Peer Review of Teaching: Sharing Best Practices

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Golparian, Shaya; Chan, Judy; Cassidy, Alice

2015-01-01

In this paper, we share examples of best peer review of teaching practices, drawing on our involvement in the design and implementation of the Peer Review of Teaching program at the Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology. We review the history of the Peer Review of Teaching Initiative at the University of British Columbia and explain key…

QA REVIEWS: HOW THEY DIFFER FROM PEER REVIEWS

EPA Science Inventory

Research papers and reports written by scientists and engineers in the United States Environmental Protection Agency are reviewed by the agency's quality assurance staff. EPA papers and reports are subjected to peer reviews that check for the validity of conclusions and the gener...

Peer Review and the Dilemmas of Quality Control in Programme Accreditation in South African Higher Education: Challenges and Possibilities

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cross, Michael; Naidoo, Devika

2011-01-01

The paper scrutinises the dynamics and the nature of peer review in the programme evaluation and accreditation process within the context of diverse individual and institutional legacies in South Africa. It analyses the peer review process and highlights the contestation at political, policy and epistemological levels. The paper argues that,…

Characteristics of retractions related to faked peer reviews: an overview.

PubMed

Qi, Xingshun; Deng, Han; Guo, Xiaozhong

2017-08-01

A faked peer review is a novel cause for retraction. We reviewed the characteristics of papers retracted due to a faked peer review. All papers retracted due to faked peer reviews were identified by searching the Retraction Watch website and by conducting a manual search. All identified papers were confirmed in published journals. The information of retracted papers was collected, which primarily included publisher, journal, journal impact factor, country, as well as publication and retraction year. Overall, 250 retracted papers were identified. They were published in 48 journals by six publishers. The top 5 journals included the Journal of Vibration and Control (24.8%), Molecular Biology Reports (11.6%), Immunopharmacology and Immunotoxicology (8.0%), Tumour Biology (6.8%) and European Journal of Medical Research (6.4%). The publishers included SAGE (31%), Springer (26%), BioMed Central (18%), Elsevier (13%), Informa (11%) and LWW (1%). A minority (4%) of retracted papers were published in Science Citation Index (SCI) journals with an impact factor of >5. A majority (74.8%) of retracted papers were written by Chinese researchers. In terms of the publication year, the retracted papers were published since 2010, and the number of retracted papers peaked in 2014 (40.8%). In terms of the retraction year, the retractions started in 2012, and the number of retractions peaked in 2015 (59.6%). The number of papers retracted due to faked peer reviews differs largely among journals and countries. With the improvement of the peer review mechanism and increased education about publishing ethics, such academic misconduct may gradually disappear in future. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Quantum Computation and Simulation Using Neutral Fermionic Atoms

DTIC Science & Technology

2014-06-06

labeled n = 1) Efimov trimer crosses the three-atom scattering threshold. Working in the context of nuclear physics in the early 1970’s, Vitaly Efimov...permit the observation of anti-ferromagnetic ordering in the Hubbard model. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals ( N /A for none) Enter List of...Physics, (06 2011): 0. doi: TOTAL: 7 Number of Papers published in peer-reviewed journals: (b) Papers published in non-peer-reviewed journals ( N /A for

Deformation Driven Alloying and Transformation

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-03-03

OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. University of Wisconsin - Madison RESERACH & SPONSORED PROGRAMS 21 N. PARK...STREET SUITE 6401 MADISON, WI 53715 -1218 4-Dec-2014 ABSTRACT Number of Papers published in peer-reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer...diffusion. Further study of the underlying mechanisms is warranted. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals (N/A for none) Enter List of papers

Peer Portal: Quality Enhancement in Thesis Writing Using Self-Managed Peer Review on a Mass Scale

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Aghaee, Naghmeh; Hansson, Henrik

2013-01-01

This paper describes a specially developed online peer-review system, the Peer Portal, and the first results of its use for quality enhancement of bachelor's and master's thesis manuscripts. The peer-review system is completely student driven and therefore saves time for supervisors and creates a direct interaction between students without…

Students' Collaborative Peer Reviewing in an Online Writing Environment

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bradley, Linda; Thouësny, Sylvie

2017-01-01

Peer review is applied as a powerful tool to enhance student collaboration online writing. The purpose of this paper is to analyse learners' mechanisms of peer reviewing in the nature of student interventions and interactions in written online peer reviewing and how categorization of student comments can be used as a means for analysing student…

Thank you to our 2016 peer reviewers

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hauck, Steven A.; Baratoux, David; Stanley, Sabine

2017-02-01

Peer review is one of most fundamental aspects of the modern practice of science. As scientists we hold our own work up to scrutiny by experts among our peers in order to encourage the best practices in scientific conduct and communication. Thorough consideration and review by professional colleagues of scientific papers are critical aspects of ensuring that the manuscripts published by JGR-Planets are accurate, valuable, and clearly communicated. Peer review is an essential element of the process of refining understanding and sharing science, and the effort and expertise shared by each reviewer are crucial to the advancement of planetary science. In 2016, JGR Planets benefited from more than 451 reviews provided by 337 of our peers for papers submitted to the journal. Thank you all for your dedication to advancing planetary science.

On the Nature and Role of Peer Review in Mathematics.

