学术出版依赖同行评审人员。
Scholarly publishing depends on peer reviewers.
作者信息
Fernandez-Llimos Fernando
机构信息
Editor-in-chief, Pharmacy Practice. Institute for Medicines Research (iMed.ULisboa), Department of Social Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universidade de Lisboa.. Lisbon (Portugal).
出版信息
Pharm Pract (Granada). 2018 Jan-Mar;16(1):1236. doi: 10.18549/PharmPract.2018.01.1236. Epub 2018 Mar 27.
The peer-review crisis is posing a risk to the scholarly peer-reviewed journal system. Journals have to ask many potential peer reviewers to obtain a minimum acceptable number of peers accepting reviewing a manuscript. Several solutions have been suggested to overcome this shortage. From reimbursing for the job, to eliminating pre-publication reviews, one cannot predict which is more dangerous for the future of scholarly publishing. And, why not acknowledging their contribution to the final version of the article published? PubMed created two categories of contributors: authors [AU] and collaborators [IR]. Why not a third category for the peer-reviewer?
同行评审危机正对学术同行评审期刊系统构成风险。期刊不得不邀请众多潜在的同行评审人员，以获得最低可接受数量的同行同意评审稿件。人们已经提出了几种解决方案来克服这种短缺。从为这项工作提供报销到取消出版前评审，人们无法预测哪种方案对学术出版的未来危害更大。而且，为什么不认可他们对已发表文章最终版本的贡献呢？医学期刊数据库（PubMed）创建了两类贡献者：作者[AU]和合作者[IR]。为什么不为同行评审人员设立第三类呢？
Zotero 插件