Tag peer-review [66 articles] Export

Recent papers classified by the tag peer-review.

	Measuring the quality of editorial peer review. [My Copy] JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 287, No. 21. (5 June 2002), pp. 2786-2790. by T. Jefferson, E. Wager, F. Davidoff posted to peer-review by cmc on 2009-10-30 00:00:07 as along with 1 person bhengeveld
	The convergence of digital libraries and the peer-review process [My Copy] Journal of Information Science, Vol. 32, No. 2. (1 April 2006), pp. 149-159. by Marko A. Rodriguez, Johan Bollen, Herbert Van de Sompel posted to peer-review by cmc on 2009-10-29 23:45:41 as along with 2 people jketterer lbjay
	Development of the Review Quality Instrument (RQI) for Assessing Peer Reviews of Manuscripts [My Copy] Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 52, No. 7. (July 1999), pp. 625-629. by S. van Rooyen posted to peer-review by cmc on 2009-10-29 23:43:59 as
	An Algorithm to Determine Peer-Reviewers [My Copy] (24 May 2006) by Marko A. Rodriguez, Johan Bollen posted to peer-review by cmc on 2009-10-29 23:39:13 as along with 8 people and 1 group JSicot markusd viktor21614 dullhunk pdlug nojhan pak entropy Metaheuristics
	The end of peer review and traditional publishing as we know it. [My Copy] Medscape journal of medicine, Vol. 10, No. 11. (2008) by Peter Frishauf posted to peter-frishauf peer-review medscape by dullhunk on 2009-10-23 15:01:36 as along with 4 people Sergey_gerbek mgaldino AJCann Gaetan
	The ups and downs of peer review [My Copy] Advan. Physiol. Edu., Vol. 31, No. 2. (1 June 2007), pp. 145-152. by Dale J. Benos, Edlira Bashari, Jose M. Chaves, et al.Amit Gaggar, Niren Kapoor, Martin LaFrance, Robert Mans, David Mayhew, Sara McGowan, Abigail Polter, Yawar Qadri, Shanta Sarfare, Kevin Schultz, Ryan Splittgerber, Jason Stephenson, Cristy Tower, R. Grace Walton, Alexander Zotov posted to peer-review by pippasmart on 2009-10-21 11:02:36 as along with 1 person lone
	Peer usage versus peer review [My Copy] BMJ, Vol. 335, No. 7617. (1 September 2007), 451. by Bruce G. Charlton posted to peer-review bruce-charlton by dullhunk on 2009-09-13 14:08:58 as along with 1 person thegoose
	Re-reviewing Peer Review [My Copy] Sci. Signal., Vol. 2, No. 85. (25 August 2009), eg11. by Michael B. Yaffe posted to peer-review by abhishek_tiwari on 2009-09-11 04:47:41 as along with 2 people renatomilani tinatoni
	Ethics of science communication on the web [My Copy] Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, Vol. NKNOWN (03 December 2008), pp. 1-4. by M. Clarke posted to peer-review maxine-clarke ethics by dullhunk on 2009-08-27 14:33:56 as
	Protecting peer review: correspondence chronology and ethical analysis regarding Logothetis vs. Shmuel and Leopold. [My Copy] Human brain mapping, Vol. 30, No. 2. (February 2009), pp. 347-354. by Peter T. Fox, Ed Bullmore, Peter A. Bandettini, Jack L. Lancaster posted to peer-review data-sharing by librain on 2009-08-26 10:32:16 as
	Peer review process revisited [My Copy] Journal of Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 19, No. 3. (2000), pp. 147-148. by J. Black posted to peer-review journals discussion coore by willwade on 2009-08-19 08:08:24 as
	The effect of masking manuscripts for the peer-review process of an ophthalmic journal [My Copy] Br J Ophthalmol, Vol. 93, No. 7. (1 July 2009), pp. 881-884. by S. J. Isenberg, E. Sanchez, K. C. Zafran posted to peer-review by nellapower on 2009-07-24 17:15:16 as
