• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Pattern of peer review proforma of medical journals of Pakistan.巴基斯坦医学期刊同行评审表格样式
Pak J Med Sci. 2019 Jul-Aug;35(4):1013-1017. doi: 10.12669/pjms.35.4.713.
2
Views of Iranian medical journal editors on medical research publication.伊朗医学期刊编辑对医学研究发表的看法。
Saudi Med J. 2004 Jan;25(1 Suppl):S29-33.
3
Nursing Journal Policies on Disclosure and Management of Conflicts of Interest.护理期刊利益冲突披露和管理政策。
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2020 Nov;52(6):680-687. doi: 10.1111/jnu.12605. Epub 2020 Oct 19.
4
Are peer reviewers encouraged to use reporting guidelines? A survey of 116 health research journals.是否鼓励同行评审员使用报告指南?对 116 种健康研究期刊的调查。
PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35621. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0035621. Epub 2012 Apr 27.
5
A health sciences researcher's experience of manuscript review comments, 2020-2022.2020-2022 年,一位健康科学研究员对稿件评审意见的体会。
S Afr Fam Pract (2004). 2023 Oct 25;65(1):e1-e5. doi: 10.4102/safp.v65i1.5753.
6
Conflict of Interest Disclosure Policies and Practices in Peer-reviewed Biomedical Journals.同行评审生物医学期刊中的利益冲突披露政策与实践
J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Dec;21(12):1248-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00598.x.
7
Solicitation for article submission by electronic journals.电子期刊征稿启事。
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2018 Sep 24;31(4):443-446. doi: 10.1080/08998280.2018.1498725. eCollection 2018 Oct.
8
Reviewing the review: a qualitative assessment of the peer review process in surgical journals.审视同行评议:对外科医学期刊同行评议过程的定性评估
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2018 May 23;3:4. doi: 10.1186/s41073-018-0048-0. eCollection 2018.
9
Journal editors' perspectives on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in biomedical journals: a qualitative study.医学期刊编辑对生物医学期刊同行评审员角色和任务的看法:一项定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2019 Nov 24;9(11):e033421. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033421.
10
Peer Review in Law Journals.法律期刊中的同行评审。
Front Res Metr Anal. 2021 Dec 8;6:787768. doi: 10.3389/frma.2021.787768. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

1
The changing forms and expectations of peer review.同行评审不断变化的形式与期望。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2018 Sep 20;3:8. doi: 10.1186/s41073-018-0051-5. eCollection 2018.
2
Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?编辑能否从同行评审员手中拯救同行评审?
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 9;12(10):e0186111. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186111. eCollection 2017.
3
Peer review and the publication process.同行评审与出版流程。
Nurs Open. 2016 Mar 16;3(4):193-202. doi: 10.1002/nop2.51. eCollection 2016 Oct.
4
Peer Review in Scientific Publications: Benefits, Critiques, & A Survival Guide.科学出版物中的同行评审:益处、批判及生存指南。
EJIFCC. 2014 Oct 24;25(3):227-43. eCollection 2014 Oct.
5
Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.提高生物医学期刊同行评审质量干预措施的影响:一项系统评价与荟萃分析
BMC Med. 2016 Jun 10;14(1):85. doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0631-5.
6
Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors.确保期刊同行评审的质量、公正性和诚信:编辑的可能作用。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Feb;22(1):169-88. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9625-5. Epub 2015 Jan 30.
7
A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology.一项系统评价强调了健康相关培训计划在期刊学方面有效性的知识空白。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 Mar;68(3):257-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.09.024. Epub 2014 Nov 7.
8
Peer review of grant applications: criteria used and qualitative study of reviewer practices.同行评议资助申请:使用的标准和评审员实践的定性研究。
PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e46054. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0046054. Epub 2012 Sep 28.
9
Manuscript peer review: a guide for advanced practice nurses.稿件同行评审:高级执业护士指南
J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2011 Jan;23(1):15-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2010.00572.x. Epub 2010 Nov 5.
10
A reliability-generalization study of journal peer reviews: a multilevel meta-analysis of inter-rater reliability and its determinants.期刊同行评审的可靠性综合研究:评分者间可靠性及其决定因素的多级元分析。
PLoS One. 2010 Dec 14;5(12):e14331. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014331.

巴基斯坦医学期刊同行评审表格样式

Pattern of peer review proforma of medical journals of Pakistan.

作者信息

Shah Faaiz Ali, Ali Mian Amjad, Nazar Zahid, Rasheed Haroon Ur

机构信息

Dr. Faaiz Ali Shah, FCPS. Department of Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Lady Reading Hospital Peshawar KP, Pakistan.

Dr. Mian Amjad Ali, PhD. Department of Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Lady Reading Hospital Peshawar KP, Pakistan.

出版信息

Pak J Med Sci. 2019 Jul-Aug;35(4):1013-1017. doi: 10.12669/pjms.35.4.713.

DOI:10.12669/pjms.35.4.713
PMID:31372134
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6659083/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the contents and format of peer review proforma of Medical journals of Pakistan.

METHODS

This descriptive study was conducted in the Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Lady reading Hospital Peshawar Pakistan from 3 August 2018 to 9 February 2019.An email was sent to the chief editors of all the medical journals listed on the official website (www.pmdc.org.pk) of Pakistan Medical and Dental Council (PM&DC).They were requested to send peer review proformas of their journals. The received proformas were analyzed for major contents and format or style. The proforma had a structured format when each portion of the manuscript i.e, title, abstract, key words, methodology, results, discussion, conclusion and references were individually sectioned for evaluation. Whereas in the unstructured proformas the reviewer was asked to assess the manuscript as a whole.

RESULTS

We received 41 proformas via emails. Majority (82.9%) of the proformas were structured while 17% were unstructured. A scoring or rating system for the manuscript was present in 31.7% of the proformas while 43.9% of the proformas were without any scoring system. Guidelines for the peer reviewers were given in 58.5% of the proformas. The peer review policy (closed or open) was mentioned in only 7.3%.About 9.7% of the proformas asked the reviewers to disclose conflict of interests.

CONCLUSION

A spectrum of contents and format of peer review proformas of medical journals were observed. We found structured peer review proforma with a scoring scale comprehensive and more appropriate for peer review.

摘要

目的

分析巴基斯坦医学期刊同行评议表格的内容和格式。

方法

这项描述性研究于2018年8月3日至2019年2月9日在巴基斯坦白沙瓦女子阅读医院骨科与创伤科进行。向巴基斯坦医学和牙科委员会(PM&DC)官方网站(www.pmdc.org.pk)上列出的所有医学期刊的主编发送了电子邮件。要求他们发送各自期刊的同行评议表格。对接收到的表格的主要内容、格式或样式进行分析。当稿件的每个部分,即标题、摘要、关键词、方法、结果、讨论、结论和参考文献分别进行评估时,该表格具有结构化格式。而在非结构化表格中,要求审稿人对稿件进行整体评估。

结果

我们通过电子邮件收到了41份表格。大多数(82.9%)表格是结构化的,而17%是非结构化的。31.7%的表格中有稿件评分或评级系统,而43.9%的表格没有任何评分系统。58.5%的表格给出了同行评审指南。仅7.3%的表格提到了同行评审政策(封闭或开放)。约9.7%的表格要求审稿人披露利益冲突。

结论

观察到医学期刊同行评议表格的内容和格式多种多样。我们发现带有评分量表的结构化同行评议表格全面且更适合同行评审。