Literature DB >> 2406470

The evolution of editorial peer review.

J C Burnham1.   

Abstract

Practically no historical accounts of the evolution of peer review exist. Biomedical journals appeared in the 19th century as personal organs, following the model of more general journalism. Journal editors viewed themselves primarily as educators. The practice of editorial peer reviewing did not become general until sometime after World War II. Contrary to common assumption, editorial peer review did not grow out of or interact with grant peer review. Editorial peer review procedures did not spread in an orderly way; they were not developed from editorial boards and passed on from journal to journal. Instead, casual referring out of articles on an individual basis may have occurred at any time, beginning in the early to mid-19th century. Institutionalization of the process, however, took place mostly in the 20th century, either to handle new problems in the numbers of articles submitted or to meet the demands for expert authority and objectivity in an increasingly specialized world.

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2406470

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  32 in total

1.  Bayesian communication: a clinically significant paradigm for electronic publication.

Authors:  H P Lehmann; S N Goodman
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2000 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  [Peer review in scientific journals].

Authors:  J Gérvas; M Pérez Fernández
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2001-04-15       Impact factor: 1.137

3.  Journalology--or what editors do.

Authors:  J Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-10-03

4.  Self-citation in publishing.

Authors:  Andreas F Mavrogenis; Pietro Ruggieri; Panayiotis J Papagelopoulos
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-07-28       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Is peer review censorship?

Authors:  Arturo Casadevall; Ferric C Fang
Journal:  Infect Immun       Date:  2009-02-17       Impact factor: 3.441

6.  Fraud and misconduct in science: the stem cell seduction: Implications for the peer-review process.

Authors:  M A G van der Heyden; T van de Ven; T Opthof
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.380

7.  Peer reviewing and curating the health care information infrastructure: experiences and recommendations.

Authors:  M P D'Alessandro; A M Westenfield; D M D'Alessandro; P R Pomrehn; J R Galvin
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  1998

8.  Peer review and journal impact factor: the two pillars of contemporary medical publishing.

Authors:  S Triaridis; A Kyrgidis
Journal:  Hippokratia       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 0.471

9.  Identifying peer-reviewed journals in clinical medicine.

Authors:  J D Eldredge
Journal:  Bull Med Libr Assoc       Date:  1997-10

10.  Peer Review and the Public's Health.

Authors:  Catherine D DeAngelis
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 4.911

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.