To improve transparency of biomedical publications;Améliorer la transparence des publications biomédicales

Annales de Biologie Clinique

Volumn 62, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 5-6

  Watine, J ^a   Friedberg, B ^a  

^a Laboratoires de Biol Polyvalente   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NOTE; PEER REVIEW; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; STANDARD;

PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS; PUBLISHING;

EID: 1242265591     PISSN: 00033898     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Note

References (6)

1. Godlee F. Making reviewers visible: openness, accountability, and credit. JAMA 2002 ; 287 : 2762-5 (full text available, free of charge, on the web on: http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/287/21/2762).
2. Goldbeck-Wood S. Evidence on peer review: scientific quality control or smokescreen? Br Med J 1999 ; 318 : 44-45 (full text available, free of charge, on the web on: http://www.bmj.com).
3. Paice E. How to write a peer review. Hosp Med 2001 ; 62 : 172-5.
4. Borgstein J, Watine J. Feudal lords of science and medicine. West J Med 2001 ; 175 : 139-40 (full text available, free of charge, on the web on: http://www.ewjm.com/cgi/content/full/175/2/139).
5. White C. Little evidence for effectiveness of scientific peer review. Br Med J 2003 ; 326 : 241 (full text available, free of charge, on the web on: http://www.bmj.com).
6. Rennie D. Freedom and responsibility in medical publication. Setting the balance right. JAMA 1998 ; 280 : 300-2 (full text available, free of charge, on the web on: http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/280/3/300).