Consultative review is worth the wait

Stuart R.F. King

11 citations0/0 files storedeLife

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Publishing and Scholarly Communication Academic Writing and Publishing Academic Publishing and Open Access

Abstract

eLife editors and reviewers consult with one another before sending out a decision after peer review. This means that authors do not have to spend time responding to confusing or conflicting requests for revisions.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

References

2017The prehistory of biology preprints: A forgotten experiment from the 1960s 2011End the wasteful tyranny of reviewer experiments 2013The eLife approach to peer review 2010A transparent black box

Cited by

2018A new twist on peer review

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.