The peer-review process of the Journal of Neurosurgery

1999 ◽  
Vol 90 (2) ◽  
pp. 364-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina S. Firlik ◽  
Andrew D. Firlik
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Fine Print

✓ Peer review is the process by which scientific articles are evaluated and selected for publication. To clarify this procedure for readers and writers, the authors present a detailed description of peer review at the Journal of Neurosurgery (JNS) in the context of other journals. They discuss the unique characteristics of JNS's peer-review process and how it contributes to the quality of the JNS.

Pitfalls and successes of peer review in neurosurgery

1997 ◽  
Vol 87 (6) ◽  
pp. 972-978 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward R. Laws ◽  
T. Glenn Pait ◽  
John A. Jane
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Scientific Progress ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Scientific Technical ◽  
Editorial Decisions ◽  
Fine Print

✓ As the first editor of the Journal of Neurosurgery, Louise Eisenhardt, acting with the advice of the editorial board, was responsible for making decisions on the acceptance or rejection of submitted manuscripts. Her log, covering the first 14 years of editorial decisions, is a record of neurosurgical progress and of the forces—scientific, technical and other—that shaped the field of neurosurgery. Any peer-review process is subject to pitfalls that become evident in retrospect, but an effective peer-review process is one of the basic ingredients of scientific progress. The decisions to accept or reject manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Neurosurgery during Eisenhardt's tenure are highlighted in this historical vignette.

scholarly journals The use of a guided peer review assessment for investigative interviewers of child witnesses

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonja P. Brubacher ◽  
Martine B. Powell ◽  
Linda C. Steele ◽  
David Boud
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Child Witnesses ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Self Development ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Learning Data

Purpose Investigative interviewers assess their colleagues' interviews (‘peer review’) as a necessary part of their practice, and for their self-development. Yet, there is little guidance around what the process involves and how they might do it. Research suggests that effective peer review is supported by using guidance material. The goal of the present work was to describe the use of such a guide by a group of professionals who regularly conduct investigative interviews with children, to share what was learned with other professionals seeking to create a formalized peer review process. Design/methodology/approach Sixty US child witness interviewers completed a guided peer review assessment of an anonymous interview, as an assignment at the conclusion of an 18-hour training program that focused on developing their interviewing skills. They consented to the use of their learning data in research, and the research was approved by the university's research ethics board. Peer reviews were coded for the extent to which they used the guide to support their evaluations, and the overall quality of the review to assess the utility of the guide in supporting them to conduct effective assessments. Findings In general, the guide and instructions for providing feedback were moderately effective in supporting the peer assessments, but results suggested specific training in how to deliver peer review would be useful. Practical implications Through this process, the authors identified components that would be helpful to further increase the efficacy of peer review. Originality/value The aim of this work was to spark a greater conversation among practitioners and academics about professionalizing the peer review process and aiding interviewers to develop peer review tools that would support their continued growth. The authors conclude with five key tips for professionals that stem from the experiences creating and evaluating the guide in combination with existing literature and three areas for future investigation.

scholarly journals Peer Review Process in Scholarly Communication and Scientific Publishing

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 15-19
Author(s):  
Bishnu Bahadur Khatri
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Scientific Publishing ◽  
The Public ◽  
Quality Control Mechanism

Peer review in scholarly communication and scientific publishing, in one form or another, has always been regarded as crucial to the reputation and reliability of scientific research. In the growing interest of scholarly research and publication, this paper tries to discuss about peer review process and its different types to communicate the early career researchers and academics.This paper has used the published and unpublished documents for information collection. It reveals that peer review places the reviewer, with the author, at the heart of scientific publishing. It is the system used to assess the quality of scientific research before it is published. Therefore, it concludes that peer review is used to advancing and testing scientific knowledgeas a quality control mechanism forscientists, publishers and the public.

scholarly journals Evaluating, Improving, and Appreciating Peer Review at IJTMB

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Ann Blair Kennedy, LMT, BCTMB, DrPH
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Scientific Publishing ◽  
Publication Process ◽  
Improve Efficiency ◽  
Peer Reviewers

  Peer review is a mainstay of scientific publishing and, while peer reviewers and scientists report satisfaction with the process, peer review has not been without criticism. Within this editorial, the peer review process at the IJTMB is defined and explained. Further, seven steps are identified by the editors as a way to improve efficiency of the peer review and publication process. Those seven steps are: 1) Ask authors to submit possible reviewers; 2) Ask reviewers to update profiles; 3) Ask reviewers to “refer a friend”; 4) Thank reviewers regularly; 5) Ask published authors to review for the Journal; 6) Reduce the length of time to accept peer review invitation; and 7) Reduce requested time to complete peer review. We believe these small requests and changes can have a big effect on the quality of reviews and speed in which manuscripts are published. This manuscript will present instructions for completing peer review profiles. Finally, we more formally recognize and thank peer reviewers from 2018–2020.

