References

• 2023Nonhuman “Authors” and Implications for the Integrity of Scientific Publication and Medical Knowledge420 cited
• 2020How a torrent of COVID science changed research publishing — in seven charts387 cited
• 1998Effect on the Quality of Peer Review of Blinding Reviewers and Asking Them to Sign Their Reports334 cited
• 1990The Effects of Blinding on the Quality of Peer Review261 cited
• 2016Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis218 cited
• 2023Guidance for Authors, Peer Reviewers, and Editors on Use of AI, Language Models, and Chatbots141 cited
• 2016Let’s make peer review scientific111 cited
• 2022Correction: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False99 cited
• 2023The Rapid Growth of Mega-Journals84 cited
• 2022Massive covidization of research citations and the citation elite76 cited
• 2018Fragments of peer review: A quantitative analysis of the literature (1969-2015)55 cited
• 2023Reminding Peer Reviewers of Reporting Guideline Items to Improve Completeness in Published Articles41 cited
• 2018Three Decades of Peer Review Congresses39 cited
• 2021Assessment of Concordance and Discordance Among Clinical Studies Posted as Preprints and Subsequently Published in High-Impact Journals