PubMed

Andersen, Line Edslev

2017-01-01

For the past three decades, peer review practices have received much attention in the literature. But although this literature covers many research fields, only one previous systematic study has been devoted to the practice of peer review in mathematics, namely a study by Geist, Löwe, and Van Kerkhove from 2010. This lack of attention may be due to a view that peer review in mathematics is more reliable, and therefore less interesting as an object of study, than peer review in other fields. In fact, Geist, Löwe, and Van Kerkhove argue that peer review in mathematics is relatively reliable. At the same time, peer review in mathematics differs from peer review in most, if not all, other fields in that papers submitted to mathematical journals are usually only reviewed by a single referee. Furthermore, recent empirical studies indicate that the referees do not check the papers line by line. I argue that, in spite of this, mathematical practice in general and refereeing practices in particular are such that the common practice of mathematical journals of using just one referee is justified from the point of view of proof validity assessment. The argument is based on interviews I conducted with seven mathematicians.

Writing and Publishing a Research Paper in a Peer-Reviewed Journal

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Porter, Stephen R.

2007-01-01

Writing and publishing a research paper in a peer-reviewed journal is a complicated process. This paper tries to take some of the mystery out of that process by describing how a good research paper should be structured, and how the journal submission process works.

Comparing Peer Review and Self-Review as Ways to Improve College Students' Writing

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Covill, Amy E.

2010-01-01

The effect of three approaches to revision instruction on 61 college students' revision behavior and writing quality was investigated for this article. Students wrote three 5-page papers and received one of three instructional approaches: Formal Peer Review (n = 19), Formal Self-Review (n = 20), or No Formal Review (n = 22). Formal Peer Review…

Expanding Group Peer Review: A Proposal for Medical Education Scholarship.

PubMed

Dumenco, Luba; Engle, Deborah L; Goodell, Kristen; Nagler, Alisa; Ovitsh, Robin K; Whicker, Shari A

2017-02-01

After participating in a group peer-review exercise at a workshop presented by Academic Medicine and MedEdPORTAL editors at the 2015 Association of American Medical Colleges Medical Education Meeting, the authors realized that the way their work group reviewed a manuscript was very different from the way by which they each would have reviewed the paper as an individual. Further, the group peer-review process yielded more robust feedback for the manuscript's authors than did the traditional individual peer-review process. This realization motivated the authors to reconvene and collaborate to write this Commentary to share their experience and propose the expanded use of group peer review in medical education scholarship.The authors consider the benefits of a peer-review process for reviewers, including learning how to improve their own manuscripts. They suggest that the benefits of a team review model may be similar to those of teamwork and team-based learning in medicine and medical education. They call for research to investigate this, to provide evidence to support group review, and to determine whether specific paper types would benefit most from team review (e.g., particularly complex manuscripts, those receiving widely disparate initial individual reviews). In addition, the authors propose ways in which a team-based approach to peer review could be expanded by journals and institutions. They believe that exploring the use of group peer review potentially could create a new methodology for skill development in research and scholarly writing and could enhance the quality of medical education scholarship.

On Disciplinary Judgement

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Muller, Johan

2011-01-01

This paper enquires into the grounds for convergence of judgements in a situation of blind peer review, where reviewers are asked to assess the standing of scholars in a disciplinary field. The paper first considers traditional accounts of peer review and threats to its reliability and validity. Next it examines the grounds for disciplinary…

Giving Feedback: Preparing Students for Peer Review and Self-Evaluation

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Philippakos, Zoi A.

2017-01-01

Revision is an important aspect of the writing process but is often challenging for students. Peer review can be helpful, but training is needed for it to work effectively. This article suggests an approach to preparing students for peer review by teaching specific evaluation criteria and leading collaborative practice in reviewing papers written…

The Problem of Humiliation in Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Comer, Debra R.; Schwartz, Michael

2014-01-01

This paper examines the problem of vituperative feedback from peer reviewers. We argue that such feedback is morally unacceptable, insofar as it humiliates authors and damages their dignity. We draw from social-psychological research to explore those aspects of the peer-review process in general and the anonymity of blind reviewing in particular…

Evaluating alternative systems of peer review: a large-scale agent-based modelling approach to scientific publication.

PubMed

Kovanis, Michail; Trinquart, Ludovic; Ravaud, Philippe; Porcher, Raphaël

2017-01-01

The debate on whether the peer-review system is in crisis has been heated recently. A variety of alternative systems have been proposed to improve the system and make it sustainable. However, we lack sufficient evidence and data related to these issues. Here we used a previously developed agent-based model of the scientific publication and peer-review system calibrated with empirical data to compare the efficiency of five alternative peer-review systems with the conventional system. We modelled two systems of immediate publication, with and without online reviews (crowdsourcing), a system with only one round of reviews and revisions allowed (re-review opt-out) and two review-sharing systems in which rejected manuscripts are resubmitted along with their past reviews to any other journal (portable) or to only those of the same publisher but of lower impact factor (cascade). The review-sharing systems outperformed or matched the performance of the conventional one in all peer-review efficiency, reviewer effort and scientific dissemination metrics we used. The systems especially showed a large decrease in total time of the peer-review process and total time devoted by reviewers to complete all reports in a year. The two systems with immediate publication released more scientific information than the conventional one but provided almost no other benefit. Re-review opt-out decreased the time reviewers devoted to peer review but had lower performance on screening papers that should not be published and relative increase in intrinsic quality of papers due to peer review than the conventional system. Sensitivity analyses showed consistent findings to those from our main simulations. We recommend prioritizing a system of review-sharing to create a sustainable scientific publication and peer-review system.

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

PubMed

Giordan, Marco; Csikasz-Nagy, Attila; Collings, Andrew M; Vaggi, Federico

2016-01-01

Background Publishing 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. Methods Here we examine an element of the editorial process at eLife , 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 to eLife since June 2012, of which 2,747 were sent for peer review. This subset of 2747 papers was then analysed in detail.   Results The 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 five days faster for papers that were rejected after peer review (n=1,099). Moreover, editors acting as reviewers had no effect on whether submissions were accepted or rejected, and a very small (but significant) effect on citation rates. Conclusions An important aspect of eLife '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.

