The importance of peer review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25753/BirthGrowthMJ.v28.i1.17614Downloads
References
2. Zaharie MA, Seeber M. Are non-monetary rewards effective in attracting peer reviewers? A natural experiment. Scientometrics. 2018; 117:1587–609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2912-613.
3. Cho YG, Park HA. Peer review process in medical journals. Korean J Fam Med. 2013; 34:372-6.
4. Manchikanti L, Kaye AD, Boswell M, Hirsch JA. Medical Journal Peer Review: Process and Bias Pain Physician. 2015; 18:E1-E14.
5. Smith R. Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals J R Soc Med. 2006; 99:178–82.
6. Jefferson T, Rudin M, Brodney Folse S, et al. Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007:2.
7. Ware M. Peer Review: Benefits, Perceptions and Alternatives. PRC Summary Papers. 2008; 4:4-20.
8. Rowley JR, Sbaffi L. Academics’ attitudes towards peer review in scholarly journals and the effect of role and discipline. Journal of Information Science. 2017; 44:644–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551517740821.
9. Blum K, Jacobs W, Modestino EJ, DiNubile N, Baron D, McLaughlin T, et al. Insurance companies fighting the peer review empire without any validity: The case for addiction and pain modalities in the face of an American drug epidemic. SEJ Surgery and Pain. 2018; 1:1–11.
10. Gannon F. The essential role of peer review. EMBO Rep. 2001; 2:743.
11. Allen H, Cury A, Gaston T , Graf C, Wakley H, Willis M. What does better peer review look like? Underlying principles and recommendations for better practice. Learned Publishing. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1222.
12. Jackson L, Peters MA, Benade L, Devine N, Arndt S, Forster D, et al. Is peer review in academic publishing still working? Open Review of Educational Research 2018; 5:95-112. https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2018.1479139.
13. Stahel P, Moore EE. Peer review for biomedical publications: we can improve the system. BMC Medicine. 2014; 12:179-82. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-014-0179-1.
14. Patel J. Why training and specialization is needed for peer review: a case study of peer review for randomized controlled trials. BMC Med. 2014; 12:128. https://doi.org/ 10.1186/s12916-014-0128-z.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright and Authors' Rights
All articles published in Nascer e Crescer - Birth and Growth Medical Journal are Open Access and comply with the requirements of funding agencies or academic institutions. For use by third parties, Nascer e Crescer - Birth and Growth Medical Journal adheres to the terms of the Creative Commons License "Attribution - Non-Commercial Use (CC-BY-NC)".
It is the author's responsibility to obtain permission to reproduce figures, tables, etc. from other publications.
Authors must submit a Conflict of Interest statement and an Authorship Form with the submission of the article. An e-mail will be sent to the corresponding author confirming receipt of the manuscript.
Authors are permitted to make their articles available in repositories at their home institutions, provided that they always indicate where the articles were published and adhere to the terms of the Creative Commons license.
