开放同行评审是最公平的系统吗？是的。 - Suppr

Suppr

超能文献

Is open peer review the fairest system? Yes.

作者信息

Groves Trish

机构信息

BMJ, London WC1H 9JR, UK.

出版信息

BMJ. 2010 Nov 16;341:c6424. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c6424.

DOI:10.1136/bmj.c6424

PMID:21081602

Abstract

摘要

相似文献

Is open peer review the fairest system? Yes.

BMJ. 2010 Nov 16;341:c6424. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c6424.

Is open peer review the fairest system? No.

BMJ. 2010 Nov 16;341:c6425. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c6425.

Quality of manuscript reviews in nursing research.

Nurs Outlook. 2009 Sep-Oct;57(5):239. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2009.02.002.

Reviewing peer review: the three reviewers you meet at submission time.

Can J Nurs Res. 2006 Dec;38(4):5-9.

Journals under pressure: publish, and be damned.

Nature. 2002 Oct 24;419(6909):772-6. doi: 10.1038/419772a.

Manuscript revision strategies.

West J Nurs Res. 2007 Nov;29(7):786-8. doi: 10.1177/0193945907305913.

Responding to peer reviews: pointers that authors don't learn in school.

Res Theory Nurs Pract. 2008;22(4):219-21.

Peer review: recognition via year-end statements.

Nature. 2003 May 8;423(6936):116. doi: 10.1038/423116b.

Journals submit to scrutiny of their peer-review process.

Nature. 2006 Jan 19;439(7074):252. doi: 10.1038/439252b.

Peer review reviewed.

Nature. 2002 May 9;417(6885):103. doi: 10.1038/417103b.

引用本文的文献

Does the disconnect between the peer-reviewed label and reality explain the peer review crisis, and can open peer review or preprints resolve it? A narrative review.

Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2025 Aug 14. doi: 10.1007/s00210-025-04486-0.

Publication speed in pharmacy practice journals: A comparative analysis.

PLoS One. 2021 Jun 29;16(6):e0253713. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253713. eCollection 2021.

The limitations to our understanding of peer review.

Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020 Apr 30;5:6. doi: 10.1186/s41073-020-00092-1. eCollection 2020.

The role of geographic bias in knowledge diffusion: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020 Jan 15;5:2. doi: 10.1186/s41073-019-0088-0. eCollection 2020.

Unprofessional peer reviews disproportionately harm underrepresented groups in STEM.

PeerJ. 2019 Dec 12;7:e8247. doi: 10.7717/peerj.8247. eCollection 2019.

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

PLoS One. 2017 Oct 9;12(10):e0186111. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186111. eCollection 2017.

Peer review: acknowledging its value and recognising the reviewers.

Br J Gen Pract. 2016 Dec;66(653):629-630. doi: 10.3399/bjgp16X688285.

Let's make peer review scientific.

Nature. 2016 Jul 7;535(7610):31-3. doi: 10.1038/535031a.

Opening peer-review: the democracy of science.

J Negat Results Biomed. 2014 Jan 24;13:2. doi: 10.1186/1477-5751-13-2.

Views on the peer review system of biomedical journals: an online survey of academics from high-ranking universities.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Jun 7;13:74. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-74.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述，助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型，支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验

相似文献

Is open peer review the fairest system? Yes.

BMJ. 2010 Nov 16;341:c6424. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c6424.

Is open peer review the fairest system? No.

BMJ. 2010 Nov 16;341:c6425. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c6425.

Quality of manuscript reviews in nursing research.

Nurs Outlook. 2009 Sep-Oct;57(5):239. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2009.02.002.

Reviewing peer review: the three reviewers you meet at submission time.

Can J Nurs Res. 2006 Dec;38(4):5-9.

Journals under pressure: publish, and be damned.

Nature. 2002 Oct 24;419(6909):772-6. doi: 10.1038/419772a.

Manuscript revision strategies.

West J Nurs Res. 2007 Nov;29(7):786-8. doi: 10.1177/0193945907305913.

Responding to peer reviews: pointers that authors don't learn in school.

Res Theory Nurs Pract. 2008;22(4):219-21.

Peer review: recognition via year-end statements.

Nature. 2003 May 8;423(6936):116. doi: 10.1038/423116b.

Journals submit to scrutiny of their peer-review process.

Nature. 2006 Jan 19;439(7074):252. doi: 10.1038/439252b.

Peer review reviewed.

Nature. 2002 May 9;417(6885):103. doi: 10.1038/417103b.

引用本文的文献

Does the disconnect between the peer-reviewed label and reality explain the peer review crisis, and can open peer review or preprints resolve it? A narrative review.

Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2025 Aug 14. doi: 10.1007/s00210-025-04486-0.

Publication speed in pharmacy practice journals: A comparative analysis.

PLoS One. 2021 Jun 29;16(6):e0253713. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253713. eCollection 2021.

The limitations to our understanding of peer review.

Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020 Apr 30;5:6. doi: 10.1186/s41073-020-00092-1. eCollection 2020.

The role of geographic bias in knowledge diffusion: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Res Integr Peer Rev. 2020 Jan 15;5:2. doi: 10.1186/s41073-019-0088-0. eCollection 2020.

Unprofessional peer reviews disproportionately harm underrepresented groups in STEM.

PeerJ. 2019 Dec 12;7:e8247. doi: 10.7717/peerj.8247. eCollection 2019.

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

PLoS One. 2017 Oct 9;12(10):e0186111. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186111. eCollection 2017.

Peer review: acknowledging its value and recognising the reviewers.

Br J Gen Pract. 2016 Dec;66(653):629-630. doi: 10.3399/bjgp16X688285.

Let's make peer review scientific.

Nature. 2016 Jul 7;535(7610):31-3. doi: 10.1038/535031a.

Opening peer-review: the democracy of science.

J Negat Results Biomed. 2014 Jan 24;13:2. doi: 10.1186/1477-5751-13-2.

Views on the peer review system of biomedical journals: an online survey of academics from high-ranking universities.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Jun 7;13:74. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-74.