Peer review.

PubMed

Twaij, H; Oussedik, S; Hoffmeyer, P

2014-04-01

The maintenance of quality and integrity in clinical and basic science research depends upon peer review. This process has stood the test of time and has evolved to meet increasing work loads, and ways of detecting fraud in the scientific community. However, in the 21st century, the emphasis on evidence-based medicine and good science has placed pressure on the ways in which the peer review system is used by most journals. This paper reviews the peer review system and the problems it faces in the digital age, and proposes possible solutions.

Emerging trends in peer review—a survey

PubMed Central

Walker, Richard; Rocha da Silva, Pascal

2015-01-01

“Classical peer review” has been subject to intense criticism for slowing down the publication process, bias against specific categories of paper and author, unreliability, inability to detect errors and fraud, unethical practices, and the lack of recognition for unpaid reviewers. This paper surveys innovative forms of peer review that attempt to address these issues. Based on an initial literature review, we construct a sample of 82 channels of scientific communication covering all forms of review identified by the survey, and analyze the review mechanisms used by each channel. We identify two major trends: the rapidly expanding role of preprint servers (e.g., ArXiv) that dispense with traditional peer review altogether, and the growth of “non-selective review,” focusing on papers' scientific quality rather than their perceived importance and novelty. Other potentially important developments include forms of “open review,” which remove reviewer anonymity, and interactive review, as well as new mechanisms for post-publication review and out-of-channel reader commentary, especially critical commentary targeting high profile papers. One of the strongest findings of the survey is the persistence of major differences between the peer review processes used by different disciplines. None of these differences is likely to disappear in the foreseeable future. The most likely scenario for the coming years is thus continued diversification, in which different review mechanisms serve different author, reader, and publisher needs. Relatively little is known about the impact of these innovations on the problems they address. These are important questions for future quantitative research. PMID:26074753

ROAST: Peer Review as a Learning and Assessment Tool in Graduate Education

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Somerville, R. C.

2003-12-01

Constructivist learning theory and inquiry-based educational practice stress the parallels between learning and research. Although peer review has long been a central feature of the working lives of research scientists, it has rarely found its way into the classroom. Motivated by this thought, an imaginary journal, Reviews of Atmospheric Science Topics (ROAST), has been integrated into a graduate-level course in atmospheric thermodynamics. The instructor acts as editor of ROAST. Students in the class are divided into teams and assigned topics on which to write survey papers and give in-class presentations, using the text, the Internet, the library, and other resources. The assigned topics range over the subject matter of the course. The submitted survey papers are sent by the ROAST editor to other members of the class, acting as anonymous reviewers. Just as in the case of real research journals, the editor asks the authors to respond to criticisms of reviewers and then sends the revised papers back to the reviewers. Each student is thus a researcher and co-author of one paper as well as an anonymous reviewer of several others. ROAST has proven to be not only a useful means of fostering learning, but also a natural and effective assessment tool. The peer review mechanism allows the student authors to address the defects in their papers, and hence in their learning, as pointed out not by an authority figure or an examination but by their own peers. As an important side benefit, the students gain experience with the peer review process itself and come to appreciate its strengths and weaknesses in evaluating scientific papers.

Fairness in peer review

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Adams, Bob

2014-06-01

In reply to Penny Gowland's article “Turning a double-blind eye” (Forum, May p17), which argued that a paper's authors, as well as its reviewers, should be anonymous during the peer-review process.

Peer-supported review of teaching: making the grade in midwifery and nursing education.

PubMed

Murphy Tighe, Sylvia; Bradshaw, Carmel

2013-11-01

This paper outlines the value of peer-supported review of teaching for nurse and midwifery educators in an academic environment. Reflection and continuing professional development are important tenets of an educators' practice and can be addressed via peer observation. Definitions and models of peer observation are presented. The strengths and challenges associated with peer-supported review of teaching are discussed. The reasons why peer observation is underutilised are explored with some suggestions on how to overcome these challenges. Recent developments in relation to peer observation and peer-supported review are outlined. The need for tangible evidence of development and enhancement of existing teaching expertise is very pronounced in the current economic climate, it is concluded that peer-supported review of teaching can provide such evidence. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Peer Review: Structured, Informal, Confidential, Helpful!

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cassidy, Alice; Lee, Jack

2011-01-01

This paper describes an introductory workshop, Preparing to be a Peer Reviewer, presented at the University of British Columbia (UBC) to give hands-on practice to faculty members and others in order to provide formative peer review upon request. This workshop, which was designed at the request of a faculty member, is complemented by an Advanced…

Peer Review: The CHAMPUS Program.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Stricker, George

This paper examines the use of the peer review system in evaluating out-patient clinical services for a third-party payer seeking justification for payment of services. Peer review is defined as a process by which one professional, in an official capacity, makes a judgment about a co-professional in a matter involving professional functioning. The…

