Reviewers support blinding in peer review

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Volumn 64, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 113-

  Tierney, Alison J ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; EDITORIAL; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PEER REVIEW; PUBLISHING; STANDARD;

DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; EDITORIAL POLICIES; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH;

EID: 54749090963     PISSN: 03092402     EISSN: 13652648     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04824.x     Document Type: Editorial

References (2)

1. Baggs J.G., Broome M.E., Dougherty M.C., Freda M.C. Kearney M.H. (2008) Blinding in peer review: the preferences of reviewers for nursing journals. Journal of Advanced Nursing 64 (2) 131 138.
2. Ware M (2008) Peer Review: Benefits, Perceptions and Alternatives. Publishing Research Consortium (PRC), PRC Summary Papers 4, London, Great Britain. Retrieved from http://www.publishingresearch.org.uk.