论提高同行评审的可持续性
On improving the sustainability of peer review.
作者信息
Routledge Daniel, Pariente Nonia
机构信息
Public Library of Science, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
出版信息
PLoS Biol. 2025 Mar 25;23(3):e3003127. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3003127. eCollection 2025 Mar.
Abstract
The term "reviewer fatigue" has become only too familiar in scientific publishing. How can we ease the burden on reviewers to make the peer review system more sustainable, while streamlining the publication process for authors?
摘要
“审稿人疲劳”一词在科学出版领域已变得太过常见。我们如何减轻审稿人的负担，以使同行评审系统更具可持续性，同时简化作者的出版流程？
相似文献
1
On improving the sustainability of peer review.论提高同行评审的可持续性
PLoS Biol. 2025 Mar 25;23(3):e3003127. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3003127. eCollection 2025 Mar.
2
Peer review comments: Friend or foe?同行评审意见：朋友还是敌人？
J Am Assoc Nurse Pract. 2025 Jan 1;37(1):1-3. doi: 10.1097/JXX.0000000000001078.
3
Reviewing manuscripts for scientific journals: recommendations for early career scientists.为科学期刊审阅稿件：给早期职业科学家的建议。
BMC Res Notes. 2025 Jan 16;18(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s13104-024-07060-8.
4
So…….You Want to be a Peer Reviewer?那么……你想成为一名同行评审者吗？
Int J Toxicol. 2024 Jul-Aug;43(4):421-424. doi: 10.1177/10915818241254582. Epub 2024 May 20.
5
Beyond peer review: rethinking scientific publishing with artificial intelligence.超越同行评审：用人工智能重新思考科学出版
Intensive Care Med. 2024 Oct;50(10):1715-1716. doi: 10.1007/s00134-024-07559-5. Epub 2024 Jul 25.
6
Beyond peer review: rethinking scientific publishing with AI. Author's reply.超越同行评审：用人工智能重新思考科学出版。作者回复。
Intensive Care Med. 2024 Oct;50(10):1717-1718. doi: 10.1007/s00134-024-07603-4. Epub 2024 Aug 15.
7
Triple-blind peer review in scientific publishing: a systematic review.科学出版中的三盲同行评审：一项系统综述。
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2024 Apr;6(4):101320. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101320. Epub 2024 Mar 16.
8
Peer review: issues in physical medicine and rehabilitation.同行评议：物理医学与康复领域的问题
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2003 Oct;82(10):790-802. doi: 10.1097/01.PHM.0000087607.28091.B7.
9
Thoughts of a manuscript reviewer.
Pharos Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Med Soc. 1996 Summer;59(3):14-8.
10
Key Guidelines for Responding to Reviewers.回复审稿人的关键指南。
F1000Res. 2024 Sep 20;13:921. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.154614.1. eCollection 2024.
本文引用的文献
1
Three AI-powered steps to faster, smarter peer review.迈向更快、更智能同行评审的三个人工智能驱动步骤。
Nature. 2025 Mar 4. doi: 10.1038/d41586-025-00526-0.
2
The present and future of peer review: Ideas, interventions, and evidence.同行评审的现状与未来：理念、干预措施及证据
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Feb 4;122(5):e2401232121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2401232121. Epub 2025 Jan 27.
3
Time to rethink academic publishing: the peer reviewer crisis.重新思考学术出版的时机：同行评审危机。
mBio. 2023 Dec 19;14(6):e0109123. doi: 10.1128/mbio.01091-23. Epub 2023 Nov 17.
4
Should peer reviewers be paid to review academic papers?是否应该付钱给同行评审员来评审学术论文？
Lancet. 2022 Apr 23;399(10335):1601. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02804-X.
5
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.
6
Life Science's Average Publishable Unit (APU) Has Increased over the Past Two Decades.在过去二十年中，生命科学领域的平均可发表单元（APU）有所增加。
PLoS One. 2016 Jun 16;11(6):e0156983. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0156983. eCollection 2016.
7
Publish or perish but do not publish and perish.要么发表成果，要么面临淘汰，但不要既不发表成果又面临淘汰。
Anesth Essays Res. 2016 May-Aug;10(2):163. doi: 10.4103/0259-1162.181225.
Zotero 插件