Letter from President of UMP

MedPharmRes ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Tuan Tran ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Ho Chi Minh City ◽  
Major Step ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
The World ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
High Standards ◽  
The University

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tran Diep Tuan President of University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Department of Pediatrics - UMP Since our founding in 1947, the University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City (UMP) has consistently worked hard to be a well-established and highly ranked university in Vietnam and the region. We aspire to provide a healthy scientific environment for our students, faculty and researchers. UMP is committed to advance scientific research and innovation, providing our community with the necessary tools in order to achieve these aspirations. The MedPharmRes journal represents a major step that UMP has undertaken to provide a stage for academics to spread, promote, discuss their ideas and research. MedPharmRes is an open-access, peer-reviewed journal that is dedicated to publishing cutting-edge research that will help and promote change in the practice of medicine. We believe that science should be available to everyone and to prevent any limitations in the publishing process, UMP will sponsor publication associated fees between 2017 and 2018. This will allow academics from all backgrounds to submit for publication in our Journal. MedPharmRes applies high standards towards the peer- review process to ensure strict standards in methodological design and valid results. We emphasize the accuracy of research methodology and high ethical standards. Our live online, blinded review process will allow both reviewers and authors to discuss the manuscript which will allow fair and accurate review of the submission, ensuring that the journal’s high standards are met. In this inaugural issue, we would like to thank all the editorial and peer reviewers for their efforts. We hope that academics from around the world will choose to publish their research in this Journal, in order to promote high quality research, contributing to the development and advancement of of medical practice in Vietnam and around the world.

scholarly journals Using Wikipedia to teach scholarly peer review

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 178
Author(s):  
Paul Anthony Thomas ◽  
Matthew F Jones ◽  
Spencer G Mattingly
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
University Of Kansas ◽  
Related Literature ◽  
Biology Department ◽  
The World ◽  
The University

This paper outlines a creative Wikipedia-based project developed by the University of Kansas (KU) Libraries and the KU Biology Department. Inspired by the tenets of open pedagogy, the purpose of this project is to use Wikipedia as a way for students to learn about the scholarly peer review process while also producing material that can be shared and used by the world outside the classroom. The paper is divided into three sections, with the first summarizing pertinent related literature related to the paper’s topic. From here, the paper describes the proposed assignment, detailing a process wherein students write new articles for the encyclopedia which are then anonymously peer reviewed by other students in the class; when articles are deemed acceptable, they are published via Wikipedia. The parallels between this project and academic peer review are emphasized throughout. The paper closes by discussing the importance of this project, arguing that it fills a known scholarly need, actively produces knowledge, furthers the aims of the open access movement, and furthers scientific outreach initiatives.

scholarly journals Peer Review of Manuscripts: A Valuable yet Neglected Educational Tool for Early-Career Researchers

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert McNair ◽  
Hai Anh Le Phuong ◽  
Levente Cseri ◽  
Gyorgy Szekely
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Early Career ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Early Career Researchers ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
Survey Results ◽  
Number Of Publications

With the number of publications being all-time high, academic peer review is imperative to ensure high-quality research content. The wider involvement of postgraduate, early-career researchers (ECRs) has been proposed on several platforms to address the unsustainability of the peer review process caused by a lack of peer reviewers. A survey involving 1203 academics and ECRs in ten countries revealed their attitudes towards the involvement of ECRs in the peer review process. The trends and motives were identified, with emphasis on the peer review being an oft-neglected tool in the skill development of ECRs. In light of the survey results, the transferrable skills that ECRs acquire from performing peer reviews at a crucial stage in their career development are systematically explored. The findings call for further engagement of ECRs in the peer review process under supervisory mentoring.

scholarly journals Open Journal System: enabling student-led journals

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-193
Author(s):  
Cheryl Hurkett
Keyword(s):  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Public Knowledge ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
The Public ◽  
Author Paper ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
The University ◽  
Paper Submission

Open Journal Systems (OJS) is an open access, online manuscript management system developed by the Public Knowledge Project (https://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/) that underpins the University of Leicester’s academic journal system. Initially released in 2001 OJS provides a complete and robust software solution that integrates and tracks all aspects of manuscript processing from the initial author paper submission, via dissemination of articles to peer reviewers, through to final online publication and indexing (Willinsky, 2005). This review will consider how OJS can be used to enhance teaching and learning through creating an authentic peer review process for students and will also offer some personal insights into the practicalities of using OJS from an Editor’s perspective. 

