Should authors submit previous peer-review reports when submitting research papers? Views of general Medical Journal Editors

Annals of Family Medicine

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 179-181

  Cals, Jochen W L ^a   Mallen, Christian D ^b   Glynn, Liam G ^c   Kotz, Daniel ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b KEELE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Peer review; Publishing

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; PEER REVIEW; PUBLISHING; STANDARD;

EDITORIAL POLICIES; HUMANS; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; JOURNALISM, MEDICAL; PEER REVIEW, RESEARCH;

EID: 84875351176     PISSN: 15441709     EISSN: 15441717     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1370/afm.1448     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Godlee F, Jefferson T. Peer Review in Health Sciences. London: BMJ Books; 2003.
2. Smith R. Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals. J R Soc Med. 2006;99(4):178-182.
3. Thompson Rueters. Web of Knowledge [website]. http://wokinfo. com/.
4. Callaham M, McCulloch C. Longitudinal trends in the performance of scientific peer reviewers. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;57(2):141-148.
5. Baxt WG, Waeckerle JF, Berlin JA, Callaham ML. Who reviews the reviewers? Feasibility of using a fictitious manuscript to evaluate peer reviewer performance. Ann Emerg Med. 1998;32(3 Pt 1):310-317.
6. Justice AC, Cho MK, Winker MA, Berlin JA, Rennie D; PEER Investigators. Does masking author identity improve peer review quality? A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 1998;280(3):240-242.
7. Van Rooyen S, Godlee F, Evans S, Smith R, Black N. Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14(10):622-624.
8. American Medical Association. The Seventh International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication [website]. http://www. ama-assn.org/public/peer/peerhome.htm.