SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Advice for authors from the editors of Perspectives on Medical Education: Getting your research published
8 references·1 citing·45 second hop
Advice for authors from the editors of Perspectives on Medical Education: Getting your research published (2018)Advice for authors from the editors of Pe…Getting Published in Medical Education: Overcoming Barriers to Scholarly Production (2018)Getting Published in Medical …Ethical Shades of Gray: International Frequency of Scientific Misconduct and Questionable Research Practices in Health Professions Education (2018)Ethical Shades of Gray: Inter…Making the First Cut: An Analysis of Academic Medicine Editors’ Reasons for Not Sending Manuscripts Out for External Peer Review (2017)Making the First Cut: An Anal…Group Peer Review: The Breakfast of Champions (2016)Group Peer Review: The Breakf…Expanding Group Peer Review: A Proposal for Medical Education Scholarship (2016)Expanding Group Peer Review: …Twelve tips for getting your manuscript published (2015)Twelve tips for getting your …Writing for publication in medical education in high impact journals. (2014)Writing for publication in me…Data dredging, salami-slicing, and other successful strategies to ensure rejection: twelve tips on how to not get your paper published (2014)Data dredging, salami-slicing…Peer-Review and Rejection Causes in Submitting Original Medical Manuscripts (2020)Peer-Review and Rejection Cau…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)Twelve tips on writing abstracts and titles: How to get people to use and cite your work (2016)Facilitators and Barriers for Young Medical Doctors Writing Their First Manuscript for Publication (2021)Key Guidelines for Responding to Reviewers (2024)Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (1963)Learning Styles (2008)Practical significance: Moving beyond statistical significance (2015)Self-citation is the hallmark of productive authors, of any gender (2018)Reasons Reviewers Reject and Accept Manuscripts (2001)Review criteria for research manuscripts. (2001)The write position (2007)A Fine Balance: How Authors Strategize Around Journal Submission (2018)Standardization, ethics and biometric indicators in scientific publication: integrative review (2019)Use of Technology-Based Tools in Ensuring Quality of Publishable Journal Articles (2020)Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams (2006)The ups and downs of peer review (2007)Grasping the dynamic complexity of team learning: An integrative model for effective team learning in organisations (2010)Discovering the Benefits of Group Peer Review of Submitted Manuscripts (2019)Envisioning the Future of Academic Writing (2020)Manuscript review continuing medical education: a retrospective investigation of the learning outcomes from this peer reviewer benefit (2020)The characteristics of peer reviewers who produce good-quality reviews (1993)Communities of Practice (1998)The benefits to climate science of including early-career scientists as reviewers (2020)Peer-reviewing in Surgical Journals: Revolutionize or Perish? (2022)Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. (1995)A Multidimensional Theory of Burnout (1998)Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail (2009)Scholarship in Emergency Medicine: A Primer for Junior Academics Part I: Writing and Publishing (2018)Diversity in health professional education scholarship: a document analysis of international author representation in leading journals (2020)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Sensitive questions in surveys. (2007)False-Positive Psychology (2011)Factors associated with scientific misconduct and questionable research practices in health professions education (2019)On the frequency, prevalence, and perceived severity of questionable research practices (2023)The benefits of preregistration and Registered Reports (2024)Grounded Theory and Sensitizing Concepts (2006)Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping (2014)Common reasons for not accepting manuscripts for further processing after editor’s triage and initial screening (2018)Editorial Decision Making for Academic Medicine, 2021 (2020)Scientific Publishing in Biomedicine: How to Choose a Journal? (2020)Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals (2006)Vaccine Refusal, Mandatory Immunization, and the Risks of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases (2009)Who's Afraid of Peer Review? (2013)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2014Data dredging, salami-slicing, and other successful strategies to ensure rejection: twelve tips on how to not get your paper published111 cited
  • 2018Ethical Shades of Gray: International Frequency of Scientific Misconduct and Questionable Research Practices in Health Professions Education93 cited
  • 2017Making the First Cut: An Analysis of Academic Medicine Editors’ Reasons for Not Sending Manuscripts Out for External Peer Review54 cited
  • 2015Twelve tips for getting your manuscript published38 cited
  • 2018Getting Published in Medical Education: Overcoming Barriers to Scholarly Production35 cited
  • 2014Writing for publication in medical education in high impact journals.27 cited
  • 2016Expanding Group Peer Review: A Proposal for Medical Education Scholarship22 cited
  • 2016Group Peer Review: The Breakfast of Champions22 cited

Cited by

  • 2020Peer-Review and Rejection Causes in Submitting Original Medical Manuscripts8 cited

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