	Elsevier says offering $25 gift cards for positive reviews was mistake [My Copy] BMJ, Vol. 339, No. jul14_1. (14 July 2009), b2841. by Helen Mooney posted to evilsevier peer-review by dullhunk on 2009-07-21 09:00:42 as along with 1 person fgibson
	Peer Review—The Newcomers' Perspective [My Copy] PLoS Biol, Vol. 3, No. 9. (13 September 2005), e326. by Gaell Mainguy, Mohammad R. Motamedi, Daniel Mietchen posted to peer-review publishing science by skoch3 to the group Science 2.0 / Open Science on 2009-07-13 05:37:33 as
	Conference reviewing considered harmful [My Copy] SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, Vol. 43, No. 2. (2009), pp. 108-116. by Thomas Anderson posted to peer-review by mattmight on 2009-06-25 18:59:16 as along with 1 person alhoori
	Content and communication: how can peer review provide helpful feedback about the writing? [My Copy] BMC Medical Research Methodology, Vol. 8 (31 January 2008), 3. by Karen Shashok posted to peer-review by Publicase to the group Science Writing on 2009-05-26 12:30:38 as
	Author perception of peer review. [My Copy] Obstetrics and gynecology, Vol. 112, No. 3. (September 2008), pp. 646-652. by M. Gibson, C. Y. Spong, S. E. Simonsen, S. Martin, J. R. Scott posted to peer-review by Publicase on 2009-05-26 12:27:46 as
	Simplifying the process of research review for the novice researcher. [My Copy] Journal of wound, ostomy, and continence nursing : official publication of The Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society / WOCN, Vol. 35, No. 1. (b 2008), pp. 30-33. by D. Callihan posted to peer-review by Publicase on 2009-05-26 12:26:43 as
	Cost of the NSERC Science Grant Peer Review System Exceeds the Cost of Giving Every Qualified Researcher a Baseline Grant [My Copy] Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance, Vol. 16, No. 1. (2009), pp. 13-40. by Richard Gordon, Bryan Poulin posted to dick-gordon funding grants peer-review by dullhunk on 2009-05-22 12:23:25 as along with 8 people skembel tnhh MurphysLab yangjustinc hawkestein jasonn mariopinedakrch fheintz
	Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts? [My Copy] Journal of Biology, Vol. 8, No. 3. (09 March 2009), 24. by Virginia Walbot posted to peer-review science by Borelli on 2009-03-27 12:05:14 as along with 7 people and 2 groups seb1 cisevol asllearner VGreiff dswan le-gal Zephyrus BergmanLab Roswell Cancer Crosstalk
	How to critically appraise an article [My Copy] Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol, Vol. 6, No. 2. (February 2009), pp. 82-91. by Jane M. Young, Michael J. Solomon posted to peer-review by julien_lafvan on 2009-03-06 17:13:47 as along with 5 people rickl AJCann yaxu katsinglott tobitas
	Scientific Journal Publications: On the Role of Electronic Preprint Exchange in the Distribution of Scientific Literature [My Copy] Social Studies of Science, Vol. 35, No. 4. (1 August 2005), pp. 549-579. by Kristrun Gunnarsdottir posted to academic-reward digital-library electronic-publishing experts information-technology journal-publication lit-koerperbilder peer-review subject-classification by szielke on 2009-02-10 16:12:34 as along with 1 person and 3 groups kaniko Neuroscience STS feminist_technoscience
	Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors. [My Copy] Trends in ecology & evolution (Personal edition), Vol. 23, No. 1. (January 2008), pp. 4-6. by A. E. Budden, T. Tregenza, L. W. Aarssen, J. Koricheva, R. Leimu, C. J. Lortie posted to double-blind female keywords-fehlen lit-koerperbilder peer-review by szielke on 2009-01-30 20:10:50 as along with 1 person timflutre
