Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

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

Peer review of statistics in medical research: the other problem

7 references·16 citing·40 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

1999Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers'recommendations: a randomised trial415 cited
1998Effect on the Quality of Peer Review of Blinding Reviewers and Asking Them to Sign Their Reports334 cited
1998Effect of Blinding and Unmasking on the Quality of Peer Review281 cited
1998Does Masking Author Identity Improve Peer Review Quality?278 cited
1998What Makes a Good Reviewer and a Good Review for a General Medical Journal?266 cited
1994Peer review. Crude and understudied, but indispensable235 cited
1998Statistical reviewing for medical journals160 cited

Cited by

2015Supporting thinking on sample sizes for thematic analyses: a quantitative tool749 cited
2007Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies312 cited
2021A CHecklist for statistical Assessment of Medical Papers (the CHAMP statement): explanation and elaboration266 cited
2016Another Look at Likert Scales185 cited
2020A scoping review of machine learning in psychotherapy research178 cited
2014Statistical review: frequently given comments100 cited
2008Psychological distress, depression and generalised anxiety in Turkish and Moroccan immigrants in Belgium83 cited

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

2011Common statistical and research design problems in manuscripts submitted to high-impact medical journals75 cited

2006Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies74 cited

2010Quality and Peer Review of Research: An Adjudicating Role for Editors73 cited

2022How to Write Statistical Analysis Section in Medical Research67 cited

2006The distribution of forensic journals, reflections on authorship practices, peer-review and role of the impact factor66 cited

2022An observational analysis of the trope “A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant” and other cut-and-paste statistical methods54 cited

2012Reviewing the review process: Identifying sources of delay53 cited

2014Are Sample Sizes Clear and Justified in RCTs Published in Dental Journals?53 cited

2018Conditional equivalence testing: An alternative remedy for publication bias39 cited