SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Learning from open source software projects to improve scientific review
11 references·7 citing·31 second hop
Learning from open source software projects to improve scientific review (2012)Learning from open source software projec…Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2019)Why Most Published Research F…Reproducible research and Biostatistics (2009)Reproducible research and Bio…Replicability is not Reproducibility:Nor is it Good Science (2009)Replicability is not Reproduc…A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures (2009)A Principal Component Analysi…Interactive open access publishing and collaborative peer review for improved scientific communication and quality assurance (2008)Interactive open access publi…Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals (2006)Peer Review: A Flawed Process…Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (2006)Peer review: a flawed process…Citation indexes for science. A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas† (2006)Citation indexes for science.…Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Why Most Published Research F…An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)An index to quantify an indiv…Studying cooperation and conflict between authors with history flow visualizations (2004)Studying cooperation and conf…Big Data and Complex Data Analytics: Breaking Peer Review? (2022)Big Data and Complex Data Ana…Mapping the Landscape of Peer Review in Computing Education Research (2020)Mapping the Landscape of Peer…Understanding the nature and scope of clinical research commentaries in PubMed (2019)Understanding the nature and …Developing Open-Source Scientific Practice * (2018)Developing Open-Source Scient…Evidence appraisal: a scoping review, conceptual framework, and research agenda (2017)Evidence appraisal: a scoping…Priority criteria in peer review of scientific articles (2016)Priority criteria in peer rev…Aggregating post-publication peer reviews and ratings (2012)Aggregating post-publication …Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)False-Positive Psychology (2011)Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience (2013)Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (2015)Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (1997)Theory and practise of the g-index (2006)How well developed are altmetrics? A cross-disciplinary analysis of the presence of ‘alternative metrics’ in scientific publications (2014)Using Publication Metrics to Highlight Academic Productivity and Research Impact (2014)Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): A New Metric That Uses Citation Rates to Measure Influence at the Article Level (2016)Scientific peer review (2011)What is open peer review? A systematic review (2017)Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map (2020)Becoming Wikipedian (2005)He says, she says (2007)Harnessing the wisdom of crowds in wikipedia (2008)Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics (2015)The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? (2015)bibliometrix : An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis (2017)Journal of Computational Neuroscience (2013)On the scientific superiority of conceptual replications for scientific progress (2016)Scientific workflows for computational reproducibility in the life sciences: Status, challenges and opportunities (2017)Fortnightly Review: How can impact factors be improved? (1996)Studying the history of ideas using topic models (2008)From the science of science to Scientometrics visualizing the history of science with HistCite software (2009)Model Transparency and Validation (2012)Model Transparency and Validation: A Report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-7 (2012)Why has it taken so long for biological psychiatry to develop clinical tests and what to do about it? (2012)Why Science Is Not Necessarily Self-Correcting (2012)Recommendations for Increasing Replicability in Psychology (2013)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2005An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output11,612 cited
  • 2005Why Most Published Research Findings Are False10,471 cited
  • 2006Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals868 cited
  • 2006Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals794 cited
  • 2004Studying cooperation and conflict between authors with history flow visualizations768 cited
  • 2009A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures574 cited
  • 2006Citation indexes for science. A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas†506 cited
  • 2019Why Most Published Research Findings Are False463 cited
  • 2009Reproducible research and Biostatistics237 cited
  • 2009Replicability is not Reproducibility:Nor is it Good Science231 cited
  • 2008Interactive open access publishing and collaborative peer review for improved scientific communication and quality assurance30 cited

Cited by

  • 2017Evidence appraisal: a scoping review, conceptual framework, and research agenda30 cited
  • 2018Developing Open-Source Scientific Practice *26 cited
  • 2012Aggregating post-publication peer reviews and ratings20 cited
  • 2019

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

Understanding the nature and scope of clinical research commentaries in PubMed
17 cited
  • 2022Big Data and Complex Data Analytics: Breaking Peer Review?15 cited
  • 2020Mapping the Landscape of Peer Review in Computing Education Research13 cited
  • 2016Priority criteria in peer review of scientific articles7 cited