Verifying authors' claims to have conducted a Systematic Review? A checklist for journal editors and peer reviewers.
作者信息
Pullin Andrew S, Macura Biljana
机构信息
Collaboration for Environmental Evidence, Bangor, UK.
School of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
出版信息
Environ Evid. 2025 May 14;14(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13750-025-00361-w.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Verifying authors' claims to have conducted a Systematic Review? A checklist for journal editors and peer reviewers.核实作者关于进行系统评价的声明？给期刊编辑和同行评审人员的一份清单。
Environ Evid. 2025 May 14;14(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s13750-025-00361-w.
2
Conflict of interest in the peer review process: A survey of peer review reports.同行评议过程中的利益冲突：同行评议报告调查。
PLoS One. 2023 Jun 8;18(6):e0286908. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0286908. eCollection 2023.
3
Journal editors' perspectives on the communication practices in biomedical journals: a qualitative study.期刊编辑对生物医学期刊交流实践的看法：一项定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 13;10(8):e035600. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035600.
4
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.
5
Librarians and information specialists as methodological peer-reviewers: a case-study of the International Journal of Health Governance.图书馆员和信息专家作为方法学同行评审员：以《国际卫生治理杂志》为例的研究
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2024 Jan 19;9(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s41073-023-00142-4.
6
Role of supplementary material in biomedical journal articles: surveys of authors, reviewers and readers.补充材料在生物医学期刊文章中的作用：对作者、审稿人和读者的调查
BMJ Open. 2018 Sep 24;8(9):e021753. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021753.
7
Reviewer training for improving grant and journal peer review.为改进基金和期刊同行评审而进行的审稿人培训。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Nov 28;11(11):MR000056. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000056.pub2.
8
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.
9
The most important tasks for peer reviewers evaluating a randomized controlled trial are not congruent with the tasks most often requested by journal editors.评估随机对照试验的同行评审员的最重要任务，与期刊编辑最常要求的任务并不一致。
BMC Med. 2015 Jul 3;13:158. doi: 10.1186/s12916-015-0395-3.
10
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.
本文引用的文献
1
Standards of conduct and reporting in evidence syntheses that could inform environmental policy and management decisions.可为环境政策和管理决策提供参考的证据综合中的行为和报告标准。
Environ Evid. 2022 Apr 19;11(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s13750-022-00269-9.
2
The CEEDER database of evidence reviews: An open-access evidence service for researchers and decision-makers.CEEDER证据综述数据库：面向研究人员和决策者的开放获取证据服务。
Environ Sci Policy. 2020 Dec;114:256-262. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2020.08.021. Epub 2020 Sep 6.
3
"A little learning is a dangerous thing": A call for better understanding of the term 'systematic review'.“一知半解是危险的”：呼吁更好地理解“系统评价”一词。
Environ Int. 2017 Feb;99:356-360. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2016.12.020. Epub 2016 Dec 29.
Zotero 插件