Context-Aware Reviewer Assignment for Trust Enhanced Peer Review

PubMed Central

Li, Lei; Wang, Yan; Liu, Guanfeng; Wang, Meng; Wu, Xindong

2015-01-01

Reviewer assignment is critical to peer review systems, such as peer-reviewed research conferences or peer-reviewed funding applications, and its effectiveness is a deep concern of all academics. However, there are some problems in existing peer review systems during reviewer assignment. For example, some of the reviewers are much more stringent than others, leading to an unfair final decision, i.e., some submissions (i.e., papers or applications) with better quality are rejected. In this paper, we propose a context-aware reviewer assignment for trust enhanced peer review. More specifically, in our approach, we first consider the research area specific expertise of reviewers, and the institution relevance and co-authorship between reviewers and authors, so that reviewers with the right expertise are assigned to the corresponding submissions without potential conflict of interest. In addition, we propose a novel cross-assignment paradigm, and reviewers are cross-assigned in order to avoid assigning a group of stringent reviewers or a group of lenient reviewers to the same submission. More importantly, on top of them, we propose an academic CONtext-aware expertise relevanCe oriEnted Reviewer cross-assignmenT approach (CONCERT), which aims to effectively estimate the “true” ratings of submissions based on the ratings from all reviewers, even though no prior knowledge exists about the distribution of stringent reviewers and lenient reviewers. The experiments illustrate that compared with existing approaches, our proposed CONCERT approach can less likely assign more than one stringent reviewers or lenient reviewers to a submission simultaneously and significantly reduce the influence of ratings from stringent reviewers and lenient reviewers, leading to trust enhanced peer review and selection, no matter what kind of distributions of stringent reviewers and lenient reviewers are. PMID:26090849

Peer Acceptance and Friendship in Early Childhood: The Conceptual Distinctions between Them

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Beazidou, Eleftheria; Botsoglou, Kafenia

2016-01-01

This paper reviews previous literature about peer acceptance and friendship, two of the most critical aspects of peer relations that have received most of research attention during the past years. In this review, we will focus on the processes explaining the way children use the ability to socialise with peers; explore the hypothesis that certain…

Peer Response to L2 Student Writing: Patterns and Expectations

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Abdalla Salih, Abdel Rahman

2013-01-01

This paper reports the corrective feedback patterns in L2 writing and the student writers' preferences for peer feedback. The study examines the actual focus of peer review and the types of corrective feedback provided in L2 composing process. Sixteen L2 matriculation students at a Malaysian university took part in five peer review sessions,…

Iterative Design and Classroom Evaluation of Automated Formative Feedback for Improving Peer Feedback Localization

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Nguyen, Huy; Xiong, Wenting; Litman, Diane

2017-01-01

A peer-review system that automatically evaluates and provides formative feedback on free-text feedback comments of students was iteratively designed and evaluated in college and high-school classrooms. Classroom assignments required students to write paper drafts and submit them to a peer-review system. When student peers later submitted feedback…

Peer Review Methods for ESL Writing Improvement

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Soares, Colleen J.

2004-01-01

This teacher research shows how peer reviews change draft papers. In the majority of cases, final papers improved in content. The study analyzes data collected from 40 intermediate/advanced nonnative speakers of English enrolled in freshman composition for international students at a large private university. It also examines student reflections…

Peer review versus editorial review and their role in innovative science.

PubMed

Steinhauser, Georg; Adlassnig, Wolfram; Risch, Jesaka Ahau; Anderlini, Serena; Arguriou, Petros; Armendariz, Aaron Zolen; Bains, William; Baker, Clark; Barnes, Martin; Barnett, Jonathan; Baumgartner, Michael; Baumgartner, Thomas; Bendall, Charles A; Bender, Yvonne S; Bichler, Max; Biermann, Teresa; Bini, Ronaldo; Blanco, Eduardo; Bleau, John; Brink, Anthony; Brown, Darin; Burghuber, Christopher; Calne, Roy; Carter, Brian; Castaño, Cesar; Celec, Peter; Celis, Maria Eugenia; Clarke, Nicky; Cockrell, David; Collins, David; Coogan, Brian; Craig, Jennifer; Crilly, Cal; Crowe, David; Csoka, Antonei B; Darwich, Chaza; Del Kebos, Topiciprin; Derinaldi, Michele; Dlamini, Bongani; Drewa, Tomasz; Dwyer, Michael; Eder, Fabienne; de Palma, Raúl Ehrichs; Esmay, Dean; Rött, Catherine Evans; Exley, Christopher; Falkov, Robin; Farber, Celia Ingrid; Fearn, William; Felsmann, Sophie; Flensmark, Jarl; Fletcher, Andrew K; Foster, Michaela; Fountoulakis, Kostas N; Fouratt, Jim; Blanca, Jesus Garcia; Sotelo, Manuel Garrido; Gittler, Florian; Gittler, Georg; Gomez, Juan; Gomez, Juan F; Polar, Maria Grazia Gonzales; Gonzalez, Jossina; Gösselsberger, Christoph; Habermacher, Lynn; Hajek, Michael; Hakala, Faith; Haliburton, Mary-Sue; Hankins, John Robert; Hart, Jason; Hasslberger, Sepp; Hennessey, Donalyn; Herrmann, Andrea; Hersee, Mike; Howard, Connie; Humphries, Suzanne; Isharc, Laeeth; Ivanovski, Petar; Jenuth, Stephen; Jerndal, Jens; Johnson, Christine; Keleta, Yonas; Kenny, Anna; Kidd, Billie; Kohle, Fritz; Kolahi, Jafar; Koller-Peroutka, Marianne; Kostova, Lyubov; Kumar, Arunachalam; Kurosawa, Alejandro; Lance, Tony; Lechermann, Michael; Lendl, Bernhard; Leuchters, Michael; Lewis, Evan; Lieb, Edward; Lloyd, Gloria; Losek, Angelika; Lu, Yao; Maestracci, Saadia; Mangan, Dennis; Mares, Alberto W; Barnett, Juan Mazar; McClain, Valerie; McNair, John Sydney; Michael, Terry; Miller, Lloyd; Monzani, Partizia; Moran, Belen; Morris, Mike; Mößmer, Georg; Mountain, Johny; Phuthe, Onnie Mary Moyo; Muñoz, Marcos; Nakken, Sheri; Wambui, Anne Nduta; Neunteufl, Bettina; Nikolić, Dimitrije; Oberoi, Devesh V; Obmode, Gregory; Ogar, Laura; Ohara, Jo; Rybine, Naion Olej; Owen, Bryan; Owen, Kim Wilson; Parikh, Rakesh; Pearce, Nicholas J G; Pemmer, Bernhard; Piper, Chris; Prince, Ian; Reid, Terence; Rindermann, Heiner; Risch, Stefan; Robbins, Josh; Roberts, Seth; Romero, Ajeandro; Rothe, Michael Thaddäus; Ruiz, Sergio; Sacher, Juliane; Sackl, Wolfgang; Salletmaier, Markus; Sanand, Jairaj; Sauerzopf, Clemens; Schwarzgruber, Thomas; Scott, David; Seegers, Laura; Seppi, David; Shields, Kyle; Siller-Matula, Jolanta; Singh, Beldeu; Sithole, Sibusio; Six, Florian; Skoyles, John R; Slofstra, Jildou; Sole, Daphne Anne; Sommer, Werner F; Sonko, Mels; Starr-Casanova, Chrislie J; Steakley, Marjorie Elizabeth; Steinhauser, Wolfgang; Steinhoff, Konstantin; Sterba, Johannes H; Steppan, Martin; Stindl, Reinhard; Stokely, Joe; Stokely, Karri; St-Pierre, Gilles; Stratford, James; Streli, Christina; Stryg, Carl; Sullivan, Mike; Summhammer, Johann; Tadesse, Amhayes; Tavares, David; Thompson, Laura; Tomlinson, Alison; Tozer, Jack; Trevisanato, Siro I; Trimmel, Michaela; Turner, Nicole; Vahur, Paul; van der Byl, Jennie; van der Maas, Tine; Varela, Leo; Vega, Carlos A; Vermaak, Shiloh; Villasenor, Alex; Vogel, Matt; von Wintzigerode, Georg; Wagner, Christoph; Weinberger, Manuel; Weinberger, Peter; Wilson, Nick; Wolfe, Jennifer Finocchio; Woodley, Michael A; Young, Ian; Zuraw, Glenn; Zwiren, Nicole

