Peer review and the nursing literature

Nursing Research

Volumn 58, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 73-

  Dougherty, Molly C ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EDITORIAL; HUMAN; NURSING RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; STANDARD;

EDITORIAL POLICIES; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; NURSING RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 63549130258     PISSN: 00296562     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/NNR.0b013e31819f1589     Document Type: Editorial

References (4)

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, 131-138.
2. Godlee, F., & Jefferson, T. (2003). Peer review in health sciences (2nd ed.). London: BMJ Books.
3. Henly, S. J., & Dougherty, M. C. (2009). Quality of manuscript reviews in nursing research. Nursing Outlook, 57, 18-26.
4. Kearney, M. H., Baggs, J. G., Broome, M. E., Dougherty, M. C, & Freda, M. C. (2008). Experience, time investment, and motivators of nursing journal peer reviewers. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 40, 395-400.