Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Peer Review: Recent Experience and Future Directions

7 references·16 citing·46 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

2008Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias1,544 cited
2006Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals794 cited
1998Effect on the Quality of Peer Review of Blinding Reviewers and Asking Them to Sign Their Reports334 cited
2007Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies312 cited
2010A Reliability-Generalization Study of Journal Peer Reviews: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Inter-Rater Reliability and Its Determinants232 cited
2010Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial163 cited
2006Differences in Review Quality and Recommendations for Publication Between Peer Reviewers Suggested by Authors or by Editors147 cited

Cited by

2012Open Evaluation: A Vision for Entirely Transparent Post-Publication Peer Review and Rating for Science84 cited
2017Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?80 cited
2013Collaborative Peer-Supported Review of Teaching78 cited
2017Peer review: The experience and views of early career researchers77 cited
2017“Let the community decide”? The vision and reality of soundness-only peer review in open-access mega-journals59 cited
2016Student peer review: enhancing formative feedback with a rebuttal52 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

2017A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review38 cited

2014Current and Evolving Models of Peer Review36 cited

2012Peer review in a rapidly evolving publishing landscape24 cited

2014Coherence of "Open" Initiatives in Higher Education and Research: Framing a Policy Agenda23 cited

2021Re-envisioning Academic Publication: From “Publish or Perish” to “Publish and Flourish”23 cited

2013Learning to review submissions to peer reviewed journals: how do they do it?22 cited

2012The Novelty Paradox & Bias for Normal Science: Evidence from Randomized Medical Grant Proposal Evaluations17 cited

2017Reviewers’ Perceptions of the Peer Review Process in Journalism and Mass Communication17 cited

2017Preserving the Quality of Scientific Research: Peer Review of Research Articles15 cited

2018Improving publication quality and the importance of Post Publication Peer Review: The illustrating example of X chromosome analysis and calculation of forensic parameters14 cited