	The Air We Breathe: A Critical Look at Practices and Alternatives in the Peer-Review Process [My Copy] Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 4, No. 1. (2009), pp. 40-50. by Jerry Suls, René Martin posted to peer-review by sfcheung on 2009-01-30 05:07:19 as
	The Peer-Review and Editorial System: Ways to Fix Something That Might Be Broken [My Copy] Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 4, No. 1. (2009), pp. 54-61. by Seth J. Schwartz, Byron L. Zamboanga posted to peer-review by sfcheung on 2009-01-29 14:14:56 as
	Masked Reviews Are Not Fairer Reviews [My Copy] Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 4, No. 1. (2009), pp. 62-64. by Nora S. Newcombe, Mark E. Bouton posted to peer-review by sfcheung on 2009-01-29 14:14:40 as
	What If Social Scientists Had Reviewed Great Scientific Works of the Past? [My Copy] Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 4, No. 1. (2009), pp. 65-78. by David Trafimow, Stephen Rice posted to peer-review by sfcheung on 2009-01-29 14:14:22 as
	Are Social Scientists Harder on Their Colleagues Than Physical Scientists Were on Theirs in the Past? Commentary on Trafimow & Rice (2009) [My Copy] Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 4, No. 1. (2009), pp. 79-83. by Raymond S. Nickerson posted to peer-review by sfcheung on 2009-01-29 14:14:06 as
	Problems, Pitfalls, and Promise in the Peer-Review Process: Commentary on Trafimow & Rice (2009) [My Copy] Perspectives on Psychological Science, Vol. 4, No. 1. (2009), pp. 84-90. by Lynne M. Cooper posted to peer-review by sfcheung on 2009-01-29 14:13:46 as
	Program annotations: feedback for students learning to program [My Copy] In ACE '06: Proceedings of the 8th Austalian conference on Computing education (2006), pp. 19-23. by Peter Bancroft, Paul Roe posted to annotation peer-review programming by sharon_hsiao to the group Adaptive-Web on 2009-01-15 05:15:31 as
	Peer review and journal models [My Copy] (31 Aug 2006) by Paolo Dall'aglio posted to diplomarbeit peer-review publishing scientific by dominikb1888 on 2009-01-12 14:43:37 as along with 5 people lesikv ansobol proportional MariaChiaraP gioia
	Correction and use of biomedical literature affected by scientific misconduct [My Copy] Science and Engineering Ethics, Vol. 13, No. 1. (11 March 2007), pp. 5-24. by Anne Neale, Justin Northrup, Rhonda Dailey, Ellen Marks, Judith Abrams posted to misconduct peer-review publishing retraction scholarly by lesikv on 2008-10-24 14:04:47 as
	Falsified papers in high-impact journals were slow to retract and indistinguishable from nonfraudulent papers [My Copy] Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 61, No. 5. (May 2008), pp. 464-470. by N. Trikalinos, E. Evangelou, J. Ioannidis posted to misconduct peer-review publishing retraction scholarly by lesikv on 2008-10-24 13:56:45 as
	Phenomena of retraction: reasons for retraction and citations to the publications. [My Copy] JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 280, No. 3. (15 July 1998), pp. 296-297. by J. M. Budd, M. Sievert, T. R. Schultz posted to citations ethics peer-review publishing retraction scholarly by lesikv on 2008-10-23 15:14:24 as
	Scientists behaving badly [My Copy] Nature, Vol. 435, No. 7043. (9 June 2005), pp. 737-738. by Brian C. Martinson, Melissa S. Anderson, Raymond de Vries posted to ethics misconduct peer-review publishing retraction by lesikv on 2008-10-23 15:05:34 as along with 2 people timflutre timothee
