Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Characteristics of ‘mega’ peer-reviewers

13 references·2 citing·45 second hop

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop

References

2007The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for Reporting Observational Studies17,756 cited
2008The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies17,743 cited
2020The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity545 cited
2012Peer review in a changing world: An international study measuring the attitudes of researchers393 cited
2008Enhancing the quality and transparency of health research332 cited
2021A billion-dollar donation: estimating the cost of researchers’ time spent on peer review305 cited
2013Who's Afraid of Peer Review?300 cited
2017A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review293 cited
2021Overburdening of peer reviewers: A multi‐stakeholder perspective on causes and effects73 cited
2020Quantifying professionalism in peer review68 cited
2020“This work is antithetical to the spirit of research”: An anatomy of harsh peer reviews65 cited
2016Attitudes of referees in a multidisciplinary journal: An empirical analysis60 cited
2018Biomedical journal speed and efficiency: a cross-sectional pilot survey of author experiences32 cited

Cited by

2023

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

Analysis of peer reviewers’ response to invitations by gender and geographical region: cohort study of manuscripts reviewed at 19 biomedical journals before and during covid-19 pandemic

32 cited

2022Peer review as a measurable responsibility of those who publish: The peer review debt index12 cited