SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
How to write a peer review
16 references·2 citing·43 second hop
How to write a peer review (2001)How to write a peer reviewOpening up BMJ peer review (1999)Opening up BMJ peer reviewEffect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers'recommendations: a randomised trial (1999)Effect of open peer review on…What makes a good reviewer of manuscripts? (1998)What makes a good reviewer of…Masking, Blinding, and Peer Review: The Blind Leading the Blinded (1998)Masking, Blinding, and Peer R…Effect of Blinding and Unmasking on the Quality of Peer Review (1998)Effect of Blinding and Unmask…Does Masking Author Identity Improve Peer Review Quality? (1998)Does Masking Author Identity …Qualitative research articles: information for authors and peer reviewers. (1997)Qualitative research articles…Peer review: reform or revolution? (1997)Peer review: reform or revolu…Reporting on surveys: information for authors and peer reviewers. (1996)Reporting on surveys: informa…Readers' evaluation of effect of peer review and editing on quality of articles in the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde (1996)Readers' evaluation of effect…How Well Does a Journal's Peer Review Process Function? (1994)How Well Does a Journal's Pee…Does Editorial Peer Review Work? (1994)Does Editorial Peer Review Wo…Do Readers and Peer Reviewers Agree on Manuscript Quality? (1994)Do Readers and Peer Reviewers…A Citation Analysis of the Impact of Blinded Peer Review (1994)A Citation Analysis of the Im…The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation (1990)The Philosophical Basis of Pe…Journal Peer Review (1985)Journal Peer ReviewGuide for peer reviewers of scientific articles in the Croatian Medical Journal. (2005)Guide for peer reviewers of s…How to write a critical letter and respond to one (2001)How to write a critical lette…Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. (1992)Qualitative studies. Their role in medical research. (1998)Criterios de calidad en la Investigación Cualitativa en Salud (ICS): apuntes para un debate necesario (2002)Social Support Processes and the Adaptation of Individuals With Chronic Disabilities (2006)Fourth Generation Evaluation (2014)The Interpretation of Cultures (2017)Assessing the Relative Impacts of Economics Journals (1983)Publishing by—and for?—the Numbers (1990)Research Papers: Who's Uncited Now? (1991)An economic analysis of the use of citations in the law (2000)Mixed Methods Research in Strategic Management (2010)The sociology of scientific validity: How professional networks shape judgement in peer review (2018)Assessing the quality of reports of randomised trials: implications for the conduct of meta-analyses. (1999)Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2007)The Effects of Double-Blind versus Single-Blind Reviewing: Experimental Evidence from The American Economic Review (2016)What is open peer review? A systematic review (2017)The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. A randomized trial (1990)Measuring the social impact of research (2001)Inter-rater agreement in the scoring of abstracts submitted to a primary care research conference (2002)Reviewers' perceptions of the peer review process for a medical education journal (2004)Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again (1982)Effects of Peer Review and Editing on the Readability of Articles Published in Annals of Internal Medicine (1994)Manuscript Quality before and after Peer Review and Editing at Annals of Internal Medicine (1994)Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2006)Statistical Reviewers Improve Reporting in Biomedical Articles: A Randomized Trial (2007)CONSORT adoption and quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: a systematic analysis in two dermatology journals (2009)Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalisation, structure and functions of the referee system (1971)Peer review in biomedical publication (1974)The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation (1991)The Effects of Blinding on Acceptance of Research Papers by Peer Review (1994)Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? (2000)Testing and adjusting for publication bias (2001)A systematic review of randomized trials on the effectiveness of computer-tailored education on physical activity and dietary behaviors (2006)Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors (2007)Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods (2005)Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research (2005)A review of theory and practice in scientometrics (2015)How open science helps researchers succeed (2016)The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review (2016)Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature (2017)Making Reviewers Visible (2002)The changing forms and expectations of peer review (2018)Peer Review Bias: A Critical Review (2019)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 1990The Philosophical Basis of Peer Review and the Suppression of Innovation436 cited
  • 1999Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers'recommendations: a randomised trial415 cited
  • 1998Effect of Blinding and Unmasking on the Quality of Peer Review281 cited
  • 1998Does Masking Author Identity Improve Peer Review Quality?278 cited
  • 1999Opening up BMJ peer review191 cited
  • 1985Journal Peer Review163 cited
  • 1994A Citation Analysis of the Impact of Blinded Peer Review120 cited
  • 1997Qualitative research articles: information for authors and peer reviewers.117 cited
  • 1997Peer review: reform or revolution?113 cited
  • 1996Readers' evaluation of effect of peer review and editing on quality of articles in the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde84 cited
  • 1998What makes a good reviewer of manuscripts?61 cited
  • 1998Masking, Blinding, and Peer Review: The Blind Leading the Blinded58 cited
  • 1994Do Readers and Peer Reviewers Agree on Manuscript Quality?46 cited
  • 1994Does Editorial Peer Review Work?46 cited
  • 1996Reporting on surveys: information for authors and peer reviewers.39 cited

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

  • 1994How Well Does a Journal's Peer Review Process Function?28 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2001How to write a critical letter and respond to one11 cited
    • 2005Guide for peer reviewers of scientific articles in the Croatian Medical Journal.10 cited