	A recipe for high impact [My Copy] Genome Biology, Vol. 8, No. 5. (2007) by Murat Cokol, Raul R. Esteban, Andrey Rzhetsky posted to impact peer-review publishing scholarly by lesikv on 2008-10-23 14:15:48 as along with 3 people and 1 group dullhunk neils grahamc Bioinformatics
	Ten Simple Rules for Getting Published [My Copy] PLoS Comput Biol, Vol. 1, No. 5. (28 October 2005), e57. by Philip E. Bourne posted to peer-review publishing scholarly by lesikv on 2008-10-22 18:36:16 as along with 29 people and 9 groups mattbiehl reconnie daforerog msampson monkare robertlischke schlady abellogin kimbellanderson misonneh Zephyrus marcius eckart_bindewald eweaver leonardo dullhunk cmm ewmoore nickluscombe paulclinger ucbcjbm rgb linhailue kevinemamy rodney Torsten_Holmer elvinado mattions kristina Roswell Cancer Crosstalk FAB-lab EBI-regulation SigsitLab BioinfoCIPF SGU-CIPF pileWorks Kopelman_Group VisionLab
	Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals. [My Copy] Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, Vol. 99, No. 4. (April 2006), pp. 178-182. by R. Smith posted to peer-review by lesikv on 2008-10-22 17:17:20 as along with 3 people ukppdadsr fgibson dullhunk
	Interactive journal concept for improved scientific publishing and quality assurance [My Copy] pp. 105-113. by Ulrich Poschl posted to journal peer-review publishing by fgibson on 2008-10-12 14:31:47 as along with 1 person gioia
	Why Current Publication Practices May Distort Science [My Copy] PLoS Med, Vol. 5, No. 10. (7 October 2008), e201. by Neal S. Young, John P. A. Ioannidis, Omar Al-Ubaydli posted to bias bibliometrics economics negative-results paper peer-review publication by CameronNeylon on 2008-10-07 06:59:51 as along with 26 people and 4 groups iannis mzkbnt CulCog NathalieCornee pfanderson jkstewart pak daforerog whitead fheintz vkwn stringertheory jago Zephyrus aspen tomhebbron viktor21614 j_rodriguez shoshin silberbauer reyez qwermish renatomilani cabbagesofdoom dullhunk neils Science 2.0 / Open Science Jiang Research Group Convention on Knowledge Commons Roswell Cancer Crosstalk
	Towards a Data Sharing Culture: Recommendations for Leadership from Academic Health Centers. [My Copy] PLoS medicine, Vol. 5, No. 9. (2 September 2008) by Heather A A. Piwowar, Michael J J. Becich, Howard Bilofsky, Rebecca S S. Crowley, posted to bibliometrics open-data peer-review policy by CameronNeylon on 2008-09-21 15:48:13 as along with 7 people and 7 groups shankark thegoose jago pfanderson dullhunk hpiwowar HugoMarcelo OER_Open_Educational_Resources Convention on Knowledge Commons Integrative Expertise for Global Health Web2Learning Web2-0_Education Web2 Science 2.0 / Open Science
	Systematic Variation in Reviewer Practice According to Country and Gender in the Field of Ecology and Evolution [My Copy] PLoS ONE, Vol. 3, No. 9. (2008), e3202. by Olyana N. Grod, Amber E. Budden, Tom Tregenza, et al.Julia Koricheva, Roosa Leimu, Lonnie W. Aarssen, Christopher J. Lortie posted to bias peer-review by CameronNeylon on 2008-09-19 12:38:10 as
	Taking Responsibility for Scientific Discourse [My Copy] Science, Vol. 321, No. 5892. (22 August 2008), pp. 1039c-1040. by Seth D. Friedman posted to peer-review pubmed science-publishing by xjlibod on 2008-08-22 16:39:22 as along with 1 person Scis0000002
	Reviewing Scientific Works In Psychology [My Copy] (2005) by Robert J. Sternberg posted to peer-review by sfcheung on 2008-08-01 18:05:44 as
