brave New World.2013 SSAT presidential address: Peer review.Parallel worlds of citable documents and others: Inflated commissioned opinion articles enhance scientometric indicatorsAnalysis and Correction of Inappropriate Image Duplication: the ExperienceThe state of the art in peer reviewPeer Review in Mentorship: Perception of the Helpfulness of Review and Reciprocal Ratings
P2860
Q24245573-1FF59DBD-8570-4E75-98E4-84CEB6FFDD20Q28076160-04E7E283-B5A3-4AC3-B0C7-66CCFDBBE26AQ28741356-0492913D-73B7-4810-AF95-951F21DF1DDFQ28741517-3D353D90-9528-4442-9288-4045D8BBB41BQ28760685-EFFC3A90-3A23-4761-8462-D73485BEC791Q30249679-F6DCF1B9-9BC7-4809-8806-87E5789EB159Q30489344-71E21A93-8381-4AD2-93A6-DD68429FFA20Q30811328-08FB30A1-54B1-414F-983E-F676A26A43D3Q33269085-5BB2BCEA-C025-4CF1-8612-0C0BC308D059Q34471308-AD474601-9947-47A1-8C8A-D45C61651DFBQ34636617-A183FFA2-B9E4-4C24-AA73-A1385ECE1575Q34712354-40247C48-EA12-428A-B643-A634D6F70677Q35759544-12D069DF-5972-4408-B728-9B2EDA865E82Q36105691-1360F1FE-0971-4E8E-9109-D1FF0B40EE62Q36115362-622BF831-0C8C-4169-A9C6-D3082EB55D5BQ36484771-8E5726EE-CE65-41E5-A92B-186DC83A60A0Q36495158-1C431401-F420-4C20-BBA0-374F9121FDBDQ37061811-6BBC4190-FAB3-4407-9E88-5F4BEB4D5BD5Q38054737-A96E0932-B60E-4073-A3B3-2BD5C2274CA8Q38058275-DF0A856E-A66A-49C1-9031-8B554EFD0585Q38544406-4CFC3CC0-B639-4D66-82FC-56E15C219448Q39384481-F5024D13-C744-421A-87F2-82B60BA183B8Q42205611-970FFD36-605B-42B7-86B1-BE4A570C6932Q42551173-6BFD344C-2E5F-4795-BEEE-1A1479840506Q42698469-500B9040-026B-47FA-9768-12934794A876Q43225203-B7661317-DD44-44BA-B4C4-A77EF6D34DF3Q43771235-65BB1A8F-6F8E-4B3A-A76E-1A1680A87FBFQ44788771-63B358DD-5A12-47B9-BE78-A8FCA809C01AQ45027659-5E105461-EA5D-4D40-8AF2-65ADE89AA58CQ47312291-F010306A-23F9-4736-9418-C9ABC528ED95Q48130361-8263BCE7-1D12-4F19-9B40-A0FAC5024547Q51534586-5811D3E1-4CC3-469E-B7E3-6E076D4C7531Q53025999-ABAA98A4-D337-4E30-83BE-A00833564A92Q54662464-32A7F88E-0576-44DB-9C47-F0245AD1D9F2Q56114944-2698CA17-15FA-476E-AC99-8ED8690785B2Q57426288-2ECB2877-CE5F-44CD-8692-ADC166D0FC3DQ57554278-A52283E1-CE02-4AE3-AF2A-2415393708DFQ58423295-31C81DB0-B62E-47B9-BF6B-B16CE34357E1
P2860
description
1990 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
1990 թուականի Մարտին հրատարակուած գիտական յօդուած
@hyw
1990 թվականի մարտին հրատարակված գիտական հոդված
@hy
1990年の論文
@ja
1990年論文
@yue
1990年論文
@zh-hant
1990年論文
@zh-hk
1990年論文
@zh-mo
1990年論文
@zh-tw
1990年论文
@wuu
name
Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism
@ast
Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism
@en
Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism.
@nl
type
label
Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism
@ast
Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism
@en
Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism.
@nl
altLabel
Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism.
@en
prefLabel
Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism
@ast
Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism
@en
Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism.
@nl
P921
P1476
Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism
@en
Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism.
@en
P2093
D A Kronick
David A. Kronick
P356
10.1001/JAMA.1990.03440100021002
P407
P577
1990-03-01T00:00:00Z
1990-03-09T00:00:00Z