Effect of english proficiency and research funding on acceptance of submitted articles to stroke journal

Stroke

Volumn 45, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 1862-1868

  Saposnik, Gustavo ^a   Ovbiagele, Bruce ^b   Raptis, Stavroula ^a   Fisher, Marc ^c,d   Johnston, S Claiborne ^e  

^a ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^c AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

gross domestic product; language; medicine; peer review; publications; research; stroke

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUTHOR; BLOOD CLOT LYSIS; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; FUNDING; HUMAN; INVESTMENT; LANGUAGE ABILITY; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PARITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; PURCHASING; READING; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS;

GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT; LANGUAGE; MEDICINE; PEER-REVIEW; PUBLICATIONS; RESEARCH; STROKE;

ANIMALS; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; STROKE;

EID: 84901935576     PISSN: 00392499     EISSN: 15244628     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.005413     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Jennings C. Quality and value: the true purpose of peer review. Nature. 2006;e05032.
2. Gross AF, Wiechers IR, Stern TA. Peer review by early career psychiatrists: an opportunity for development. J Clin Psychiatry. 2009;70:1600-1601.
3. Lovejoy TI, Revenson TA, France CR. Reviewing manuscripts for peer-review journals: a primer for novice and seasoned reviewers. Ann Behav Med. 2011;42:1-13.
4. Vinther S, Rosenberg J. Impact factor trends for general medical journals: non-English-language journals are lacking behind. Swiss Med Wkly. 2012;142:w13572.
5. Winkmann G, Schlutius S, Schweim HG. Publication languages of Impact Factor journals and of medical bibliographic databanks. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2002;127:131-137.
6. Saposnik G, Johnston SC, Raptis S, Ovbiagele B, Fisher M; Stroke Journal Editorial Board. Stroke journal: what is being published to advance the feld? Stroke. 2013;44:2644-2649
7. 2012 global. R&D funding forecast. R&D Magazine. 2011;1-35.
8. Love NG, Ansaldo U. The native speaker and the mother tongue. Lang Sci. 2010;32:589-593.
9. Education First. English Profciency Index. Toronto: Education First; 2013. http://www.ef.com/ca/epi/downloads. Accessed March 28, 2014.
10. Hanley JA, Negassa A, Edwardes MD, Forrester JE. Statistical analysis of correlated data using generalized estimating equations: an orientation. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;157:364-375.
11. Halligan M, Zecevic A. Safety culture in healthcare: a review of concepts, dimensions, measures and progress. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20: 338-343.
12. Okike K, Kocher MS, Mehlman CT, Heckman JD, Bhandari M. Nonscientifc factors associated with acceptance for publication in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American Volume). J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:2432-2437.
13. Thompson PJ. How to choose the right journal for your manuscript. Chest. 2007;132:1073-1076.
14. Howard RW. Peer review-an educational necessity? JAMA. 1973;225:731-732.
15. Rothwell PM, Martyn CN. Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience. Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? Brain. 2000;123(pt 9):1964-1969.
16. Wong VS. The examination of peer review and publication in neurology. J Child Neurol. 2010;25:1298-1301.
17. Lynch JR, Cunningham MR, Warme WJ, Schaad DC, Wolf FM, Leopold SS. Commercially funded and United States-based research is more likely to be published; good-quality studies with negative outcomes are not. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:1010-1018.
18. Link AM. US and non-US submissions: an analysis of reviewer bias. JAMA. 1998;280:246-247.
19. Ross JS, Gross CP, Desai MM, Hong Y, Grant AO, Daniels SR, et al. Effect of blinded peer review on abstract acceptance. JAMA. 2006;295:1675-1680.
20. Hachinski V, Donnan GA, Gorelick PB, Hacke W, Cramer SC, Kaste M, et al. Stroke: working toward a prioritized world agenda. Int J Stroke. 2010;5:238-256.
21. Reich ES. Science publishing: The golden club. Nature. 2013;502:291-293.
22. Jacob BA, Lefgren L. The Impact of Research Grant Funding on Scientifc Productivity. J Public Econ. 2011;95:1168-1177.
23. Mai TV, Agan DL, Clopton P, Collins G, DeMaria AN. The magnitude and nature of unfunded published cardiovascular research. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:275-281.