☆ 4.6 Article

Relationship between journal impact factor and the thoroughness and helpfulness of peer reviews

PLOS BIOLOGY (2023)

相关参考文献

注意：仅列出部分参考文献，下载原文获取全部文献信息。

Article Multidisciplinary Sciences

Peer review analyze: A novel benchmark resource for computational analysis of peer reviews

Tirthankar Ghosal et al.

Summary: Peer review is essential in scholarly communication and scientific publishing, but it is often criticized for its lack of transparency, bias, and arbitrary nature. This study presents a unique dataset of 1199 open peer review texts annotated at the sentence level across four layers. The dataset can be used for natural language processing research and addresses issues with peer review quality. The study introduces four novel tasks and provides baseline experiments and results for further investigation.

PLOS ONE (2022)

添加到收藏夹

Article Education, Scientific Disciplines

A method for the madness: An international survey of health professions education authors' journal choice

Eliot L. Rees et al.

Summary: This study conducted a survey to investigate the journal selection process among successful scholars in health professions education. The findings suggest that authors who prioritize fit and select a journal early are more likely to have their manuscripts accepted at their first-choice journal.

PERSPECTIVES ON MEDICAL EDUCATION (2022)

添加到收藏夹

Article Social Sciences, Mathematical Methods

Politics as Usual? Measuring Populism, Nationalism, and Authoritarianism in US Presidential Campaigns (1952-2020) with Neural Language Models

Bart Bonikowski et al.

Summary: This study investigates whether similar discursive frames used by radical-right movements had been used by mainstream political actors prior to their exploitation by the radical right. It utilizes a neural language model to measure these frames and finds that Donald Trump's campaign differentiated itself by explicitly evoking exclusionary nationalism, which had previously been implicit among presidential nominees.

SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH (2022)

添加到收藏夹

Article Information Science & Library Science

Analyzing sentiments in peer review reports: Evidence from two science funding agencies

Junwen Luo et al.

Summary: This study explores whether review sentiment can be used as a reliable proxy for understanding peer reviewer opinions. Through manual and algorithmic analysis of reviewer opinions, it is found that manual analysis provides a reliable prediction of funding decisions, while algorithms have moderate accuracy in predicting funding success.

QUANTITATIVE SCIENCE STUDIES (2022)

添加到收藏夹

Article Orthopedics

Presenting artificial intelligence, deep learning, and machine learning studies to clinicians and healthcare stakeholders: an introductory reference with a guideline and a Clinical AI Research (CAIR) checklist proposal

Jakub Olczak et al.

Summary: This article aims to provide clinicians with a context and understanding of AI research, discussing common tasks, considerations, pitfalls, as well as corresponding performance and outcome measures in AI research. Ethical considerations regarding data collection or sharing are also addressed.

ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA (2021)

添加到收藏夹

Editorial Material Medicine, General & Internal

Equity and the JAMA Network

Phil B. Fontanarosa et al.

JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (2021)

添加到收藏夹

Review Medicine, General & Internal

Characteristics of scholars who review for predatory and legitimate journals: linkage study of Cabells Scholarly Analytics and Publons data

Anna Severin et al.

Summary: The study analyzed the characteristics of scholars who reviewed for predatory or legitimate journals, finding that most scholars never reviewed for predatory journals and those who did were typically younger and had fewer publications and reviews. Regions with the highest shares of predatory reviews were sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East and North Africa, and South Asia. To combat predatory journals, it is important for universities, funders, and publishers to educate reviewers on quality and legitimacy in scholarly publishing.

BMJ OPEN (2021)

添加到收藏夹

Review Information Science & Library Science

Purposes of peer review: A qualitative study of stakeholder expectations and perceptions

Anna Severin et al.

Summary: This study explored the perceptions and expectations of different stakeholders on peer review, revealing diverging views on the functions of peer review and potential tensions that may arise from differing expectations based on stakeholders' roles and tasks within the scientific community.

LEARNED PUBLISHING (2021)

添加到收藏夹

Editorial Material Multidisciplinary Sciences

Unlock ways to share data on peer review

Flaminio Squazzoni et al.

NATURE (2020)

添加到收藏夹

Article Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications

Open peer review: promoting transparency in open science

Dietmar Wolfram et al.

SCIENTOMETRICS (2020)

添加到收藏夹

Review Biology

Large-scale language analysis of peer review reports

Ivan Buljan et al.

ELIFE (2020)

添加到收藏夹

News Item Multidisciplinary Sciences

COVID-19 RETRACTIONS RAISE CONCERNS ABOUT DATA OVERSIGHT

Heidi Ledford et al.

NATURE (2020)

添加到收藏夹

Review Computer Science, Information Systems

Automatically detecting open academic review praise and criticism

Mike Thelwall et al.

ONLINE INFORMATION REVIEW (2020)

添加到收藏夹

Review Health Care Sciences & Services

Tools used to assess the quality of peer review reports: a methodological systematic review

Cecilia Superchi et al.

BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY (2019)

添加到收藏夹

Article Microbiology

Blacklists and Whitelists To Tackle Predatory Publishing: a Cross-Sectional Comparison and Thematic Analysis

Michaela Strinzel et al.

MBIO (2019)

添加到收藏夹

Review Biology

Use of the Journal Impact Factor in academic review, promotion, and tenure evaluations

Erin C. Mckiernan et al.

ELIFE (2019)

添加到收藏夹

Editorial Material Medicine, General & Internal

The Lancet Group's commitments to gender equity and diversity

LANCET (2019)

添加到收藏夹

Article Multidisciplinary Sciences

Predatory journals: no definition, no defence

Agnes Grudniewicz et al.

NATURE (2019)

添加到收藏夹

Article Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications

glmmTMB Balances Speed and Flexibility Among Packages for Zero-inflated Generalized Linear Mixed Modeling

Mollie E. Brooks et al.

R JOURNAL (2017)

添加到收藏夹

Review Information Science & Library Science

Evaluation practices and effects of indicator use-a literature review

Sarah de Rijcke et al.

RESEARCH EVALUATION (2016)

添加到收藏夹

Article Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications

Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4

Douglas Bates et al.

JOURNAL OF STATISTICAL SOFTWARE (2015)

添加到收藏夹

Review Rheumatology

Diversity, value and limitations of the journal impact factor and alternative metrics

Lutz Bornmann et al.

RHEUMATOLOGY INTERNATIONAL (2012)

添加到收藏夹

Article Emergency Medicine

Longitudinal Trends in the Performance of Scientific Peer Reviewers

Michael Callaham et al.

ANNALS OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE (2011)

添加到收藏夹

Article Information Science & Library Science

Author perceptions of journal quality

John J. Regazzi et al.

LEARNED PUBLISHING (2008)

添加到收藏夹

Article Social Sciences, Mathematical Methods

A multilevel cross-classified modelling approach to peer review of grant proposals: the effects of assessor and researcher attributes on assessor ratings

UW Jayasinghe et al.

JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY SERIES A-STATISTICS IN SOCIETY (2003)

添加到收藏夹

© Peeref 2019-2024. All rights reserved.