从一本医学期刊的角度看招募同行评审员的挑战。
The challenge of recruiting peer reviewers from one medical journal's perspective.
作者信息
Peterson Christopher J, Orticio Cynthia, Nugent Kenneth
机构信息
School of Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas.
Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings, Dallas, Texas.
出版信息
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2022 Feb 10;35(3):394-396. doi: 10.1080/08998280.2022.2035189. eCollection 2022.
Abstract
Peer review continues to be a crucial part of the scientific publishing process. Many editors have reported difficulty recruiting potential reviewers and receiving timely recommendations. Poor reviewer acceptance and completion rates can complicate and delay publication. However, few studies have examined these rates in detail. Here we analyze reviewer invitation, acceptance, and completion data from the .
摘要
同行评审仍然是科学出版过程的关键部分。许多编辑报告称，在招募潜在评审人员和及时获得评审建议方面存在困难。评审人员的低接受率和低完成率可能会使出版过程变得复杂并延迟出版。然而，很少有研究详细考察这些比率。在此，我们分析了来自……的评审邀请、接受和完成数据。
相似文献
1
The challenge of recruiting peer reviewers from one medical journal's perspective.从一本医学期刊的角度看招募同行评审员的挑战。
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2022 Feb 10;35(3):394-396. doi: 10.1080/08998280.2022.2035189. eCollection 2022.
2
Peer reviewer survey for .关于……的同行评审调查
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2022 Oct 26;36(1):132-134. doi: 10.1080/08998280.2022.2130040. eCollection 2023.
3
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.
4
5
Reliability of editors' subjective quality ratings of peer reviews of manuscripts.编辑对手稿同行评审主观质量评级的可靠性
JAMA. 1998 Jul 15;280(3):229-31. doi: 10.1001/jama.280.3.229.
6
Why do peer reviewers decline to review? A survey.同行评审员为何拒绝评审？一项调查。
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2007 Jan;61(1):9-12. doi: 10.1136/jech.2006.049817.
7
Peer review and journal impact factor: the two pillars of contemporary medical publishing.同行评审与期刊影响因子：当代医学出版的两大支柱。
Hippokratia. 2010 Dec;14(Suppl 1):5-12.
8
A survey to assess animal methods bias in scientific publishing.评估科学出版中动物方法偏差的调查。
ALTEX. 2023;40(4):665-676. doi: 10.14573/altex.2210212. Epub 2023 Jul 18.
9
Subspecialty Influence on Scientific Peer Review for an Obstetrics and Gynecology Journal With a High Impact Factor.亚专业对高影响因子妇产科学期刊科学同行评议的影响。
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Feb;129(2):243-248. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001852.
10
Editorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care?医学期刊编辑同行评议人的推荐：可靠吗？编辑会在意吗？
PLoS One. 2010 Apr 8;5(4):e10072. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010072.
引用本文的文献
1
A structured, journal-led peer-review mentoring program enhances peer review training.一个由期刊主导的结构化同行评审指导计划可加强同行评审培训。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2024 Mar 8;9(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s41073-024-00143-x.
2
Implementation of a novel peer review academy by Surgery and the Association of Women Surgeons.外科与女外科医生协会实施了一个新型同行评审学院。
Surgery. 2024 Feb;175(2):323-330. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.09.050. Epub 2023 Nov 10.
3
Peer reviewers' willingness to review, their recommendations and quality of reviews after the Finnish Medical Journal switched from single-blind to double-blind peer review.在芬兰医学杂志从单盲同行评审改为双盲同行评审后，同行评审人员的评审意愿、他们的建议及评审质量。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2023 Oct 24;8(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s41073-023-00140-6.
4
Introducing the SURGERY Peer Review Academies.介绍外科同行评审学院。
Surgery. 2023 May;173(5):1111-1112. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.03.010.
5
Peer reviewer survey for .关于……的同行评审调查
Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent). 2022 Oct 26;36(1):132-134. doi: 10.1080/08998280.2022.2130040. eCollection 2023.
本文引用的文献
1
Shared burden is always lighter - Peer-review performance in an ophthalmological journal 2010-2020.共同的负担总是更轻——2010-2020 年眼科期刊的同行评议表现。
Acta Ophthalmol. 2022 Aug;100(5):559-563. doi: 10.1111/aos.15033. Epub 2021 Oct 5.
2
What Motivates 's Peer Reviewers to Review? A Survey of Our Scholarly Community.激励“同行评审者”进行评审的因素是什么？对我们学术共同体的一项调查。
Health Commun. 2020 Aug;35(9):1056-1060. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2020.1762970. Epub 2020 May 18.
3
Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals.为同行评审争取审稿人是否变得越来越难？基于五本生态学期刊数据的一项测试。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016 Nov 4;1:14. doi: 10.1186/s41073-016-0022-7. eCollection 2016.
4
Recruitment of reviewers is becoming harder at some journals: a test of the influence of reviewer fatigue at six journals in ecology and evolution.在一些期刊中，招募审稿人变得越来越困难：对生态学和进化领域六本期刊审稿人疲劳影响的一项测试。
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2017 Mar 8;2:3. doi: 10.1186/s41073-017-0027-x. eCollection 2017.
5
The Principles of Fair Allocation of Peer-Review: How Much Should a Researcher be Expected to Contribute?同行评审公平分配原则：研究者应做出多少贡献？
Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Aug;21(4):825-8. doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9584-2. Epub 2014 Sep 7.
6
Why do peer reviewers decline to review? A survey.同行评审员为何拒绝评审？一项调查。
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2007 Jan;61(1):9-12. doi: 10.1136/jech.2006.049817.
Zotero 插件