266 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28630514)
1. Editors' Perspectives on Enhancing Manuscript Quality and Editorial Decisions Through Peer Review and Reviewer Development.
Janke KK; Bzowyckyj AS; Traynor AP
Am J Pharm Educ; 2017 May; 81(4):73. PubMed ID: 28630514
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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; 5(4):e10072. PubMed ID: 20386704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reliability of editors' subjective quality ratings of peer reviews of manuscripts.
Callaham ML; Baxt WG; Waeckerle JF; Wears RL
JAMA; 1998 Jul; 280(3):229-31. PubMed ID: 9676664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Peer Review and Medical Journals.
Nugent K; Peterson CJ
J Prim Care Community Health; 2024; 15():21501319241252235. PubMed ID: 38682542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Journal editors' perspectives on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in biomedical journals: a qualitative study.
Glonti K; Boutron I; Moher D; Hren D
BMJ Open; 2019 Nov; 9(11):e033421. PubMed ID: 31767597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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. PubMed ID: 17411314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [The recognition of peer reviewers activity: the potential promotion of a virtuous circle.].
Pierno A; Fruscio R; Bellani G
Recenti Prog Med; 2017 Sep; 108(9):355-359. PubMed ID: 28901342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Authors' and editors' perspectives on peer review quality in three scholarly nursing journals.
Shattell MM; Chinn P; Thomas SP; Cowling WR
J Nurs Scholarsh; 2010 Mar; 42(1):58-65. PubMed ID: 20487187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The editorial process for medical journals: I. Introduction of a series and discussion of the responsibilities of editors, authors, and reviewers.
Liesegang TJ; Albert DM; Schachat AP; Minckler DS
Am J Ophthalmol; 2003 Jul; 136(1):109-13. PubMed ID: 12834678
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Preserving blind peer review of electronic manuscript files.
Jacobson AF; Schmidt K; Coeling H
Nurse Author Ed; 2005; 15(1):1-4, 7. PubMed ID: 15739759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Key elements required to publish a good article: consensus among executive editors of Traditional Chinese Medicine and integrative medicine journals - a Delphi study.
Hu X; Robinson N; Yu H; Liu J
J Tradit Chin Med; 2015 Jun; 35(3):335-42. PubMed ID: 26237840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A survey of orthopaedic journal editors determining the criteria of manuscript selection for publication.
Hing CB; Higgs D; Hooper L; Donell ST; Song F
J Orthop Surg Res; 2011 Apr; 6():19. PubMed ID: 21527007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Journal policies and editors' opinions on peer review.
Hamilton DG; Fraser H; Hoekstra R; Fidler F
Elife; 2020 Nov; 9():. PubMed ID: 33211009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Retrospective analysis of the quality of reports by author-suggested and non-author-suggested reviewers in journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models.
Kowalczuk MK; Dudbridge F; Nanda S; Harriman SL; Patel J; Moylan EC
BMJ Open; 2015 Sep; 5(9):e008707. PubMed ID: 26423855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A Vibrant Community of Readers, Authors and Reviewers: A Medical Editors' Necessity and a Challenge for Medical Education.
Escada P; Donato H; Villanueva T
Acta Med Port; 2019 Mar; 32(3):171-172. PubMed ID: 30946784
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. [Quality of manuscript evaluation in Gaceta Sanitaria].
García AM; Plasència A; Fernández E
Gac Sanit; 2002; 16(3):244-9. PubMed ID: 12057181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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; 280(3):231-3. PubMed ID: 9676665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Becoming a peer reviewer to medical education journals.
Azer SA; Ramani S; Peterson R
Med Teach; 2012; 34(9):698-704. PubMed ID: 22643022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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. PubMed ID: 17643779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL EDITORS' VIEWS ON REAL-WORLD EVIDENCE.
Oehrlein EM; Graff JS; Perfetto EM; Mullins CD; Dubois RW; Anyanwu C; Onukwugha E
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2018 Jan; 34(1):111-119. PubMed ID: 29415784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
