The Medical Journal of Australia Internet peer-review study

Lancet

Volumn 352, Issue 9126, 1998, Pages 441-445

  Bingham, Craig M ^a   Higgins, Gail ^b   Coleman, Ross ^b   Van Der Weyden, Martin B ^a  

^a Medical Journal of Australia   (Australia)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; INTERNET; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 0032497137     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11510-0     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. 1 Lock S. A difficult balance. Editorial peer review in medicine. London: BMJ Publishing, 1991: 15-16.
2. 2 Kassirer JP, Campion EW. Peer review: crude and understudied, but indispensable. JAMA 1994; 272: 96-97.
3. 3 Smith R. Peer review: reform or revolution? BMJ 1997; 315: 759-60.
4. 4 Godlee F, Gale CR, Martyn CN. The effect on the quality of peer review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their reports: a randomized controlled trial [abstr]. Presented at the International Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Global Communcations, Sept 17-21, 1997, Prague, Czech Republic.
5. 5 Sharp DW. What can and should be done about publication bias? JAMA 1990; 263: 1390-91.
6. 6 Horrobin D. The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation. JAMA 1990; 263: 1438-41.
7. 7 Broad W. Imbroglio at Yale (1): emergence of a fraud. Science 1980; 210: 38-41.
8. 8 Feurer ID, Becker GJ, Picus D, et al. Evaluating peer reviews: pilot testing of a grading instrument. JAMA 1994; 272: 98-100.
9. 9 LaPorte RE, Marler E, Akazawa S, et al. The death of biomedical journals. BMJ 1995; 310: 1387-90.
10. 10 Kassirer JP, Angell M. The Internet and the journal. N Engl J Med 1995; 332: 1709-10.
11. 11 Pierie J-PEN, Walvoort HC, Overbeke JPM. Readers' evaluation of effect of peer review and editing on quality of articles in the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde. Lancet 1996; 348: 1480-83.