The etpheices of peer review: What to know before saying "yes"

Nursing Management

Volumn 47, Issue 7, 2016, Pages 44-48

  Siedlecki, Sandra L ^a,b,c  

^a LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c WALDEN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ETHICS; HUMAN; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PUBLISHING; STANDARDS;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PUBLICATION BIAS; PUBLISHING;

EID: 84983422364     PISSN: 07446314     EISSN: 15388670     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.NUMA.0000480762.22417.43     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Haag-Heitmann B, George V. Nursing peer review: Principles and practice. Am Nurse Today. 2011;6(9):48-53.
2. Ray K, Meyer S. Moving toward a more objective peer review process. Nurs Manage. 2014;45(1):52-54.
3. Gopee N. The role of peer assessment and peer review in nursing. Br J Nurs.2001; 10(2):115-121.
4. Rout A, Roberts P. Peer review in nursing and midwifery: A literature review. J Clin Nurs. 2008;17(4):427-442.
5. Souder L. The ethics of scholarly peer review: A review of the literature. Learned Publishing. 2011;24(1):55-72.
6. Spear HJ. On ethical peer review and publication: The importance of professional conduct and communication. Nurse Author Ed. 2004;14(4):1-3.
7. McCutchen CW. Peer review: Treacherous servant, disastrous master. Tech Rev. 1991; 94(7):36-40.
8. Rennie D, Flanagin A, Glass RM. Conflicts of interest in the publication of science. JAMA. 1991;266(2):266-267.
9. Wurzbach ME. Manuscript reviewing: An ethical perspective. Nurse Author Ed. 2007; 17(4).
10. Benos DJ, Kirk KL, Hall JE. How to review a paper. Adv Physiol Educ. 2003;27(2): 47-52.