Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 271

1.

The relationship between a reviewer's recommendation and editorial decision of manuscripts submitted for publication in obstetrics.

Vintzileos AM, Ananth CV, Odibo AO, Chauhan SP, Smulian JC, Oyelese Y.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Dec;211(6):703.e1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.053. Epub 2014 Jun 28.

PMID:
24983685
2.

What is submitted and what gets accepted in Indian Pediatrics: analysis of submissions, review process, decision making, and criteria for rejection.

Gupta P, Kaur G, Sharma B, Shah D, Choudhury P.

Indian Pediatr. 2006 Jun;43(6):479-89. Erratum in: Indian Pediatr. 2006 Aug;43(8):749.

3.

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.

5.

Are Reviewers' Scores Influenced by Citations to Their Own Work? An Analysis of Submitted Manuscripts and Peer Reviewer Reports.

Schriger DL, Kadera SP, von Elm E.

Ann Emerg Med. 2016 Mar;67(3):401-406.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2015.09.003. Epub 2015 Oct 27.

PMID:
26518378
6.

Peer review at the American Journal of Roentgenology: how reviewer and manuscript characteristics affected editorial decisions on 196 major papers.

Kliewer MA, DeLong DM, Freed K, Jenkins CB, Paulson EK, Provenzale JM.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004 Dec;183(6):1545-50.

PMID:
15547189
7.
8.

A peek behind the curtain: peer review and editorial decision making at Stroke.

Sposato LA, Ovbiagele B, Johnston SC, Fisher M, Saposnik G; Stroke Outcome Research Working Group (www.sorcan.ca).

Ann Neurol. 2014 Aug;76(2):151-8. doi: 10.1002/ana.24218. Epub 2014 Jul 16.

PMID:
25043350
9.

Subspecialty Influence on Scientific Peer Review for an Obstetrics and Gynecology Journal With a High Impact Factor.

Parikh LI, Benner RS, Riggs TW, Hazen N, Chescheir NC.

Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Feb;129(2):243-248. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001852.

PMID:
28079780
10.

The effect of masking manuscripts for the peer-review process of an ophthalmic journal.

Isenberg SJ, Sanchez E, Zafran KC.

Br J Ophthalmol. 2009 Jul;93(7):881-4. doi: 10.1136/bjo.2008.151886. Epub 2009 Feb 11.

PMID:
19211602
12.

How do reviewers affect the final outcome? Comparison of the quality of peer review and relative acceptance rates of submitted manuscripts.

Kurihara Y, Colletti PM.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Sep;201(3):468-70. doi: 10.2214/AJR.12.10025.

PMID:
23971437
13.

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
14.

Early editorial manuscript screening versus obligate peer review: a randomized trial.

Johnston SC, Lowenstein DH, Ferriero DM, Messing RO, Oksenberg JR, Hauser SL.

Ann Neurol. 2007 Apr;61(4):A10-2.

PMID:
17444512
15.

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
16.

Peer review in the Croatian Medical Journal from 1992 to 1996.

Marusić A, Mestrović T, Petrovecki M, Marusić M.

Croat Med J. 1998 Mar;39(1):3-9.

PMID:
9475799
17.

Characteristics and fate of orthodontic articles submitted for publication: An exploratory study of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics.

Farjo N, Turpin DL, Coley RY, Feng J.

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015 Jun;147(6):680-90. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.01.020.

PMID:
26038071
18.

Blinded vs. unblinded peer review of manuscripts submitted to a dermatology journal: a randomized multi-rater study.

Alam M, Kim NA, Havey J, Rademaker A, Ratner D, Tregre B, West DP, Coleman WP 3rd.

Br J Dermatol. 2011 Sep;165(3):563-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10432.x.

PMID:
21623749
19.

Effect of institutional prestige on reviewers' recommendations and editorial decisions.

Garfunkel JM, Ulshen MH, Hamrick HJ, Lawson EE.

JAMA. 1994 Jul 13;272(2):137-8.

PMID:
8015125
20.

Substantial agreement of referee recommendations at a general medical journal--a peer review evaluation at Deutsches Ärzteblatt International.

Baethge C, Franklin J, Mertens S.

PLoS One. 2013 May 2;8(5):e61401. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061401. Print 2013.

Supplemental Content

Support Center