Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers? - Wikidata - thesis-toulmin - TriplyDB

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q42708376

about

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review Current developments and challenges for the British Journal of Psychology.It's Time We Fix the Peer Review System.The state of the art in peer review

P2860

Q33269085-C5805FCD-E3ED-4EF5-83DC-240C33E2BEA0 Q50125340-D1F0E0F2-DC28-4278-9B8D-F254418BFE2F Q55712470-8A31F540-0C6A-47F5-A475-C87DC6C526FE Q57554278-25AB0767-2A2F-4A82-9816-376981EF05A0

P2860

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q42708376

description

2017 nî lūn-bûn

@nan

2017年の論文

@ja

2017年論文

@yue

2017年論文

@zh-hant

2017年論文

@zh-hk

2017年論文

@zh-mo

2017年論文

@zh-tw

2017年论文

@wuu

2017年论文

@zh

2017年论文

@zh-cn

name

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

@en

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

@nl

type

label

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

@en

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

@nl

prefLabel

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

@en

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

@nl

P1433

Q42708376-67BF8EF8-A8E1-4353-BA02-6F493D8859AE

P1476

Q42708376-31D009D9-6072-4F56-AEB7-5F2CE6928549

P2093

Q42708376-7DBBEDA8-D293-463A-8644-E5A2EFC11A5B

P2860

Q42708376-0CDC32DF-F74C-4F00-AE2D-E09A3B8FF10E

Q42708376-169D0607-EA58-469E-A7AF-203D9FB0F9F6

Q42708376-22C66224-AEEB-4B09-9025-B99DCFC71B95

Q42708376-34822AC8-7340-4DF1-8B1C-32FF22974C45

Q42708376-46DB8F9F-C4EC-4066-BD19-DB2667DE91DF

Q42708376-4B3B1C23-7DCC-420B-A8D8-F894091413B0

Q42708376-4DE65D41-C3D8-4C60-9472-AC6DFE76CFB4

Q42708376-54F72097-A19C-4C53-BE57-E40A6AC83706

Q42708376-6915E46E-7D6D-4C54-922C-2E2EB0204BE5

Q42708376-856B876F-4E3B-4ECA-8F57-62E3BD0F978C

P304

Q42708376-C0916BF0-55D7-4D22-8D96-3F5D7D6D6110

P31

Q42708376-4119E2FD-4444-4B91-AEB9-A4CC41B6C84E

P356

Q42708376-839BF175-F4FE-4DF5-B10A-E1A14A75817D

P407

Q42708376-45EEF099-633C-4314-8BC0-26DCACEBCC52

P433

Q42708376-5EF1EBB3-E4B5-4784-9A25-FFDA152B14F2

P478

Q42708376-696A512C-4045-4823-A8C6-BDA370B5A6B6

P50

Q42708376-06F97397-5165-449C-A989-ED7C8E49DE5F

P577

Q42708376-53CBC29D-0D9C-4753-9BC6-38C730BCF653

P698

Q42708376-9B02286A-D91C-4AAB-8CD8-FA1DBBEA397F

P932

Q42708376-11859590-7E03-4E65-AFD3-F9A6CB2A9E68

P356

JOURNAL.PONE.0186111

P1433

P1476

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

@en

P2093

James P O'Dwyer

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P2860

Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies

Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers' recommendations: a randomised trial

The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise

Mechanism change in a simulation of peer review: from junk support to elitism

Open evaluation: a vision for entirely transparent post-publication peer review and rating for science

What is open peer review? A systematic review

Peer review, program officers and science funding

Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience. Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone?

Effects of editorial peer review: a systematic review.

Peer review: Troubled from the start.

P304

e0186111

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P31

scholarly article

P356

10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0186111

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P407

P433

10

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P478

12

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P50

Rafael D'Andrea

P577

2017-10-09T00:00:00Z

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime

P698

29016678

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string

P932

5633172

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string