SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The Open Science Peer Review Oath
5 references·1 citing·30 second hop
The Open Science Peer Review Oath (2014)The Open Science Peer Review OathWhy training and specialization is needed for peer review: a case study of peer review for randomized controlled trials (2014)Why training and specializati…Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility (2014)Policy: NIH plans to enhance …Cooperation between Referees and Authors Increases Peer Review Accuracy (2011)Cooperation between Referees …Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets? (2011)Believe it or not: how much c…Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Why Most Published Research F…Reviewer selection biases editorial decisions on manuscripts (2018)Reviewer selection biases edi…Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement (1996)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomized Trials (2010)Fortifying the Corrective Nature of Post-publication Peer Review: Identifying Weaknesses, Use of Journal Clubs, and Rewarding Conscientious Behavior (2016)A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review (2017)Journal Peer Review and Editorial Evaluation: Cautious Innovator or Sleepy Giant? (2019)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)False-Positive Psychology (2011)Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience (2013)Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (2015)Nepotism and sexism in peer-review (1997)Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers'recommendations: a randomised trial (1999)Winners don’t punish (2008)Ironing out the statistical wrinkles in “ten ironic rules” (2013)The four pillars of scholarly publishing: The future and a foundation (2014)Does open peer review improve citation count? Evidence from a propensity score matching analysis of PeerJ (2020)Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications (2012)Gender bias in scholarly peer review (2017)Meta-assessment of bias in science (2017)Open Science Badges in the Journal of Neurochemistry (2018)Reglas y consejos para ser un buen revisor por pares de manuscritos científicos (2022)Use of preprint peer review to educate and enculturate science undergraduates (2022)STARD 2015: An Updated List of Essential Items for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (2015)STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies (2015)What does research reproducibility mean? (2016)Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis (2014)The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015 (2018)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2005Why Most Published Research Findings Are False10,471 cited
  • 2011Believe it or not: how much can we rely on published data on potential drug targets?1,885 cited
  • 2014Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility1,247 cited
  • 2014Why training and specialization is needed for peer review: a case study of peer review for randomized controlled trials75 cited
  • 2011Cooperation between Referees and Authors Increases Peer Review Accuracy35 cited

Cited by

  • 2018Reviewer selection biases editorial decisions on manuscripts15 cited

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