SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Perspectives on Medical Education: three changes in our guidelines to make authors’ and reviewers’ lives easier
6 references·2 citing·38 second hop
Perspectives on Medical Education: three changes in our guidelines to make authors’ and reviewers’ lives easier (2020)Perspectives on Medical Education: three …The cases for and against double-blind reviews (2019)The cases for and against dou…Scientific sinkhole: The pernicious price of formatting (2019)Scientific sinkhole: The pern…Peer Review Bias: A Critical Review (2019)Peer Review Bias: A Critical …Put science first and formatting later (2018)Put science first and formatt…Rewarding reviewers – sense or sensibility? A Wiley study explained (2016)Rewarding reviewers – sense o…Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2007)Editorial peer review for imp…Time to Publication in Medical Education Journals: An Analysis of Publication Timelines During COVID-19 (2019–2022) (2024)Time to Publication in Medica…Healthy food retail availability and cardiovascular mortality in the United States: a cohort study (2021)Healthy food retail availabil…Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again (1982)A comparison of results of meta-analyses of randomized control trials and recommendations of clinical experts. Treatments for myocardial infarction (1992)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Improving the peer-review process for grant applications: Reliability, validity, bias, and generalizability. (2008)The elephant in the living room: or extending the conversation about the politics of evidence (2009)Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial (2011)What Makes a Good Reviewer and a Good Review for a General Medical Journal? (1998)Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research (2014)The STM Report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing (2015)Improving the peer review of narrative literature reviews (2016)Peer review: The experience and views of early career researchers (2017)Ten considerations for open peer review (2018)Manuscript Rejection: Causes and Remedies (2010)Does it take too long to publish research? (2016)Recent developments in scholarly publishing to improve research practices in the life sciences (2018)Simplify manuscript submission and optimize authors’ resources by eliminating formatting and cover letters (2020)Saving time and money in biomedical publishing: the case for free-format submissions with minimal requirements (2023)Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)The Process of Science: A Critical Evaluation of more than 15 Years of Research on Self-Compassion with the Self-Compassion Scale (2020)The role of geographic bias in knowledge diffusion: a systematic review and narrative synthesis (2020)The Peer Review Process: Past, Present, and Future (2024)Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science (2011)Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science (2013)Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review (2017)Improving Women’s Advancement in Political Science: What We Know About What Works (2020)Impact of COVID-19 on longitudinal ophthalmology authorship gender trends (2021)Metrics and methods in the evaluation of prestige bias in peer review: A case study in computer systems conferences (2022)Racial Residential Segregation: A Fundamental Cause of Racial Disparities in Health (2001)The Impact of Food Prices on Consumption: A Systematic Review of Research on the Price Elasticity of Demand for Food (2009)Mortality in the United States, 2020 (2021)Availability and Accessibility of Healthy and Unhealthy Foods in Neighborhood and their Association with Noncommunicable Diseases: A Scoping Review (2024)The association of neighborhood walkability and food environment with incident cardiovascular disease in The Maastricht Study (2025)The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future (2018)Challenges for the female academic during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020)Keep up with the latest coronavirus research (2020)Scientific sinkhole: estimating the cost of peer review based on survey data with snowball sampling (2023)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2007Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies312 cited
  • 2019Peer Review Bias: A Critical Review165 cited
  • 2016Rewarding reviewers – sense or sensibility? A Wiley study explained124 cited
  • 2019The cases for and against double-blind reviews65 cited
  • 2019Scientific sinkhole: The pernicious price of formatting36 cited
  • 2018Put science first and formatting later21 cited

Cited by

  • 2021Healthy food retail availability and cardiovascular mortality in the United States: a cohort study16 cited
  • 2024Time to Publication in Medical Education Journals: An Analysis of Publication Timelines During COVID-19 (2019–2022)6 cited

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