How to review a scientific paper

Asian Journal of Psychiatry

Volumn 11, Issue , 2014, Pages 124-127

  Tandon, Rajiv ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTHOR; EDITOR; ETHICS; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; PEER REVIEW; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; VALIDITY; METHODOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PUBLISHING;

HUMANS; PEER REVIEW; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84912050350     PISSN: 18762018     EISSN: 18762026     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajp.2014.08.007     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Allen T.W. Peer review guidance: how do you write a good review?. J. Am. Osteopath. Assoc. 2013, 113:916-920.
2. Benos D.J., Kirk K.L., Hall J.E. How to review a paper. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2003, 27:47-52.
3. Bjork B.-C., Roos A., Lauri M. Scientific journal publishing: yearly volume and open access availability. Inf. Res. 2009, 14-1:391.
4. Black N., van Rooyen S., Godlee F., Smith R., Evans S. What makes a good reviewer. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1998, 280:231-233.
5. Burnham J.C. The evolution of editorial peer review. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1990, 263:1323-1329.
6. Clark A., Rankupalli B., Tandon R. Practicing evidence-based psychiatry. 3. Interpreting treatment guidelines. Asian J. Psychiatry 2011, 4:304-308.
7. Elsevier. Reviewer guidelines. (accessed 16.08.14). http://www.elsevier.com/reviewers/reviewer-guidelines.
8. Haj-Ibrahim J., Tandon R. Practicing evidence-based psychiatry. 2. Interpreting integrative literature. Asian J. Psychiatry 2011, 4:80-85.
9. Hoppin F.G. How I review an original scientific article. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2002, 166:1019-1023.
10. Ioannidis J.P., Tatsioni A., Karassa F.B. Who is afraid of reviewers. Eur. J. Clin. Invest. 2010, 40:285-287.
11. Jefferson T., Rudin M., Brodney F.S., Davidoff F. Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2007, 2:MR000016.
12. Keshavan M.S. How you can get your psychiatry scientific paper accepted. Asian J. Psychiatry 2011, 4:216-217.
13. Kravitz R.L., Franks P., Feldman M.D., et al. Editorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care?. PLoS ONE 2010, 5(4):e10072.
14. Kronick D.A. Peer review in 18th-century scientific journalism. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1990, 263:1321-1322.
15. Larson B.P., Chung K.C. A systematic review of peer review for scientific manuscripts. Hand 2012, 7:37-44.
16. Onitilo A.A., Engel J.M., Salzman-Scott S.A., Stankowski R.V., Doi S.A. A core-item reviewer evaluation (CoRE) system for manuscript peer review. Acc. Res. 2014, 21:109-121.
17. Provenzale J.M., Stanley R.J. A systematic guide to reviewing a manuscript. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005, 185:1-7.
18. Rankupalli B., Tandon R. Practicing evidence-based psychiatry.1. Applying a study's findings. Asian J. Psychiatry 2010, 3:35-40.
19. Szekely T., Kruger O., Krause E.T. Errors in science: the role of reviewers. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2014, 29:371-373.
20. Twaij H., Oussedik S., Hoffmeyer P. Peer review. Bone Joint J. 2014, 96-B:436-441.
21. Vintzileos A.M., Ananth C.V. The art of peer-reviewing an original research paper. J. Ultrasound Med. 2010, 29:513-518.