Research into peer review and scientific publication: Journals look in the mirror

Annals of Emergency Medicine

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 313-316

  Callaham, Michael L ^a  

^a Annals of Emergency Medicine   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; EMERGENCY MEDICINE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; NOTE; PEER REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; RELIABILITY; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; WRITING;

EID: 0036733689     PISSN: 01960644     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1067/mem.2002.127329     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Graphical literacy: The quality of graphs in a large-circulation journal
2. Effect of structured workshop training on subsequent performance of journal peer reviewers
3. The use of dedicated methodology and statistical reviewers for peer review: A content analysis of comments to authors made by methodology and regular reviewers
4. The effect of dedicated methodology and statistical review on published manuscript quality
5. Graphics in pharmaceutical advertisements: Are they truthful, are they adequately detailed?
6. Effect of written feedback by editors on quality of reviews: Two randomized trials
7. Journal prestige, publication bias, and other characteristics associated with citation of published studies in peer-reviewed journals
8. Author perception of peer review impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction
9. Content categorization for a peer-reviewed journal
10. Effect on the quality of peer review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their reports: A randomized controlled trial
11. Who reviews the reviewers? Feasibility of using a fictitious manuscript to evaluate peer reviewer performance
12. The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review
13. Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quatity of peer review
14. Does masking author identity improve peer review quality? A randomized controlled trial
15. Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers' recommendations: A randomised trial
16. When physicians double as entrepreneurs
17. Conflicts of interest: Can you believe what you read?
18. Conflict of interest. NEJM admits breaking its own tough rules
19. Withholding research results in academic life science. Evidence from a national survey of faculty
20. Declaring financial competing interests: Survey of five general medical journals
21. Conflict of interest policies in science and medical journals: Editorial practices and author disclosures
22. Deciphering the authorship code