Literature DB >> 21596357

Conceptual debates and empirical evidence about the peer review process for scholarly journals.

Sandra P Thomas1.   

Abstract

Until recently, nursing scholars have seldom questioned the underlying premises of peer review, nor have they engaged in the conceptual debates about the peer review process. In this article, literature from a wide range of nursing and nonnursing journals was examined to provide an overview of (a) the conceptual debates and (b) the empirical evidence about the peer review process in scholarly journals. A multiplicity of questions for future research are proposed. 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21596357     DOI: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2010.09.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prof Nurs        ISSN: 8755-7223            Impact factor:   2.104


  2 in total

1.  Mistake index as a surrogate of quality in scientific manuscripts.

Authors:  Antoni Margalida; M Àngels Colomer
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-03-10       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Tips for charting the course of a successful health research career.

Authors:  Lawrence Mbuagbaw; Frederick Morfaw; John-Eudes L Kunda; Jackson K Mukonzo; Jasmine Kastner; Shiyuan Zhang; Madzouka Kokolo; Lehana Thabane
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2013-04-24
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.