Peer review and the web: The implications of electronic peer review for biomedical authors, referees and learned society publishers

Journal of Documentation

Volumn 54, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 173-197

  Wood, D J ^a  

^a Society for Endocrinology   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032330896     PISSN: 00220418     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000007165     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Cronin, B. and McKim, G. Science and scholarship on the World Wide Web: a North American perspective. Journal of Documentation, 52 (2), 1996, 163-171.
2. Report of the Joint Funding Councils' Libraries Review Group. (Chairman: Prof Sir Brian Follett) Bristol: HEFCE, 1993.
3. Wood, D.J. ESPERE report of Stage One. Bristol: ESPERE Project, available from the author or at http://www.ulst.ac.uk/espere.
4. Lock, S. A. A difficult balance: editorial peer review in medicine. The Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust, 1985. (Reprinted London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1991.)
5. Delamothe, A. Why we should allow authors to post preprints on the Internet. 1996. http:www.bmj.com/bmj/preprint.htm.
6. McKnight, C. Digital library research at Loughborough: the last fifteen years. Presentation at the Second Annual Conference on the Theory and Practice of Digital libraries, June 11-13, 1995, Austin, Texas, USA.
7. Marriot, P. and Brittain, M. Refereeing in the InfoTrain Electronic Journal. Presentation at The First Australian World Wide Web Conference (AusWeb 97), 5-9 July 1997.
8. Ginsparg, P. Winners and losers in the global village. Presentation for Conference held at UNESCO HQ, Paris, 19-23 Feb 1996 during the session Scientists' View of Electronic Publishing and Issues Raised, Wed 21 Feb 1996.
9. eMJA Online Peer Review Trial - original proposal. University of Sydney Library: Medical Journal of Australia Joint submission to the AVCC Electronic Publishing Working Group, 1995.
10. Harnad, S. Implementing peer review on the net: scientific quality control in electronic journals. In: Peek, R.P. and Newby, G.B., eds. Scholarly publishing: the electronic frontier. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.
11. The Royal Society, The British Library and The Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers. The Scientific Technical and Medical Information System in the UK. London: British Library, 1993. (BL R&D Report No 6123)
12. McGarva, D. and Roberts, D. From paper to pixels: electronic publishing and the microbiologist. Learned Publishing, 8, 1995, 225-227.
13. Morgan, A. The immunologist and the Internet - a tale of the tortoise and the hare? Learned Publishing, 9(2), 1996, 73-77.
14. Flatten, K. and Mackenzie, N. TAPin: Training & Awareness Programme in networks: interim report (Electronic Libraries Programme). Centre for Information Research & Training, Faculty of Computing & Information Studies, University of Central England, 1996.
15. Goodman, R. Document formats discussion paper. Project ACORN (Electronic Libraries Programme) 1996. http://acorn.lboro.ac.uk.
16. MacColl, J. Acrobat a high flyer. Ariadne, 7, 1997, 1.
17. Brailsford, H. and Clarke, E. Parallel Publishing for Transactions (PPT) Annual Report (Electronic Libraries Programme). Department of Geography, Queen Mary & Westfield College, University of London/Electronic Publishing Research Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, 1996.
18. Email experiences (Questionnaire results). ESPERE project report 1996 available from the author or at http://www.ulst.ac.uk/emsurvey.htm.
19. Kehoe, C. M. and Pitkow J. E. Surveying the territory: GVU's five WWW user surveys. World Wide Web Journal, 1, 3, 1996.
20. Microsoft Office 97. A white paper. Microsoft Corporation, June 1996.
21. Microsoft enlists Win95 in battle of the browsers. News item in Computing, 16 January 1997, 1.