Results 1 to 10 of about 280,617 (296)
Characteristics of ‘mega’ peer-reviewers
Research Integrity and Peer Review, 2022 Background The demand for peer reviewers is often perceived as disproportionate to the supply and availability of reviewers. Considering characteristics associated with peer review behaviour can allow for the development of solutions to manage the ...
Danielle B. Rice +4 more
doaj +2 more sources
Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open, 2021 Stephanie D. Wauson
doaj +3 more sources
Engaged Scholar Journal, 2022 The quality of our Journal depends on scholarly collaboration between the two groups of scholars, the authors and the anonymous peer-reviewers of their work. We thank both groups for their interest in and support of our Journal.
Engaged Scholar Journal
doaj +3 more sources
Peer review: An essential component of scientific publications
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University Journal, 2023 The peer review is for the improvement of the manuscript. Additionally, it helps the editors make an informed decision about the suitability of the manuscript to be published in their journal.
M Mostafa Zaman
doaj +5 more sources
Stressing the need for the pool of trained peer reviewers vs. authors’ suggested reviewers
Journal of Medical Education Development, 2023 This letter comes to you in the hope of emphasizing how important trained peer reviewers are for the scientific workflow of academic journals. Normally, between 1 and 3 independent reviewers are required to peer-review a single manuscript. Most papers in
Nematullah Shomoossi +2 more
doaj +1 more source
Review the ‘peer review’ [PDF]
Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 2017 Peer review has been the main form of appraisal of scientific knowledge for over a century. In essence, this process involves the evaluation of a scientific finding by independent experts prior to its dissemination to the scientific community, in an attempt to ensure that both the research and conclusions meet the necessary standards regarding quality,
Blockeel, Christophe +4 more
openaire +3 more sources
Peer‐review for the peer‐review system [PDF]
human_ontogenetics, 2009 AbstractThe process of peer‐review of papers submitted for publication and of grant proposals is widely accepted in modern science as a crucial guarantee of high‐quality work. Foremost in restricted research areas, anonymous reviewers and editors may use their power to slow down or even reject competitive yet worthwhile work that does not fit or is ...
Rühli, F. +3 more
openaire +3 more sources
The collective management of performers’ rights in the UK: a story of competing interests
SCRIPTed: A Journal of Law, Technology & Society, 2019 In this article I examine the experience of UK performers using collective management organisation PPL, a UK CMO established by record companies that also manages the rights of performers.
Ananay Aguilar
doaj +1 more source
Peer review golden rules and good practice checklist [PDF]
Science Editing, 2016 This is a republication of Appendix 1, The Golden Rules and the Peer-Review Good Practice Checklist, from the author’s book, Peer Review and Manuscript Management in Scientific Journals: guidelines for good practice, published in 2007 by Wiley-Blackwell ...
Irene Hames
doaj +1 more source