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 The effects of an editor serving as one of the reviewers during the peer-review process

F1000Research ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 683 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Giordan ◽  
Attila Csikasz-Nagy ◽  
Andrew M. Collings ◽  
Federico Vaggi
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Scientific Journals ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
Decision Type ◽  
Number Of Citations ◽  
Decision Times

BackgroundPublishing in scientific journals is one of the most important ways in which scientists disseminate research to their peers and to the wider public. Pre-publication peer review underpins this process, but peer review is subject to various criticisms and is under pressure from growth in the number of scientific publications.MethodsHere we examine an element of the editorial process ateLife, in which the Reviewing Editor usually serves as one of the referees, to see what effect this has on decision times, decision type, and the number of citations. We analysed a dataset of 8,905 research submissions toeLifesince June 2012, of which 2,750 were sent for peer review, using R and Python to perform the statistical analysis.ResultsThe Reviewing Editor serving as one of the peer reviewers results in faster decision times on average, with the time to final decision ten days faster for accepted submissions (n=1,405) and 5 days faster for papers that were rejected after peer review (n=1,099). There was no effect on whether submissions were accepted or rejected, and a very small (but significant) effect on citation rates for published articles where the Reviewing Editor served as one of the peer reviewers.ConclusionsAn important aspect ofeLife’s peer-review process is shown to be effective, given that decision times are faster when the Reviewing Editor serves as a reviewer. Other journals hoping to improve decision times could consider adopting a similar approach.

scholarly journals Preface

2021 ◽  
Vol 1193 (1) ◽  
pp. 011001
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Materials Science ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Science And Engineering ◽  
Engineering Society ◽  
Materials Science And Engineering ◽  
Ninth Edition ◽  
Manufacturing Engineering ◽  
The University

As the Chairman of the 9th edition of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference (MESIC 2021) held in Gijόn (Spain) from 23 to 25 of June 2021, I have the honour to present the papers discussed at the conference by researchers and professionals from 18 different countries. This ninth edition was organized by the Manufacturing Engineering Area of the University of Oviedo on behalf of the Manufacturing Engineering Society (SIF). The conference was first held in Calatayud (Spain) in 2005, with the main objective of becoming a forum for the exchange of experiences between national and international researchers and professionals in the field of Manufacturing Engineering. The rest of the editions have been celebrated up to now with this same vocation. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (MSE) publishes here the 140 papers, organised according to the topics of the Conference, that were finally accepted for presentation at the MESIC 2021 after a rigorous peer review process. List of Committees Organizing Committee, Scientific Committee, Editors, Organizer, Promoter and Sponsors and this titles are available in this pdf.

scholarly journals Metascience on Peer Review: Testing the Effects of a Study’s Originality and Statistical Significance in a Field Experiment

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malte Elson ◽  
Markus Huff ◽  
Sonja Utz
Keyword(s):  
Field Experiment ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Selection Method ◽  
Psychological Theories ◽  
Peer Reviewers

Peer review has become the gold standard in scientific publishing as a selection method and a refinement scheme for research reports. However, despite its pervasiveness and conferred importance, relatively little empirical research has been conducted to document its effectiveness. Further, there is evidence that factors other than a submission’s merits can substantially influence peer reviewers’ evaluations. We report the results of a metascientific field experiment on the effect of the originality of a study and the statistical significance of its primary outcome on reviewers’ evaluations. The general aim of this experiment, which was carried out in the peer-review process for a conference, was to demonstrate the feasibility and value of metascientific experiments on the peer-review process and thereby encourage research that will lead to understanding its mechanisms and determinants, effectively contextualizing it in psychological theories of various biases, and developing practical procedures to increase its utility.

scholarly journals High adoption rates in a new preprint service from Springer Nature and Research Square

