Display Settings:

Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Results: 1 to 20 of 967

1.

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

Schroter S, Tite L, Hutchings A, Black N.

JAMA. 2006 Jan 18;295(3):314-7.

PMID:
16418467
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
2.

A comparison of reviewers selected by editors and reviewers suggested by authors.

Rivara FP, Cummings P, Ringold S, Bergman AB, Joffe A, Christakis DA.

J Pediatr. 2007 Aug;151(2):202-5.

PMID:
17643779
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
3.

Are reviewers suggested by authors as good as those chosen by editors? Results of a rater-blinded, retrospective study.

Wager E, Parkin EC, Tamber PS.

BMC Med. 2006 May 30;4:13.

PMID:
16734897
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
4.

What makes a good reviewer and a good review for a general medical journal?

Black N, van Rooyen S, Godlee F, Smith R, Evans S.

JAMA. 1998 Jul 15;280(3):231-3.

PMID:
9676665
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
5.

Authors' and editors' perspectives on peer review quality in three scholarly nursing journals.

Shattell MM, Chinn P, Thomas SP, Cowling WR 3rd.

J Nurs Scholarsh. 2010 Mar;42(1):58-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2009.01331.x.

PMID:
20487187
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
6.

Author perception of peer review: impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction.

Weber EJ, Katz PP, Waeckerle JF, Callaham ML.

JAMA. 2002 Jun 5;287(21):2790-3.

PMID:
12038913
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
7.

Blinding in peer review: the preferences of reviewers for nursing journals.

Baggs JG, Broome ME, Dougherty MC, Freda MC, Kearney MH.

J Adv Nurs. 2008 Oct;64(2):131-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04816.x. Epub 2008 Sep 1.

PMID:
18764847
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
8.

Survey of conflict-of-interest disclosure policies of ophthalmology journals.

Anraku A, Jin YP, Trope GE, Buys YM.

Ophthalmology. 2009 Jun;116(6):1093-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.12.053. Epub 2009 Apr 19.

PMID:
19376583
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
9.

Spine journals: is reviewer agreement on publication recommendations greater than would be expected by chance?

Weiner BK, Weiner JP, Smith HE.

Spine J. 2010 Mar;10(3):209-11. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2009.12.003.

PMID:
20207330
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
10.

Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers' recommendations: a randomised trial.

van Rooyen S, Godlee F, Evans S, Black N, Smith R.

BMJ. 1999 Jan 2;318(7175):23-7.

PMID:
9872878
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
11.

Editors' requests of peer reviewers: a study and a proposal.

Frank E.

Prev Med. 1996 Mar-Apr;25(2):102-4.

PMID:
8860274
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
12.

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

Marusić A, Lukić IK, Marusić M, McNamee D, Sharp D, Horton R.

Croat Med J. 2002 Jun;43(3):286-9.

PMID:
12035133
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free Article
13.

Views of Iranian medical journal editors on medical research publication.

Etemadi A, Raiszadeh F, Alaeddini F, Azizi F.

Saudi Med J. 2004 Jan;25(1 Suppl):S29-33.

PMID:
14968189
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
14.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure Policies and Practices in Peer-reviewed Biomedical Journals.

Cooper RJ, Gupta M, Wilkes MS, Hoffman JR.

J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Dec;21(12):1248-52.

PMID:
17105524
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
15.

Is there gender bias in JAMA's peer review process?

Gilbert JR, Williams ES, Lundberg GD.

JAMA. 1994 Jul 13;272(2):139-42.

PMID:
8015126
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
16.

The relationship of previous training and experience of journal peer reviewers to subsequent review quality.

Callaham ML, Tercier J.

PLoS Med. 2007 Jan;4(1):e40.

PMID:
17411314
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
17.

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

van Rooyen S, Delamothe T, Evans SJ.

BMJ. 2010 Nov 16;341:c5729. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c5729.

PMID:
21081600
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
18.

Reliability of editors' subjective quality ratings of peer reviews of manuscripts.

Callaham ML, Baxt WG, Waeckerle JF, Wears RL.

JAMA. 1998 Jul 15;280(3):229-31.

PMID:
9676664
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
19.

Editorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care?

Kravitz RL, Franks P, Feldman MD, Gerrity M, Byrne C, Tierney WM.

PLoS One. 2010 Apr 8;5(4):e10072. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010072.

PMID:
20386704
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
20.

Predictors of publication: characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals.

Lee KP, Boyd EA, Holroyd-Leduc JM, Bacchetti P, Bero LA.

Med J Aust. 2006 Jun 19;184(12):621-6.

PMID:
16803442
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

Display Settings:

Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk