SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Learning About and Benefiting From Peer Review: A Course Assignment for Doctoral Students at Two Different Universities
6 references·3 citing·42 second hop
Learning About and Benefiting From Peer Review: A Course Assignment for Doctoral Students at Two Different Universities (2016)Learning About and Benefiting From Peer R…Peer review for biomedical publications: we can improve the system (2014)Peer review for biomedical pu…A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology (2014)A systematic review highlight…Systematic review of the effectiveness of training programs in writing for scholarly publication, journal editing, and manuscript peer review (protocol) (2013)Systematic review of the effe…Strategies for successful academic writing — Institutional and non-institutional support for students (2013)Strategies for successful aca…Peer Reviewer Training and Editor Support: Results From an International Survey of Nursing Peer Reviewers (2009)Peer Reviewer Training and Ed…In search of the elusive ADDIE model (2003)In search of the elusive ADDI…Enhancing peer review skills in higher education: a mixed-methods study on challenges and training needs (2025)Enhancing peer review skills …Using the peer review process to educate and empower emerging nurse scholars (2020)Using the peer review process…Evaluating Scientific Writing Skill in DNP Program Students (2020)Evaluating Scientific Writing…What Makes a Good Reviewer and a Good Review for a General Medical Journal? (1998)Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial (2004)Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2007)Authors’ and Editors’ Perspectives on Peer Review Quality in Three Scholarly Nursing Journals (2010)Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals (2012)Does mentoring new peer reviewers improve review quality? A randomized trial (2012)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Rewarding Peer Reviewers - Maintaining the Integrity of Science Communication (2015)Tools used to assess the quality of peer review reports: a methodological systematic review (2019)Overburdening of peer reviewers: A multi‐stakeholder perspective on causes and effects (2021)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)A scoping review of competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals (2016)A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review (2017)Knowledge and motivations of training in peer review: An international cross-sectional survey (2023)Communities of practice learning, meaning, and identity (1999)Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions (2000)Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life's domains. (2008)Fostering Master's Students' Metacognition and Self-Regulation Practices for Research Writing (2018)Main barriers and possible enablers of academicians while publishing (2022)Identifying and analyzing common English writing challenges among regular undergraduate students (2024)Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (2011)Reviewers’ Perceptions of the Peer Review Process in Journalism and Mass Communication (2017)Designs of trials assessing interventions to improve the peer review process: a vignette-based survey (2018)Reviewer selection biases editorial decisions on manuscripts (2018)Reliability, Validity, and Holistic Scoring: What We Know and What We Need to Know (1990)The Science of Scientific Writing (1990)The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences (2007)Peer Review in Health Sciences (1999)Peer review in health sciences (2002)Improving the peer-review process for grant applications: Reliability, validity, bias, and generalizability. (2008)The qualitative content analysis process (2008)Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study (2013)Code Saturation Versus Meaning Saturation (2016)Design-Based Research Process: Problems, Phases, and Applications (2014)Designing for Engagement: Using the ADDIE Model to Integrate High-Impact Practices into an Online Information Literacy Course (2016)The effects of training satisfaction, employee benefits, and incentives on part-time employees’ commitment (2018)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2003In search of the elusive ADDIE model752 cited
  • 2014Peer review for biomedical publications: we can improve the system103 cited
  • 2014A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology62 cited
  • 2009Peer Reviewer Training and Editor Support: Results From an International Survey of Nursing Peer Reviewers59 cited
  • 2013Strategies for successful academic writing — Institutional and non-institutional support for students59 cited
  • 2013Systematic review of the effectiveness of training programs in writing for scholarly publication, journal editing, and manuscript peer review (protocol)18 cited

Cited by

  • 2020Using the peer review process to educate and empower emerging nurse scholars14 cited
  • 2020Evaluating Scientific Writing Skill in DNP Program Students10 cited
  • 2025Enhancing peer review skills in higher education: a mixed-methods study on challenges and training needs8 cited

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