2012-10-01

Peer review is a widely accepted instrument for raising the quality of science. Peer review limits the enormous unstructured influx of information and the sheer amount of dubious data, which in its absence would plunge science into chaos. In particular, peer review offers the benefit of eliminating papers that suffer from poor craftsmanship or methodological shortcomings, especially in the experimental sciences. However, we believe that peer review is not always appropriate for the evaluation of controversial hypothetical science. We argue that the process of peer review can be prone to bias towards ideas that affirm the prior convictions of reviewers and against innovation and radical new ideas. Innovative hypotheses are thus highly vulnerable to being "filtered out" or made to accord with conventional wisdom by the peer review process. Consequently, having introduced peer review, the Elsevier journal Medical Hypotheses may be unable to continue its tradition as a radical journal allowing discussion of improbable or unconventional ideas. Hence we conclude by asking the publisher to consider re-introducing the system of editorial review to Medical Hypotheses.

Expanding Capacity and Promoting Inclusion in Introductory Computer Science: A Focus on Near-Peer Mentor Preparation and Code Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Pon-Barry, Heather; Packard, Becky Wai-Ling; St. John, Audrey

2017-01-01

A dilemma within computer science departments is developing sustainable ways to expand capacity within introductory computer science courses while remaining committed to inclusive practices. Training near-peer mentors for peer code review is one solution. This paper describes the preparation of near-peer mentors for their role, with a focus on…

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2018-02-01

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2018-04-01

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2018-05-01

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2018-03-01

All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Adding Value to the Learning Process by Online Peer Review Activities: Towards the Elaboration of a Methodology to Promote Critical Thinking in Future Engineers

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Dominguez, Caroline; Nascimento, Maria M.; Payan-Carreira, Rita; Cruz, Gonçalo; Silva, Helena; Lopes, José; Morais, Maria da Felicidade A.; Morais, Eva

2015-01-01

Considering the results of research on the benefits and difficulties of peer review, this paper describes how teaching faculty, interested in endorsing the acquisition of communication and critical thinking (CT) skills among engineering students, has been implementing a learning methodology throughout online peer review activities. While…

Social Skills of Children with Specific Language Impairment: Peer Relationships.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Craig, Holly K.

1993-01-01

This paper reviews literature on peer relationships of children with specific language impairment and provides a clinical case to illustrate the social-interactional difficulties encountered. The paper analyzes the quantity and quality of peer interactions, child's knowledge of interactive access behaviors, disputes, responsiveness, assertiveness,…

Transformation of Adolescent Peer Relations in the Social Media Context: Part 2-Application to Peer Group Processes and Future Directions for Research.

PubMed

Nesi, Jacqueline; Choukas-Bradley, Sophia; Prinstein, Mitchell J

2018-04-07

As social media use becomes increasingly widespread among adolescents, research in this area has accumulated rapidly. Researchers have shown a growing interest in the impact of social media on adolescents' peer experiences, including the ways that the social media context shapes a variety of peer relations constructs. This paper represents Part 2 of a two-part theoretical review. In this review, we offer a new model for understanding the transformative role of social media in adolescents' peer experiences, with the goal of stimulating future empirical work that is grounded in theory. The transformation framework suggests that the features of the social media context transform adolescents' peer experiences by changing their frequency or immediacy, amplifying demands, altering their qualitative nature, and/or offering new opportunities for compensatory or novel behaviors. In the current paper, we consider the ways that social media may transform peer relations constructs that often occur at the group level. Our review focuses on three key constructs: peer victimization, peer status, and peer influence. We selectively review and highlight existing evidence for the transformation of these domains through social media. In addition, we discuss methodological considerations and key conceptual principles for future work. The current framework offers a new theoretical perspective through which peer relations researchers may consider adolescent social media use.

