Peer review of manuscripts submitted to medical journals

Middle East Fertility Society Journal

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 139-143

  Mahmoud Youssef, Mohamed Abdelfattah ^a,b  

^a CAIRO UNIVERSITY   (Egypt)

^b Egyptian International Fertility Center IVF   (Egypt)

Author keywords

Medical journals; Peer review; Publication

Indexed keywords

MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; REVIEW;

EID: 84862849744     PISSN: 11105690     EISSN: 20903251     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.mefs.2012.04.006     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Peer review of the biomedical literature. Olson CM. Am J Emerg Med. 1990;8(4):356-8. Review. PMID: 2194471 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE].
2. C.R. Weld A history of the royal society 1848 J.W. Parker London
3. D. Rennie Editorial peer review: its development and rationale F. Godlee, T. Jefferson, Peer review in health sciences 2nd ed. 2003 BMJ Books 1 13
4. H. Lyons The royal society, 1660-1940 1944 Cambridge University Press Cambridge 56-7
5. H. Brown Scientific organizations in seventeenth century France, 1620-1680 1934 Williams & Wilkins Baltimore 185-207
6. Kronick DA. Peer review in 18th century scientific journalism. JAMA 1990;263:1321-2.
7. M. Fisher, S.B. Friedman, and B. Strauss The effects of blinding on acceptance of research papers by peer review JAMA 272 1994 143 146
8. R.A. McNutt, A.T. Evans, R.H. Fletcher, and S.W. Fletcher The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review JAMA 263 10 1990 1371 1376
9. S. van Rooyen, F. Godlee, S. Evans, R. Smith, and N. Black Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review JAMA 280 3 1998 234 237
10. S. Schroter, L. Tite, A. Hutchings, and N. Black Differences in review quality and recommendations for publication between peer reviewers suggested by authors or by editors JAMA. 295 3 2006 314 317s