메뉴 건너뛰기
Medical Education
Volumn 46, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 924-925
To blind or not to blind? That remains the question

(1)  Eva, Kevin W a  

a NONE
Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]
Indexed keywords

EDITORIAL; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PEER REVIEW; PUBLISHING; STANDARD; WRITING;
EID: 84866458485     PISSN: 03080110     EISSN: 13652923     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04358.x     Document Type: Editorial
Times cited : (4)
References (10)
  • 1
    • 0037024214 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • Effects of editorial peer review: a systematic review
    • Jefferson T, Alderson P, Wager E, Davidoff F. Effects of editorial peer review: a systematic review. JAMA 2002;287:2784-6.
    • (2002) JAMA , vol.287 , pp. 2784-2786
    • Jefferson, T.1    Alderson, P.2    Wager, E.3    Davidoff, F.4
  • 2
    • 78449286446 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial
    • van Rooyen S, Delamothe T, Evans SJ. Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2010;341:c5729.
    • (2010) BMJ , vol.341
    • van Rooyen, S.1    Delamothe, T.2    Evans, S.J.3
  • 3
    • 67449097579 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • The effect of masking manuscripts for the peer review process of an ophthalmic journal
    • Isenberg SJ, Sanchez E, Zafran KC. The effect of masking manuscripts for the peer review process of an ophthalmic journal. Br J Ophthalmol 2009;93:881-4.
    • (2009) Br J Ophthalmol , vol.93 , pp. 881-884
    • Isenberg, S.J.1    Sanchez, E.2    Zafran, K.C.3
  • 4
    • 33747698399 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • To blind or not to blind? What authors and reviewers prefer
    • Bordage G, Regehr G. To blind or not to blind? What authors and reviewers prefer. Med Educ 2006;40:832-9.
    • (2006) Med Educ , vol.40 , pp. 832-839
    • Bordage, G.1    Regehr, G.2
  • 5
    • 0026342591 scopus 로고
    • How blind is blind review?
    • Yankauer A. How blind is blind review? Am J Public Health 1991;81:843-5.
    • (1991) Am J Public Health , vol.81 , pp. 843-845
    • Yankauer, A.1
  • 6
    • 84866443698 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • Unsigned: why anonymous evaluations in clinical settings are counterproductive
    • Guerassio J, Weissberg M. Unsigned: why anonymous evaluations in clinical settings are counterproductive. Med Educ 2012;46:928-30.
    • (2012) Med Educ , vol.46 , pp. 928-930
    • Guerassio, J.1    Weissberg, M.2
  • 7
    • 58149086691 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • The reviewer is always right: peer review of research in Medical Education
    • Eva KW. The reviewer is always right: peer review of research in Medical Education. Med Educ 2009;43:2-4.
    • (2009) Med Educ , vol.43 , pp. 2-4
    • Eva, K.W.1
  • 8
    • 47649101171 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • What's next? A guiding question for educators engaged in educational research
    • Eva KW, Lingard L. What's next? A guiding question for educators engaged in educational research. Med Educ 2008;42:752-4.
    • (2008) Med Educ , vol.42 , pp. 752-754
    • Eva, K.W.1    Lingard, L.2
  • 9
    • 74049132349 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • It's NOT rocket science: rethinking our metaphors for research in health professions education
    • Regehr G. It's NOT rocket science: rethinking our metaphors for research in health professions education. Med Educ 2010;44:31-9.
    • (2010) Med Educ , vol.44 , pp. 31-39
    • Regehr, G.1
  • 10
    • 79551662100 scopus 로고    scopus 로고
    • Method and reporting quality in health professions education research: a systematic review
    • Cook DA, Levinson AJ, Garside S. Method and reporting quality in health professions education research: a systematic review. Med Educ 2011;45:227-38.
    • (2011) Med Educ , vol.45 , pp. 227-238
    • Cook, D.A.1    Levinson, A.J.2    Garside, S.3

* 이 정보는 Elsevier사의 SCOPUS DB에서 KISTI가 분석하여 추출한 것입니다.