	Measuring article quality in wikipedia: models and evaluation [My Copy] In CIKM '07: Proceedings of the sixteenth ACM conference on Conference on information and knowledge management (2007), pp. 243-252. by Meiqun Hu, Ee-Peng Lim, Aixin Sun, Hady W. Lauw, Ba-Quy Vuong posted to abuse article classification classifier collaboration collaborative-authoring country dataset edits empirical encyclopedia peer-review prediction quality quality-assessment quality-assurance rigor wikipedia by krisl on 2008-07-25 00:43:35 as along with 7 people nliu82 mahart456 hongliangjie fiacobelli dtd aarontaycheehsien jfelipe
	Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. [My Copy] Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online), No. 2. (2007) by T. Jefferson, M. Rudin, S. Brodney Folse, F. Davidoff posted to peer-review review by xjlibod on 2008-07-23 18:48:15 as along with 1 person guhjy
	The evolution of editorial peer review. [My Copy] JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 263, No. 10. (9 March 1990), pp. 1323-1329. by J. C. Burnham posted to history peer-review by xjlibod on 2008-07-23 18:32:31 as
	Future of open access could be online and peer-reviewed [My Copy] Nature, Vol. 454, No. 7201. (10 July 2008), pp. 158-158. by Massimo Sandal posted to open-access peer-review by dullhunk on 2008-07-09 20:53:20 as
	Reviewing Peer Review [My Copy] Science, Vol. 321, No. 5885. (4 July 2008), 15. by Bruce Alberts, Brooks Hanson, Katrina L. Kelner posted to peer-review publication science by Borelli on 2008-07-04 16:10:40 as along with 12 people and 2 groups Pgalimberti szielke applebyb rrbarb sen_cheng emmahe johnsonw kaniko annyork libtech7 jago HugoMarcelo Academic Writing, Literacies and Discourse STS
	Painful Publishing [My Copy] Science, Vol. 321, No. 5885. (4 July 2008), 36a. by Martin Raff, Alexander Johnson, Peter Walter posted to peer-review pico problem-articulation by jago to the group Convention on Knowledge Commons on 2008-07-04 11:30:42 as along with 5 people and 2 groups vsiegel stringertheory dullhunk Borelli kaniko Academic Writing, Literacies and Discourse STS

Note: You may cite this page as: http://www.citeulike.org/tag/peer-review

Result page: 1 2 Next

publishing	14
experts	5
scholarly	5
bibliometrics	4
journals	4
lit-koerperbilder	4
publication	4
retraction	4
science	4
academy	3
article	3
e-publishing	3
education	3
ethics	3
misconduct	3
publications	3
referee	3
scientific-writing	3
academe	2
academic-reward	2
annotation	2
bias	2
digital-library	2
double-blind	2
electronic-publishing	2
female	2
information-technology	2
journal	2
journal-publication	2
keywords-fehlen	2
lit-review	2
marking	2
markov-chain	2
particle-swarm-optimization	2
pico	2
policy	2
problem-articulation	2
process	2
programming	2
social	2
subject-classification	2
user-study	2
abuse	1
algorithm	1
bruce-charlton	1
citation_analysis	1
citations	1
classification	1
classifier	1
collaboration	1
collaborative-authoring	1
coore	1
country	1
data-sharing	1
dataset	1
dick-gordon	1
diplomarbeit	1
discussion	1
economics	1
edits	1
empirical	1
encyclopedia	1
evilsevier	1
funding	1
grant	1
grants	1
history	1
impact	1
maxine-clarke	1
medscape	1
negative-results	1
open-access	1
open-data	1
openscience	1
paper	1
peter-frishauf	1
prediction	1
professionalism	1
pubmed	1
qotd	1
quality	1
quality-assessment	1
quality-assurance	1
regulation	1
review	1
rigor	1
science-publishing	1
scientific	1
self-regulation	1
social-networks	1
statistics	1
wikipedia	1

Tag peer-review [66 articles] Export

Related Tags