Literature DB >> 35814508

How to be a Good Reviewer for a Scientific Journal.

Keith Siau1,2, Anand V Kulkarni3, Emad El-Omar4.   

Abstract

In academia, peer-review refers to a fundamental quality control process whereby external experts (reviewers) are invited to provide unbiased critique of a paper (or other submitted material) and advise on suitability for publication. The process must be robust and conducted with honor and integrity and to the highest professional standards. It is not only the responsibility of the authors but also the reviewers to assess the manuscript appropriately and help in improving the quality of the finished article. A good reviewer not only assists the editors and the journal but can also benefit the authors, the wider scientific community and the general readership. In this article, we discuss the salient features of the peer-review process and tips for undertaking peer-review on scientific papers in an effective and professional manner, including opportunities to develop reviewer skills.
© 2022 Indian National Association for Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  peer-review; research; reviewer skills

Year:  2022        PMID: 35814508      PMCID: PMC9257857          DOI: 10.1016/j.jceh.2022.04.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Exp Hepatol        ISSN: 0973-6883


  5 in total

1.  The role of a social media editor: What to expect and tips for success.

Authors:  Keith Siau; Rashid Lui; Sultan Mahmood
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 4.623

2.  The editors' guide for peer review of papers submitted to Endoscopy.

Authors:  M Dinis-Ribeiro; N Vakil; T Ponchon
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2012-12-19       Impact factor: 10.093

3.  Does Tweeting Improve Citations? One-Year Results From the TSSMN Prospective Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Jessica G Y Luc; Michael A Archer; Rakesh C Arora; Edward M Bender; Arie Blitz; David T Cooke; Tamara Ni Hlci; Biniam Kidane; Maral Ouzounian; Thomas K Varghese; Mara B Antonoff
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author's perspective.

Authors:  Janine Huisman; Jeroen Smits
Journal:  Scientometrics       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.238

5.  Does a Graphical Abstract Bring More Visibility to Your Paper?

Authors:  Eva-Maria Pferschy-Wenzig; Ulrich Pferschy; Dongdong Wang; Andrei Mocan; Atanas G Atanasov
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2016-09-18       Impact factor: 4.411

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.