Literature DB >> 24982500

Supporting and enhancing peer review in the BJGP.

Abigail Moore1, Roger Jones2.   

Abstract

Mesh：

Year:  2014        PMID： 24982500      PMCID： PMC4073733          DOI： 10.3399/bjgp14X680713

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN： 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


× No keyword cloud information.
  12 in total

1.  Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review.

Authors:  S Van Rooyen; F Godlee; S Evans; R Smith; N Black
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Development of the review quality instrument (RQI) for assessing peer reviews of manuscripts.

Authors:  S van Rooyen; N Black; F Godlee
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Effect of written feedback by editors on quality of reviews: two randomized trials.

Authors:  Michael L Callaham; Robert K Knopp; E John Gallagher
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2002-06-05       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Peer review in a small and a big medical journal: case study of the Croatian Medical Journal and the Lancet.

Authors:  Ana Marusić; Ivan Kresimir Lukić; Matko Marusić; David McNamee; David Sharp; Richard Horton
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 1.351

5.  Differences in review quality and recommendations for publication between peer reviewers suggested by authors or by editors.

Authors:  Sara Schroter; Leanne Tite; Andrew Hutchings; Nick Black
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-01-18       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Quality assessment of reviewers' reports using a simple instrument.

Authors:  Annemieke P Landkroon; Anne Margriet Euser; Hans Veeken; Wimpeter Hart; A John P M Overbeke
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. A randomized trial.

Authors:  R A McNutt; A T Evans; R H Fletcher; S W Fletcher
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-03-09       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  The Medical Journal of Australia Internet peer-review study.

Authors:  C M Bingham; G Higgins; R Coleman; M B Van Der Weyden
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-08-08       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Evaluating peer reviews. Pilot testing of a grading instrument.

Authors:  I D Feurer; G J Becker; D Picus; E Ramirez; M D Darcy; M E Hicks
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1994-07-13       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals.

Authors:  Armen Yuri Gasparyan; George D Kitas
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 1.351
View more
  2 in total

1.  Peer review: acknowledging its value and recognising the reviewers.

Authors:  Benjamin Joshua Riley; Roger Jones
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Tools used to assess the quality of peer review reports: a methodological systematic review.

Authors:  Cecilia Superchi; José Antonio González; Ivan Solà; Erik Cobo; Darko Hren; Isabelle Boutron
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 4.615
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.