Improving peer review with CARMA

Learned Publishing

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 173-176

  Carmi, Ran ^a,c   Koch, Christof ^b  

^a Eye Predict   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547174267     PISSN: 09531513     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1087/095315107X204067     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Weller, A.C. Editorial Peer Review: Its Strengths and Weaknesses. Medford, NJ, Information Today, 2001.
2. Adam, D. and Knight, J. 2002. Journals under pressure: publish, and be damned. Nature, 419: 772-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/419772a
3. Daniel, H.D. 2005. Publications as a measure of scientific advancement and of scientists' productivity. Learned Publishing, 18: 143-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/0953151053584939
4. Gura, T. 2002. Scientific publishing: peer review, unmasked. Nature, 416: 258-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/416258a
5. Jefferson, T. and Shashok, K. 2003. Journals: how to decide what's worth publishing. Nature, 421: 209-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/421209b
6. Horrobin, D.F. 1990. The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263: 1438-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.263.10.1438
7. Chong, S. and Normile, D. 2006. Stem cells: how young Korean researchers helped unearth a scandal ... Science, 311: 22-5. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1126/science.311.5757.22
8. Beasley, M.R., Datta, S., Kogelnik, H., Kroemer, H., and Monroe, D. Report of the Investigation Committee on the Possibility of Scientific Misconduct in the Work of Hendrik Schön and Coauthors. Paris, Lucent Technologies, 2002. Available at http://publish.aps.org/reports/lucentrep.pdf
9. Couzin, J. and Schirber, M. 2006. Fraud upends oral cancer field, casting doubt on prevention trial. Science, 311: 448-9. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1126/science.311.5760.448a
10. Godlee, F. 2002. Making reviewers visible: openness, accountability, and credit. Journal of the American Medical Association, 287: 2762-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.21.2762
11. Rennie, D. 1998. Freedom and responsibility in medical publication; setting the balance right. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280: 300-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.3.300
12. Ingelfinger, F.J. 1975. Charity and peer review in publication. New England Journal of Medicine, 293: 1371-2.
13. Walsh, E., Rooney, M., Appleby, L., and Wilkinson, G. 2000. Open peer review: a randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry, 176: 47-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.176.1.47
14. Godlee, F., Gale, C.R., and Martyn, C.N. 1998. Effect on the quality of peer review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their reports. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280: 237-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.3.237
15. van Rooyen, S., Godlee, F., Evans, S., Smith., R., and Black, N. 1998. Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review: a randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280: 234-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.3.234
16. McNutt, R.A., Evans, A.T., Fletcher, R.H., and Fletcher, S.W. 1990. The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. A randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263: 1371-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.263.10.1371
17. Kennedy, D. 2006. Nick Cozzarelli. Science, 312: 159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1128103
18. Smith, R. 1999. Opening up BMJ peer review: a beginning that should lead to complete transparency. British Medical Journal, 318: 4-5.
19. Peer review policy for journals published by BioMed Central (2006). Available at http://www.biomedcentral.com/info/about/peerreview.
20. Callaham, M. and Tercier, J. Qualitative profile of journal peer reviewers and predictors of peer reviewer quality. Paper presented at the International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, Chicago, 2005. Abstract available at http://www.ama-assn.org/public/peer/abstracts. html#predict2.
21. White, S. and Creaser, C. Scholarly Journal Prices: Selected Trends and Comparisons. Loughborough, LISU, 2004. Available at http://www.lboro.ac. uk/departments/dis/lisu/downloads/op34.pdf.