메뉴 건너뛰기
American Journal of Roentgenology
Volumn 183, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 1545-1550
Peer review at the American Journal of Roentgenology: How reviewer and manuscript characteristics affected editorial decisions on 196 major papers
Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]
Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; DECISION MAKING; DEMOGRAPHY; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PEER REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RADIOLOGY; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; ARTICLE; BIBLIOMETRICS; STATISTICAL MODEL;
EID: 16644376027     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.183.6.01831545     Document Type: Review
Times cited : (34)
References (18)
  • 1
    • 0028365095 scopus 로고
    • Peer review: Crude and understudied, but indispensable
    • Kassirer JP, Campion EW. Peer review: crude and understudied, but indispensable. JAMA 1994;272:96-97
    • (1994) JAMA , vol.272 , pp. 96-97
    • Kassirer, J.P.1    Campion, E.W.2
  • 2
    • 0025965169 scopus 로고
    • Assassins and zealots: Variations in peer review
    • Siegelman SS. Assassins and zealots: variations in peer review. Radiology 1991;178:637-642
    • (1991) Radiology , vol.178 , pp. 637-642
    • Siegelman, S.S.1
  • 3
    • 0141855194 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • Internationalization of the American Journal of Roentgenology: 1980-2002
    • Chen MY, Jenkins CB, Elster AD. Internationalization of the American Journal of Roentgenology: 1980-2002. AJR 2003;181:907-912
    • (2003) AJR , vol.181 , pp. 907-912
    • Chen, M.Y.1    Jenkins, C.B.2    Elster, A.D.3
  • 4
    • 0028915897 scopus 로고
    • Manuscript peer review at the AJR: Facts, figures, and quality assessment
    • Friedman DP. Manuscript peer review at the AJR: facts, figures, and quality assessment. AJR 1995;164:1007-1009
    • (1995) AJR , vol.164 , pp. 1007-1009
    • Friedman, D.P.1
  • 5
    • 0028234337 scopus 로고
    • Multiple blinded reviews of the same two manuscripts
    • Nylenna M, Riis P, Karlsson Y. Multiple blinded reviews of the same two manuscripts. JAMA 1994;272:149-151
    • (1994) JAMA , vol.272 , pp. 149-151
    • Nylenna, M.1    Riis, P.2    Karlsson, Y.3
  • 6
    • 0032527568 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • 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. What makes a good reviewer and a good review for a general medical journal? JAMA 1998;280:231-233
    • (1998) JAMA , vol.280 , pp. 231-233
    • Black, N.1    Van Rooyen, S.2    Godlee, F.3    Smith, R.4    Evans, S.5
  • 7
    • 0027049660 scopus 로고
    • Consistency between peer reviewers for a clinical specialty journal
    • Cullen DJ, Macaulay A. Consistency between peer reviewers for a clinical specialty journal. Acad Med 1992;67:856-859
    • (1992) Acad Med , vol.67 , pp. 856-859
    • Cullen, D.J.1    Macaulay, A.2
  • 8
    • 0016066143 scopus 로고
    • Peer review in biomedical publication
    • Ingelfinger FJ. Peer review in biomedical publication. Am J Med 1974;56:686-692
    • (1974) Am J Med , vol.56 , pp. 686-692
    • Ingelfinger, F.J.1
  • 10
    • 0032527530 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • Reliability of editors' subjective quality ratings of peer reviews of manuscripts
    • Callaham ML, Baxt WG, Waeckerle JF, Wears RL. Reliability of editors' subjective quality ratings of peer reviews of manuscripts. JAMA 1998;280:229-231
    • (1998) JAMA , vol.280 , pp. 229-231
    • Callaham, M.L.1    Baxt, W.G.2    Waeckerle, J.F.3    Wears, R.L.4
  • 11
    • 0028291595 scopus 로고
    • Is there gender bias in JAMA's peer review process?
    • Gilbert JR, Williams ES, Lundberg GD. Is there gender bias in JAMA's peer review process? JAMA 1994;272:139-142
    • (1994) JAMA , vol.272 , pp. 139-142
    • Gilbert, J.R.1    Williams, E.S.2    Lundberg, G.D.3
  • 12
    • 0028489175 scopus 로고
    • Reviewer bias: A blinded experimental study
    • Ernst E, Resch KL. Reviewer bias: a blinded experimental study. J Lab Clin Med 1994;124:178-182
    • (1994) J Lab Clin Med , vol.124 , pp. 178-182
    • Ernst, E.1    Resch, K.L.2
  • 13
    • 0000876735 scopus 로고
    • Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system
    • Mahoney MJ. Publication prejudices: an experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system. Cognit Ther Res 1977;1:161-175
    • (1977) Cognit Ther Res , vol.1 , pp. 161-175
    • Mahoney, M.J.1
  • 14
    • 0032527531 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • US and non-US submissions: An analysis of reviewer bias
    • Link AM. US and non-US submissions: an analysis of reviewer bias. JAMA 1998;280:246-247
    • (1998) JAMA , vol.280 , pp. 246-247
    • Link, A.M.1
  • 15
    • 0025247163 scopus 로고
    • Peer review in scientific journals: What good is it?
    • Relman AS. Peer review in scientific journals: what good is it? West J Med 1990;153:520-522
    • (1990) West J Med , vol.153 , pp. 520-522
    • Relman, A.S.1
  • 16
    • 0024975805 scopus 로고
    • How good is peer review?
    • Relman AS, Angell M. How good is peer review? N Engl J Med 1989;321:827-829
    • (1989) N Engl J Med , vol.321 , pp. 827-829
    • Relman, A.S.1    Angell, M.2
  • 17
    • 0027453224 scopus 로고
    • Manuscript peer review: General concepts and the AJR process
    • Chew FS. Manuscript peer review: general concepts and the AJR process. AJR 1993;160:409-411
    • (1993) AJR , vol.160 , pp. 409-411
    • Chew, F.S.1
  • 18
    • 0029157046 scopus 로고
    • The role of the manuscript reviewer in the peer review process
    • Polak JF. The role of the manuscript reviewer in the peer review process. AJR 1995;165:685-688
    • (1995) AJR , vol.165 , pp. 685-688
    • Polak, J.F.1

* 이 정보는 Elsevier사의 SCOPUS DB에서 KISTI가 분석하여 추출한 것입니다.