Computer-Mediated Peer Review of Student Papers.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Sullivan, Dave; Brown, Carol E.; Nielson, Norma L.

1998-01-01

Barriers to peer review of student work can be overcome using computer-mediated systems ranging from customized software to e-mail, multiuser object-oriented systems (MOOs), and Web-based projects. (SK)

Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial.

PubMed

van Rooyen, Susan; Delamothe, Tony; Evans, Stephen J W

2010-11-16

To see whether telling peer reviewers that their signed reviews of original research papers might be posted on the BMJ's website would affect the quality of their reviews. Randomised controlled trial. A large international general medical journal based in the United Kingdom. 541 authors, 471 peer reviewers, and 12 editors. Consecutive eligible papers were randomised either to have the reviewer's signed report made available on the BMJ's website alongside the published paper (intervention group) or to have the report made available only to the author-the BMJ's normal procedure (control group). The intervention was the act of revealing to reviewers-after they had agreed to review but before they undertook their review-that their signed report might appear on the website. The main outcome measure was the quality of the reviews, as independently rated on a scale of 1 to 5 using a validated instrument by two editors and the corresponding author. Authors and editors were blind to the intervention group. Authors rated review quality before the fate of their paper had been decided. Additional outcomes were the time taken to complete the review and the reviewer's recommendation regarding publication. 558 manuscripts were randomised, and 471 manuscripts remained after exclusions. Of the 1039 reviewers approached to take part in the study, 568 (55%) declined. Two editors' evaluations of the quality of the peer review were obtained for all 471 manuscripts, with the corresponding author's evaluation obtained for 453. There was no significant difference in review quality between the intervention and control groups (mean difference for editors 0.04, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.17; for authors 0.06, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.20). Any possible difference in favour of the control group was well below the level regarded as editorially significant. Reviewers in the intervention group took significantly longer to review (mean difference 25 minutes, 95% CI 3.0 to 47.0 minutes). Telling peer reviewers that their signed reviews might be available in the public domain on the BMJ's website had no important effect on review quality. Although the possibility of posting reviews online was associated with a high refusal rate among potential peer reviewers and an increase in the amount of time taken to write a review, we believe that the ethical arguments in favour of open peer review more than outweigh these disadvantages.

Development and Testing of Recombinant Single Domain Antibodies

DTIC Science & Technology

2010-12-31

critical insights to the basis of the sdAb-target interaction and sdAb properties. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals (N/A for none) Structures...Library. Anal. Chem. 78:8245-55 List of papers submitted or published that acknowledge ARO support during this reporting period. List the papers ...including journal references, in the following categories: (b) Papers published in non-peer-reviewed journals or in conference proceedings (N/A for none

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2018-03-01

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2018-05-01

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2017-11-01

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2017-10-01

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2017-09-01

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2018-02-01

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2017-12-01

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Peer review statement

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2018-03-01

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the proceedings Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.

Statistical Reviewers Improve Reporting in Biomedical Articles: A Randomized Trial

PubMed Central

Cobo, Erik; Selva-O'Callagham, Albert; Ribera, Josep-Maria; Cardellach, Francesc; Dominguez, Ruth; Vilardell, Miquel

2007-01-01

Background Although peer review is widely considered to be the most credible way of selecting manuscripts and improving the quality of accepted papers in scientific journals, there is little evidence to support its use. Our aim was to estimate the effects on manuscript quality of either adding a statistical peer reviewer or suggesting the use of checklists such as CONSORT or STARD to clinical reviewers or both. Methodology and Principal Findings Interventions were defined as 1) the addition of a statistical reviewer to the clinical peer review process, and 2) suggesting reporting guidelines to reviewers; with “no statistical expert” and “no checklist” as controls. The two interventions were crossed in a 2×2 balanced factorial design including original research articles consecutively selected, between May 2004 and March 2005, by the Medicina Clinica (Barc) editorial committee. We randomized manuscripts to minimize differences in terms of baseline quality and type of study (intervention, longitudinal, cross-sectional, others). Sample-size calculations indicated that 100 papers provide an 80% power to test a 55% standardized difference. We specified the main outcome as the increment in quality of papers as measured on the Goodman Scale. Two blinded evaluators rated the quality of manuscripts at initial submission and final post peer review version. Of the 327 manuscripts submitted to the journal, 131 were accepted for further review, and 129 were randomized. Of those, 14 that were lost to follow-up showed no differences in initial quality to the followed-up papers. Hence, 115 were included in the main analysis, with 16 rejected for publication after peer review. 21 (18.3%) of the 115 included papers were interventions, 46 (40.0%) were longitudinal designs, 28 (24.3%) cross-sectional and 20 (17.4%) others. The 16 (13.9%) rejected papers had a significantly lower initial score on the overall Goodman scale than accepted papers (difference 15.0, 95% CI: 4.6–24.4). The effect of suggesting a guideline to the reviewers had no effect on change in overall quality as measured by the Goodman scale (0.9, 95% CI: −0.3–+2.1). The estimated effect of adding a statistical reviewer was 5.5 (95% CI: 4.3–6.7), showing a significant improvement in quality. Conclusions and Significance This prospective randomized study shows the positive effect of adding a statistical reviewer to the field-expert peers in improving manuscript quality. We did not find a statistically significant positive effect by suggesting reviewers use reporting guidelines. PMID:17389922

Peer Support and Psychosocial Pain Management Strategies for Children with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

PubMed

Nabors, Laura; Ige, Teminijesu John; Fevrier, Bradley

2015-01-01

This paper reviews information on Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) in children. Children with this chronic illness often experience pain related to their condition. They also can experience social isolation. This paper reviews psychosocial information on peer support and cognitive behavioral pain management strategies. The information presented in this paper provides new insights for health professionals assisting children and families in coping with psychological facets of this disease. Research focusing on ways by which peers and friends can support the child's use of psychological pain management strategies will provide new information for the literature.

