Peer Review in Ophthalmology: A Collaborative Approach to Training the Next Generation of Reviewers.
作者信息
Chan Matilda F
机构信息
Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California, United States.
Francis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, California, United States.
出版信息
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2024 Aug 1;65(10):1. doi: 10.1167/iovs.65.10.1.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Peer Review in Ophthalmology: A Collaborative Approach to Training the Next Generation of Reviewers.眼科同行评审：培养下一代评审员的协作方法。
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2024 Aug 1;65(10):1. doi: 10.1167/iovs.65.10.1.
2
Enhancements in peer review of manuscripts by the Journal.该期刊对手稿同行评审的改进。
Am J Ophthalmol. 2014 Jul;158(1):1-2. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2014.04.020.
3
Survey of conflict-of-interest disclosure policies of ophthalmology journals.眼科期刊利益冲突披露政策调查。
Ophthalmology. 2009 Jun;116(6):1093-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.12.053. Epub 2009 Apr 19.
4
The delicate topic of mentorship.指导关系这个微妙的话题。
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2020 Jan;258(1):1. doi: 10.1007/s00417-019-04518-5. Epub 2019 Nov 27.
5
On what information do ophthalmologists base their clinical practice?
J Refract Surg. 2004 Sep-Oct;20(5):414-6. doi: 10.3928/1081-597X-20040901-01.
6
Peer review: Award bonus points to motivate reviewers.同行评审：给予加分以激励评审人员。
Nature. 2017 Feb 22;542(7642):414. doi: 10.1038/542414d.
7
Bias Among Peer Reviewers.同行评审者中的偏见。
JAMA. 2017 Aug 22;318(8):755. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.9186.
8
Bias Among Peer Reviewers.同行评审者中的偏见。
JAMA. 2017 Aug 22;318(8):755-756. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.9201.
9
Peer review: acknowledging its value and recognising the reviewers.同行评审：认可其价值并感谢评审人员。
Br J Gen Pract. 2016 Dec;66(653):629-630. doi: 10.3399/bjgp16X688285.
10
Your American Journal of Ophthalmology: The Next Chapter.《您的〈美国眼科杂志〉：新篇章》
Am J Ophthalmol. 2016 Mar;163:x-xi. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.01.003.
引用本文的文献
1
Behind the Scenes at Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science.《眼科与视觉科学研究》幕后故事
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2025 Feb 3;66(2):19. doi: 10.1167/iovs.66.2.19.
本文引用的文献
1
More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 - a new record.2023年有超过1万篇研究论文被撤回，创下了新纪录。
Nature. 2023 Dec;624(7992):479-481. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-03974-8.
2
Surge in number of 'extremely productive' authors concerns scientists.“高产”作者数量激增引发科学家担忧。
Nature. 2024 Jan;625(7993):14-15. doi: 10.1038/d41586-023-03865-y.
3
A Journal Carol.
Ophthalmology. 2023 Dec;130(12):1237-1239. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2023.09.026.
4
ChatGPT and the Future of Journal Reviews: A Feasibility Study.ChatGPT 与期刊评审的未来：一项可行性研究。
Yale J Biol Med. 2023 Sep 29;96(3):415-420. doi: 10.59249/SKDH9286. eCollection 2023 Sep.
5
Knowledge and motivations of training in peer review: An international cross-sectional survey.同行评议培训的知识和动机：一项国际横断面调查。
PLoS One. 2023 Jul 12;18(7):e0287660. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287660. eCollection 2023.
6
Publishers unite to tackle doctored images in research papers.
Nature. 2021 Sep 28. doi: 10.1038/d41586-021-02610-7.
7
Predatory journals: no definition, no defence.掠夺性期刊：无定义，无辩护。
Nature. 2019 Dec;576(7786):210-212. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-03759-y.
8
Ancient texts to PubMed: a brief history of the peer-review process.从古代文献到《医学期刊数据库》：同行评审过程简史
J Perinatol. 2017 Jan;37(1):13-15. doi: 10.1038/jp.2016.209. Epub 2016 Nov 17.
9
Reviewing peer review.审视同行评审。
Science. 2008 Jul 4;321(5885):15. doi: 10.1126/science.1162115.
Zotero 插件