Peer review process, open-access publication, and ethical issues in scientific communications

Annals of Tropical Medicine and Public Health

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 79-80

  Kandi, Venkataramana ^a  

^a Prathima Institution of Medical Sciences   (India)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; COMPETITION; DATA BASE; DECISION MAKING; EDITORIAL; FEE; HUMAN; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH ETHICS;

EID: 84939422915     PISSN: 17556783     EISSN: 09746005     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4103/1755-6783.162308     Document Type: Editorial

References (8)

1. Bohannon J. Who's afraid of peer review? Science 2013;342:60-5
2. Agrawal AA. Four more reasons to be skeptical of open-access publishing. Trends Plant Sci 2014;19:133
3. Davis PM. Open access, readership citations: A randomized controlled trial of scientifi c journal publishing. FASEB J 2011;25:2129-34
4. Osuchowski MF, Remick DG, Lederer JA, Lang CH, Aasen AO, Aibiki M, et al. Abandon the mouse research ship? Not Just Yet! Shock 2014;41:463-75
5. Kumar R. The Science hoax: Poor journalology refl ects poor training in peer review. BMJ 2013;347:f7465
6. Beall J. Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature 2012;489:179
7. Kumar AH. Rise in polluters of scientifi c research: How to curtail information pollution (infollution). J Nat Sc Biol Med 2013;4:271
8. Kumar AH. Anatomy and physiology of peer review process, can it be unbiased? J Nat Sci Biol Med 2014;5:1-2