scholarly journals Online Journals: the Path Towards Visibility and Quality

1970 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 175-184
Author(s):  
Julie Walker
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Editorial Office ◽  
Online Journal ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Journal Editors ◽  
Virtuous Cycle ◽  
Journal Visibility

Increasing the visibility of a journal is the key to increasing quality. The International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications works with journal editors in the global South to publish their journals online and to increase the efficiency of the peer review process. Editors are trained in using the Open Journals System software and in online journal management and strategy so they have the tools and knowledge needed to initiate a ‘virtuous cycle' in which visibility leads to an increase in the number and quality of submissions and in turn, increased citations and impact. In order to maximise this increase in quality, it must be supported by strong editorial office processes and management. This article describes some of the issues and strategies faced by the editors INASP works with, placing a particular emphasis on Nepal Journals Online. Key words: INASP; Open Journals System; Journals Online Projects; Nepal Journals Online; journal visibility; peer review DOI: 10.3126/dsaj.v3i0.2786 Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Vol.3 2009 175-184

scholarly journals How to choose and become a reviewer for a scientific medical journal

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 151
Author(s):  
Paola Gnerre ◽  
Giorgio Vescovo ◽  
Paola Granata ◽  
Cecilia Politi ◽  
Andrea Fontanella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Journal ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Scholarly Work ◽  
Publication Delay ◽  
Area Of Interest ◽  
Good Review

Peer review is the process of subjecting an author’s scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. The peer review of scientific manuscripts is a cornerstone of modern science and medicine. Some journals have difficulty in finding appropriate reviewers who are able to complete reviews on time avoiding publication delay. We discuss some of the main issues involved during the peer review process. The reviewer has a direct and important impact on the quality of a scientific medical Journal. Editors select reviewers on the basis of their expertise. Reviewers are more likely to accept to review a manuscript when it is relevant to their area of interest. They should respond to ethical principles, excluding any conflict of interest condition. The reviewer has to be professional, constructive, tactful, empathetic and respectful. Structured approaches, quality indicators and step-by-step process check list formats could be useful in obtaining a good review.

scholarly journals Peering into peer review: Good quality reviews of research articles require neither writing too much nor taking too long

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula CABEZAS Del FIERRO ◽  
Omar SABAJ MERUANE ◽  
Germán VARAS ESPINOZA ◽  
Valeria GONZÁLEZ HERRERA
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Average Length ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Review Time ◽  
Feedback Quality ◽  
Review Reports ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract The value of scientific knowledge is highly dependent on the quality of the process used to produce it, namely, the quality of the peer-review process. This process is a pivotal part of science as it works both to legitimize and improve the work of the scientific community. In this context, the present study investigated the relationship between review time, length, and feedback quality of review reports in the peer-review process of research articles. For this purpose, the review time of 313 referee reports from three Chilean international journals were recorded. Feedback quality was determined estimating the rate of direct requests by the total number of comments in each report. Number of words was used to describe the average length in the sample. Results showed that average time and length have little variation across review reports, irrespective of their quality. Low quality reports tended to take longer to reach the editor, so neither time nor length were related to feedback quality. This suggests that referees mostly describe, criticize, or praise the content of the article instead of making useful and direct comments to help authors improve their manuscripts.

scholarly journals Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author’s perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 113 (1) ◽  
pp. 633-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janine Huisman ◽  
Jeroen Smits
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process

scholarly journals A peer review process to assess the quality of graduate medical education

1988 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 288-93
Author(s):  
H Levine ◽  
E Vanek ◽  
G Lefferts ◽  
W Michener ◽  
G Weiker
Keyword(s):  
Medical Education ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Graduate Medical Education ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Graduate Medical

Most courses are not born digital

2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 217-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evangeline Marlos Varonis
Keyword(s):  
Online Learning ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Course Design ◽  
Online Courses ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Online Course ◽  
Shared Services ◽  
Online Course Design ◽  
Content Type

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss benefits of and barriers to online learning and describe utilization of the Quality Matters (QM) peer review process as a method to assure the quality of online courses. It outlines the QM higher education rubric, explains how the collaborative QM peer review process facilitates online course design and certification, reports on the development of a statewide consortium in Ohio, and explores future directions in online courses. Design/methodology/approach – This paper offers a brief historical review of the incorporation of technology into teaching and learning. It describes attitudes toward online learning and the creation of the non-profit QM program as a vehicle for improving online course design. It summarizes the eight standards of the QM rubric, describes the QM peer review process, and discusses the implementation of the Ohio QM Consortium (OQMC) as a shared services model. Findings – Given existing barriers to online learning, the QM program can improve learning outcomes by offering best practices in online course design, validating the quality of online courses, encouraging faculty buy-in through a focus on design rather than content, and facilitating degree completion through recognition of quality courses. Practical implications – Institutions that seek to validate online course quality in a cost-effective manner can explore a shared services model such as that developed by the OQMC. Originality/value – This paper introduces to an international audience a program and process, widely implemented in the USA, which encourages inter-institutional cooperation and promotes a supportive culture among online educators.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document