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Damian Pattinson
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Manuscript Reviewer ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
Gates Foundation

In recent years, funders have increased their support for early sharing of biomedical research through the use of preprints. For most, such as the COAlitionS group of funders (ASAPbio 2019) and the Gates foundation, this takes the form of active encouragement, while for others, it is mandated. But despite these motivations, few authors are routinely depositing their work as a preprint before submitting to a journal. Some journals have started offering authors the option of posting their work early at the point at which it is submitted for review. These include PLOS, who offer a link to BiorXiv, the Cell journals, who offer SSRN posting through ‘Sneak Peak’, and Nature Communications, who offer posting to any preprint and a link from the journal page called ‘Under Consideration’. Uptake has ranged from 3% for the Nature pilot, to 18% for PLOS (The Official Plos Blog 2018). In order to encourage more researchers to post their work early, we have been offering authors who submit to BMC Series titles the opportunity to post their work as a preprint on Research Square, a new platform that lets authors share and improve their research. To encourage participation, authors are offered a greater amount of control and transparency over the peer review process if they opt in. First, they are given a detailed peer review timeline which updates in real time every time an event occurs on their manuscript (reviewer invited, reviewer accepts etc). Second, they are encouraged to share their preprint with colleagues, who are able to post comments on the paper. These comments are sent to the editor when they are making their decision. Third, authors can suggest potential peer reviewers, recommendations which are also passed onto the editor to vet and invite. Together, these incentives have had a positive impact on authors choosing to post a preprint. Among the journals that offer this service, the average opt-in rate is 40%. This translates to over 3,000 manuscripts (as of July 2019) that have been posted to Research Square since the launch of the service in October 2018. In this talk I will demonstrate the functionality of Research Square, and provide demographic and discipline data on which areas are most and least likely to post.

scholarly journals Editorial

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Society Journal ◽  
Interesting Case ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Lateral Condyle ◽  
The World ◽  
Paediatric Orthopaedics ◽  
Paediatric Orthopaedic

Warm greetings to all from the International Journal of Paediatric Orthopaedics Editorial Team. We are pleased to present the 3rd POSI issue of IJPO. Thanks to the overwhelming response to our invitation for submissions, our team of reviewers and editors have been kept busy in the past few months. We would like to express our gratitude to the entire POSI family from around the world and to all the authors for their submissions. With your continued support, the journal will reach great heights in the years to come. This issue has an informative and exhaustively researched symposium on lateral condyle fractures of the humerus. The articles in the symposium will provide a comprehensive and updated overview about this condition that poses significant challenges to the treating surgeon. The authors are acknowledged experts in paediatric trauma from India and around the world. It has been specially designed to supplement the material available in orthopaedic textbooks for the benefit of trainees, in addition to providing treatment pearls for the practising orthopaedic surgeon. We have original articles and interesting case reports from India, United Kingdom, Portugal, Senegal on a wide variety of paediatric orthopaedic conditions including DDH, infection and its sequelae and clubfoot managed in diverse healthcare systems. Due to the unprecedented increase in submissions, we call upon the POSI fraternity to help the society journal by joining our team of reviewers. This will help us to complete the peer review process in a timely manner. Being a part of our team will help also young surgeons to better understand the review process and develop their writing skills. We look forward to hearing from you with suggestions for further improvement. Sincerely Jayanth S Sampath FRCSEd (Tr & Orth) Editor, International Journal of Paediatric Orthopaedics [email protected]

scholarly journals Introduction: Taiwan, Public Diplomacy, and the World Health Assembly

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-9
Author(s):  
Gary D. Rawnsley
Keyword(s):  
Guest Editor ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
World Health ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
World Health Assembly ◽  
The World ◽  
Global Communications

This is an introduction by the guest editor to the topical section on ‘Taiwan, Public Diplomacy, and the World Health Assembly’ of this issue of the International Journal of Taiwan Studies. The selected four papers, after a double-blind peer review process, were initially presented at a workshop entitled ‘Public Diplomacy and Taiwan's Campaign to Join the wha’, organised by the Global Communications Research Centre, Department of International Politics, Aberystwyth University, 28 March 2018.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document