-
Journal of Primary Care & Community... 2024Journal editors depend on peer reviewers to make decisions about submitted manuscripts. These reviewers help evaluate the methods, the results, the discussion of the...
Journal editors depend on peer reviewers to make decisions about submitted manuscripts. These reviewers help evaluate the methods, the results, the discussion of the results, and the overall organization and presentation of the manuscript. In addition, reviewers can help identify important mistakes and possible misconduct. Editors frequently have difficulty obtaining enough peer reviews which are submitted in a timely manner. This increases the workload of editors and journal managers and potentially delays the publication of clinical and research studies. This commentary discusses of the importance of peer reviews and make suggestions which potentially can increase the participation of academic faculty and researchers in this important activity.
Topics: Humans; Periodicals as Topic; Peer Review, Research; Editorial Policies; Peer Review; Publishing
PubMed: 38682542
DOI: 10.1177/21501319241252235 -
Singapore Medical Journal Feb 2022
Topics: Humans; Peer Review
PubMed: 34602311
DOI: 10.11622/smedj.2021139 -
Communications Biology 2019The theme of this year's Peer Review Week, Quality in Peer Review, reflects both the necessity of peer review and the growing uncertainty about its role in scholarly...
The theme of this year's Peer Review Week, Quality in Peer Review, reflects both the necessity of peer review and the growing uncertainty about its role in scholarly publishing. We support peer review that aims to improve manuscripts through critical evaluation before publication.
Topics: Humans; Peer Review; Scholarly Communication
PubMed: 31552304
DOI: 10.1038/s42003-019-0603-3 -
Indian Journal of Dermatology,... 2019
Topics: Double-Blind Method; Forecasting; Humans; Peer Review; Periodicals as Topic
PubMed: 30971533
DOI: 10.4103/ijdvl.IJDVL_296_19 -
Canadian Family Physician Medecin de... Sep 2022
Topics: Humans; Peer Group; Peer Review
PubMed: 36100392
DOI: 10.46747/cfp.6809632 -
Microbiology (Reading, England) May 2019
Topics: Online Systems; Peer Review; Printing; Publications
PubMed: 30938669
DOI: 10.1099/mic.0.000785 -
The Journal of Experimental Medicine May 2012Last year, we came to the realization that online supplemental material had gotten out of control. In our conversations with authors and referees, we heard that the time...
Last year, we came to the realization that online supplemental material had gotten out of control. In our conversations with authors and referees, we heard that the time needed to produce it and thoroughly review it was increasing at an unsustainable pace. In response, we changed our policy on supplemental material. Well, we’re still listening. And we’re hearing author frustration with seemingly endless rounds of external review at high-impact journals. We want to let you know that the editors of have been working hard to avoid contributing to this problem.
Topics: Biomedical Research; Editorial Policies; Peer Review, Research; Periodicals as Topic
PubMed: 22508838
DOI: 10.1084/jem.20120731 -
Genome Biology May 2020
Topics: Access to Information; Peer Review, Research
PubMed: 32362286
DOI: 10.1186/s13059-020-02004-4 -
Indian Journal of Dermatology,... 2020
Topics: Fees and Charges; Humans; Peer Review; Periodicals as Topic
PubMed: 31975699
DOI: 10.4103/ijdvl.IJDVL_22_20 -
Journal of Korean Medical Science Jan 2019Inappropriate authorship and other fraudulent publication strategies are pervasive. Here, I deal with contribution disclosures, authorship disputes versus plagiarism... (Review)
Review
Inappropriate authorship and other fraudulent publication strategies are pervasive. Here, I deal with contribution disclosures, authorship disputes versus plagiarism among collaborators, kin co-authorship, gender bias, authorship trade, and fake peer review (FPR). In contrast to underserved authorship and other ubiquitous malpractices, authorship trade and FPR appear to concentrate in some Asian countries that exhibit a mixed academic pattern of rapid growth and poor ethics. It seems that strong pressures to publish coupled with the incessantly growing number of publications entail a lower quality of published science in part attributable to a poor, compromised or even absent (in predatory journals) peer review. In this regard, the commitment of Publons to strengthen this fundamental process and ultimately ensure the quality and integrity of the published articles is laudable. Because the many recommendations for adherence to authorship guidelines and rules of honest and transparent research reporting have been rather ineffective, strong deterrents should be established to end manipulated peer review, undeserved authorship, and related fakeries.
Topics: Authorship; Peer Review; Publishing; Scientific Misconduct
PubMed: 30636943
DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e6