Literature DB >> 26917302

Improving the peer-review process from the perspective of an author and reviewer.

C M Faggion1.   

Abstract

The peer-review process is a fundamental component in the advancement of science. In this process, independent reviewers evaluate the quality of a manuscript and its suitability for publication in a particular scientific journal. Thus, to favour the publication of the highest-level information, the peer-review system should be as unbiased as possible. Although the peer-review system is the most commonly used method to select manuscripts for publication, it has several potential limitations. The main objective of this manuscript is to discuss some limitations of the peer-review system and suggest potential solutions from the perspective of an author and reviewer. This article may contribute to the always-dynamic development of the peer-review process.

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26917302     DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.131

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br Dent J        ISSN: 0007-0610            Impact factor:   1.626


  5 in total

1.  The Eighth International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication: A call for research.

Authors:  Drummond Rennie; Annette Flanagin; Fiona Godlee; Theodora Bloom
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Eighth international congress on peer review in biomedical publication.

Authors:  Drummond Rennie; Annette Flanagin; Fiona Godlee; Theodora Bloom
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2015-05-25

3.  Journals' peer review system sometimes overlooks important research.

Authors:  Adrian O'Dowd
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2014-12-23

4.  Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Susan van Rooyen; Tony Delamothe; Stephen J W Evans
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-11-16

5.  Alternatives to peer review: novel approaches for research evaluation.

Authors:  Aliaksandr Birukou; Joseph Rushton Wakeling; Claudio Bartolini; Fabio Casati; Maurizio Marchese; Katsiaryna Mirylenka; Nardine Osman; Azzurra Ragone; Carles Sierra; Aalam Wassef
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 2.380

  5 in total
  4 in total

1.  Dental publishing: Peer review reviewed.

Authors:  A M Bal; K K Mahawar
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 1.626

2.  Transparency and open access in CF research.

Authors:  Sanja Stanojevic; Rhonda Szczesniak
Journal:  J Cyst Fibros       Date:  2020-04-05       Impact factor: 5.482

3.  The Necessities for the Transparent Peer-Review.

Authors:  Jung Hun Lee; Jeong Ho Jeon; Kwang Seung Park; Tae Yeong Kim; Ji Hwan Kim; Sang Hee Lee
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 1.429

4.  The role of scientific journal editors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  J Matias-Guiu
Journal:  Neurologia (Engl Ed)       Date:  2020-05
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.