Literature DB >> 15849858

Guide for peer reviewers of scientific articles in the Croatian Medical Journal.

Matko Marusić1, Dario Sambunjak, Ana Marusić.   

Abstract

Despite its shortcomings, peer review is still the best tool of scientific publishing. It brings benefits not only to the journal and its authors, but to the peer reviewers: they are privileged to have an insight into the latest research and still unpublished results in their scientific field. Reviewers also build up their ability to critically assess scientific papers, which may be useful in their own professional work and development. We wrote these brief guidelines to help the reviewers for the Croatian Medical Journal learn about the specificities of the journal and editor's expectations from their partnership with peer reviewers. The guidelines were created primarily for new reviewers, but they may be useful as a refresher text for experienced reviewers.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15849858

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Croat Med J        ISSN: 0353-9504            Impact factor:   1.351


  3 in total

1.  Peer review in scholarly biomedical journals: a few things that make a big difference.

Authors:  Armen Yuri Gasparyan
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 2.153

Review 2.  Manuscript review continuing medical education: a retrospective investigation of the learning outcomes from this peer reviewer benefit.

Authors:  Steven Kawczak; Sultana Mustafa
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Upgrading instructions for authors of scholarly journals.

Authors:  Armen Y Gasparyan; Lilit Ayvazyan; Sergey V Gorin; George D Kitas
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2014-06-01       Impact factor: 1.351

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.