Argument-Driven Inquiry: Using the Laboratory to Improve Undergraduates' Science Writing Skills through Meaningful Science Writing, Peer-Review, and Revision

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Walker, Joi Phelps; Sampson, Victor

2013-01-01

This paper presents preliminary evidence supporting the use of peer review in undergraduate science as a means to improve student writing and to alleviate barriers, such as lost class time, by incorporation of the peer-review process into the laboratory component of the course. The study was conducted in a single section of an undergraduate…

Most Courses Are Not Born Digital: An Overview of the Quality Matters Peer Review Process for Online Course Design

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Varonis, Evageline Marlos

2014-01-01

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…

Is Peer Victimization Associated with Academic Achievement? A Meta-Analytic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Nakamoto, Jonathan; Schwartz, David

2010-01-01

This paper presents a meta-analytic review of 33 studies, with a total of 29,552 participants, that examined the concurrent association between peer victimization and academic achievement. The results revealed a small but significant negative correlation between peer victimization and academic achievement under both the random-effects model (r =…

Mitigating Stress Waves by using Nanofoams and Nanohoneycombs

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-02-13

local softening in a regular foam is suppressed, and bulk energy absorption is achieved. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals ( N /A for none...including journal references, in the following categories: (b) Papers published in non-peer-reviewed journals ( N /A for none) Received Paper TOTAL...Inventions (DD882) Scientific Progress Please see the attachment Technology Transfer N Patent Filed in US? (5d-1) Patent Filed in Foreign Countries

Learning from peer support schemes--can prison listeners support offenders who self-injure in custody?

PubMed

Griffiths, Louise; Bailey, Di

2015-01-01

The purpose of this paper is to critically evaluate the current evidence for peer support in prisons, in particular its contribution to working with prisoners who self-injure and the extent to which the success of peer support schemes such as the prison listeners, hinges upon staff's willingness to engage with the initiative. The review was constructed by using primary and secondary terms to search the literature. The studies focused on peer support in custody with reference to mental health and self-injury. Searches identified papers on the prison listener scheme and staff perspectives on prison peer support, as these formed a central focus of the review. Studies were excluded from the review if the participants' behaviours was explicitly linked to suicidal intent, as the review focused on self-injury as a coping strategy. A total of 24 studies were selected according to specific inclusion criteria (six were grey literature, 18 academic literature). Of the 24 studies ten studies focused on peer support and self-injury. Of the 24 studies the listener scheme was the focus of 16 studies, of these 16 studies self-injury and the listener scheme was a focus of eight studies. Evidence from the review suggests that prison peer support could be considered on a continuum depending on the different degrees of peer involvement.

The evaluation of research papers in the XXI century. The Open Peer Discussion system of the World Economics Association.

PubMed

Ietto-Gillies, Grazia

2012-01-01

The paper starts with a brief discussion of the traditional peer review (TPR) system of research evaluation, its role, and the criticisms levelled at it. An analysis of specific problems in economics leads to a full discussion of the Open Peer Review (OPR) system developed by the World Economics Association (WEA) and the principles behind it. The system is open in the following two respects: (a) disclosure of names of authors and reviewers; and (b) inclusivity of potential reviewers in terms of paradigmatic approaches, country, and community. The paper then discusses the applicability of the same system to other disciplines. In doing so, it stressed the aims of various evaluation systems and the possible pitfalls of rating systems. It also speculates on the future of journal publication.

Alternatives to Peer Review: Novel Approaches for Research Evaluation

PubMed Central

Birukou, Aliaksandr; Wakeling, Joseph Rushton; Bartolini, Claudio; Casati, Fabio; Marchese, Maurizio; Mirylenka, Katsiaryna; Osman, Nardine; Ragone, Azzurra; Sierra, Carles; Wassef, Aalam

2011-01-01

In this paper we review several novel approaches for research evaluation. We start with a brief overview of the peer review, its controversies, and metrics for assessing efficiency and overall quality of the peer review. We then discuss five approaches, including reputation-based ones, that come out of the research carried out by the LiquidPub project and research groups collaborated with LiquidPub. Those approaches are alternative or complementary to traditional peer review. We discuss pros and cons of the proposed approaches and conclude with a vision for the future of the research evaluation, arguing that no single system can suit all stakeholders in various communities. PMID:22174702

Using Nominal Group Technique to Develop a Consensus Derived Model for Peer Review of Teaching across a Multi-School Faculty

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Burrows, Tracy; Findlay, Naomi; Killen, Chloe; Dempsey, Shane E.; Hunter, Sharyn; Chiarelli, Pauline; Snodgrass, Suzanne

2011-01-01

This paper describes the development of a peer review of teaching model for the Faculty of Health at the University of Newcastle, Australia. The process involved using the nominal group technique to engage Faculty academic staff to consider seven key decision points that informed the development of the peer review of teaching model. Use of the…

Empowering peer reviewers with a checklist to improve transparency.

