SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Mejorando la calidad de las publicaciones y avanzando en todos los paradigmas de la investigación de la farmacia asistencial, clínica y social: las declaraciones de Granada
16 references·0 citing·41 second hop
Mejorando la calidad de las publicaciones y avanzando en todos los paradigmas de la investigación de la farmacia asistencial, clínica y social: las declaraciones de Granada (2023)Mejorando la calidad de las publicaciones…Citation counts and journal impact factors do not capture some indicators of research quality in the behavioural and brain sciences (2022)Citation counts and journal i…A billion-dollar donation: estimating the cost of researchers’ time spent on peer review (2021)A billion-dollar donation: es…Mapping pharmacy journals: A lexicographic analysis (2019)Mapping pharmacy journals: A …The Impact Factor Fallacy (2018)The Impact Factor FallacyEvaluating alternative systems of peer review: a large-scale agent-based modelling approach to scientific publication (2017)Evaluating alternative system…Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective (2017)Duration and quality of the p…Comparison of the time-to-indexing in PubMed between biomedical journals according to impact factor, discipline, and focus (2016)Comparison of the time-to-ind…Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts? (2009)Are we training pit bulls to …What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them? (2008)What errors do peer reviewers…Show me the data (2007)Show me the dataEditorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2007)Editorial peer review for imp…An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)An index to quantify an indiv…Effects of Editorial Peer Review (2002)Effects of Editorial Peer Rev…Peer review. Crude and understudied, but indispensable (1994)Peer review. Crude and unders…Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism (1990)Peer Review in 18th-Century S…Journal Peer Review (1985)Journal Peer ReviewPeer-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)Peer review in biomedical publication (1974)Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases (2010)A Descriptive and Historical Review of Bibliometrics with Applications to Medical Sciences (2015)Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers'recommendations: a randomised trial (1999)Quality of reporting of experimental studies in medical education: a systematic review (2007)The effect of publishing peer review reports on referee behavior in five scholarly journals (2019)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials (2001)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria (2002)Funding grant proposals for scientific research: retrospective analysis of scores by members of grant review panel (2011)Scientific Utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability (2016)Why articles are retracted: a retrospective cross-sectional study of retraction notices at BioMed Central (2016)Journal impact factor: a brief review. (1999)The Impact Factor Game (2006)Article-Level Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact (2009)The Altmetric Score: A New Measure for Article-Level Dissemination and Impact (2015)The Journal Impact Factor: A Brief History, Critique, and Discussion of Adverse Effects (2019)Patterns of evaluation in science: Institutionalisation, structure and functions of the referee system (1971)The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation (1991)The Effects of Blinding on Acceptance of Research Papers by Peer Review (1994)Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? (2000)The Slowdown of the Economics Publishing Process (2000)The publishing delay in scholarly peer-reviewed journals (2013)The STM Report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing (2015)Self-citations as strategic response to the use of metrics for career decisions (2017)On the value of preprints: An early career researcher perspective (2019)How to search for literature in systematic reviews and meta-analyses: A comprehensive step-by-step guide (2024)Science Since Babylon (1961)Bridging Neurodiversity and Open Scholarship: How Shared Values Can Guide Best Practices for Research Integrity, Social Justice, and Principled Education (2022)Can Large Language Models Provide Useful Feedback on Research Papers? A Large-Scale Empirical Analysis (2024)The strain on scientific publishing (2024)The Evolution of Editorial Peer Review (1990)Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics (2015)The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? (2015)bibliometrix : An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis (2017)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2005An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output11,612 cited
  • 1990Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism350 cited
  • 2002Effects of Editorial Peer Review347 cited
  • 2007Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies312 cited
  • 2021A billion-dollar donation: estimating the cost of researchers’ time spent on peer review305 cited
  • 2017Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective303 cited
  • 2007Show me the data279 cited
  • 1994Peer review. Crude and understudied, but indispensable235 cited
  • 2008What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them?226 cited
  • 1985Journal Peer Review163 cited
  • 2022Citation counts and journal impact factors do not capture some indicators of research quality in the behavioural and brain sciences123 cited
  • 2018The Impact Factor Fallacy96 cited
  • 2019Mapping pharmacy journals: A lexicographic analysis72 cited
  • 2017Evaluating alternative systems of peer review: a large-scale agent-based modelling approach to scientific publication71 cited
  • 2016Comparison of the time-to-indexing in PubMed between biomedical journals according to impact factor, discipline, and focus

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

61 cited
  • 2009Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts?60 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.