eLife 选择论文进行同行评审的方式和原因。
How and why eLife selects papers for peer review.
出版信息
Elife. 2024 Jul 23;13:e100571. doi: 10.7554/eLife.100571.
Abstract
When deciding which submissions should be peer reviewed, eLife editors consider whether they will be able to find high-quality reviewers, and whether the reviews will be valuable to the scientific community.
摘要
在决定哪些提交内容应该进行同行评审时，eLife 的编辑会考虑他们是否能够找到高质量的评审人员，以及评审是否对科学界有价值。
相似文献
1
How and why eLife selects papers for peer review.eLife 选择论文进行同行评审的方式和原因。
Elife. 2024 Jul 23;13:e100571. doi: 10.7554/eLife.100571.
2
Do peer reviewers comment on reporting items as instructed by the journal? A secondary analysis of two randomized trials.同行评审员是否按照期刊的要求对报告项目进行评论？两项随机试验的二次分析。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2025 May 8;183:111818. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111818.
3
Paying reviewers and regulating the number of papers may help fix the peer-review process.向审稿人支付报酬并规范论文数量可能有助于修复同行评审过程。
F1000Res. 2024 Aug 27;13:439. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.148985.1. eCollection 2024.
4
Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies.用于提高生物医学研究报告质量的编辑同行评审。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;2007(2):MR000016. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000016.pub3.
5
Factors within the clinical encounter that impact upon risk assessment within child and adolescent mental health services: a rapid realist synthesis.临床接触中的影响儿童和青少年心理健康服务风险评估的因素：快速现实主义综合评估。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Jan;12(1):1-107. doi: 10.3310/VKTY5822.
6
Author guidelines in medical journals: Essential rules and rationale.医学期刊的作者指南：基本规则及原理
Adv Clin Exp Med. 2025 Jun;34(6):861-869. doi: 10.17219/acem/205025.
7
Consultative review is worth the wait.咨询审查值得等待。
Elife. 2017 Sep 28;6:e32012. doi: 10.7554/eLife.32012.
8
Reporting and publishing guidelines: article 12 in Integrating and coordinating efforts in COPD guideline development. An official ATS/ERS workshop report.报告和出版指南：COPD 指南制定中的整合和协调努力第 12 条。美国胸科学会/欧洲呼吸学会研讨会官方报告。
Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2012 Dec;9(5):293-7. doi: 10.1513/pats.201208-065ST.
9
Peer review reports of randomized controlled trials in oncology can be short and superficial.肿瘤学中随机对照试验的同行评审报告可能简短且肤浅。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2025 Jun 30;185:111893. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2025.111893.
10
The delicate nature of a constructive peer review: pearls from the editorial board.建设性同行评审的微妙性质：编辑委员会的真知灼见。
Neurosurg Rev. 2024 Oct 23;47(1):814. doi: 10.1007/s10143-024-03047-y.
Zotero 插件