PubMed

Parker, Timothy H; Griffith, Simon C; Bronstein, Judith L; Fidler, Fiona; Foster, Susan; Fraser, Hannah; Forstmeier, Wolfgang; Gurevitch, Jessica; Koricheva, Julia; Seppelt, Ralf; Tingley, Morgan W; Nakagawa, Shinichi

2018-06-01

Peer review is widely considered fundamental to maintaining the rigour of science, but it often fails to ensure transparency and reduce bias in published papers, and this systematically weakens the quality of published inferences. In part, this is because many reviewers are unaware of important questions to ask with respect to the soundness of the design and analyses, and the presentation of the methods and results; also some reviewers may expect others to be responsible for these tasks. We therefore present a reviewers' checklist of ten questions that address these critical components. Checklists are commonly used by practitioners of other complex tasks, and we see great potential for the wider adoption of checklists for peer review, especially to reduce bias and facilitate transparency in published papers. We expect that such checklists will be well received by many reviewers.

An Analysis of Peer-Submitted and Peer-Reviewed Answer Rationales, in an Asynchronous Peer Instruction Based Learning Environment

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bhatnagar, Sameer; Lasry, Nathaniel; Desmarais, Michel; Dugdale, Michael; Whittaker, Chris; Charles, Elizabeth S.

2015-01-01

This paper reports on an analyis of data from a novel "Peer Instruction" application, named DALITE. The Peer Instruction paradigm is well suited to take advantage of peer-input in web-based learning environments. DALITE implements an asynchronous instantiation of peer instruction: after submitting their answer to a multiple-choice…

Variability of Reviewers' Comments in the Peer Review Process for Orthopaedic Research.

PubMed

Iantorno, Stephanie E; Andras, Lindsay M; Skaggs, David L

2016-07-01

Retrospective analysis of peer review comments. To assess the likelihood that comments provided by peer reviewers of one orthopaedic journal would be similar to comments of reviewers from the same journal and a second journal. The consistency of the peer review process in orthopedic research has not been objectively examined. Nine separate clinical papers related to spinal deformity were submitted for publication in major peer-reviewed journals and initially rejected. The exact same manuscripts were then submitted to different journals. All papers were returned with comments from two to three reviewers from each journal. Reviews were divided into distinct conceptual criticisms that were regarded as separate comments. Comments were compared between reviewers of the same journal and to comments from reviewers of the second journal. When comparing comments from reviewers of the same journal, an average of 11% of comments were repeated (range 0% [0/12] to 23% [3/13]). On average, 20% of comments from the first journal were repeated by a reviewer at the second journal (range 10% [1/10] to 33% [6/18]). If a comment was made by two or more reviewers from the first journal, it had a higher likelihood (43% [6/14]) of being repeated by a reviewer from the second journal. When an identical manuscript is submitted to a second journal after being rejected, 80% of peer review comments from the first journal are not repeated by reviewers from the second journal. One may question if addressing every peer review comment in a rejected manuscript prior to resubmission is an efficient use of resources. Comments that appear twice or more in the first journal review are more likely to reappear and may warrant special attention from the researcher. Level IV. Copyright © 2016 Scoliosis Research Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Funding the Pan American Materials Conference

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-06-01

sufficient support and (b) senior invited speakers that lend prestige to the event. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals ( N /A for none...including journal references, in the following categories: (b) Papers published in non-peer-reviewed journals ( N /A for none) (c) Presentations...interesting lecture on the extraction of keratin from poultry feathers . The development of alloys for biomedical applications magnesium was described

Sport prostheses and prosthetic adaptations for the upper and lower limb amputees: an overview of peer reviewed literature.

PubMed

Bragaru, Mihai; Dekker, Rienk; Geertzen, Jan H B

2012-09-01

Sport prostheses are used by both upper- and lower-limb amputees while participating in sports and other physical activities. Although the number of these devices has increased over the past decade, no overview of the peer reviewed literature describing them has been published previously. Such an overview will allow specialists to choose appropriate prostheses based on available scientific evidence rather than on personal experience or preference. To provide an overview of the sport prostheses as they are described by the papers published in peer reviewed literature. Literature review. Four electronic databases were searched using free text and Medical Subject Headings (MESH) terms. Papers were included if they concerned a prosthesis or a prosthetic adaptation used in sports. Papers were excluded if they did not originate from peer reviewed sources, if they concerned prostheses for body parts other than the upper or lower limbs, if they concerned amputations distal to the wrist or ankle, or if they were written in a language other than English. Twenty-four papers were included in this study. The vast majority contained descriptive data and consisted of expert opinions and technical notes. Data concerning the energy efficiency, technical characteristics and special mechanical properties of prostheses or prosthetic adaptations for sports, other than running, are scarce.

What do we know about grant peer review in the health sciences?

PubMed

Guthrie, Susan; Ghiga, Ioana; Wooding, Steven

2017-01-01

 Peer review decisions award >95% of academic medical research funding, so it is crucial to understand how well they work and if they could be improved.  This paper summarises evidence from 105 relevant papers identified through a literature search on the effectiveness and burden of peer review for grant funding.  There is a remarkable paucity of evidence about the overall efficiency of peer review for funding allocation, given its centrality to the modern system of science. From the available evidence, we can identify some conclusions around the effectiveness and burden of peer review. The strongest evidence around effectiveness indicates a bias against innovative research. There is also fairly clear evidence that peer review is, at best, a weak predictor of future research performance, and that ratings vary considerably between reviewers. There is some evidence of age bias and cronyism. Good evidence shows that the burden of peer review is high and that around 75% of it falls on applicants. By contrast, many of the efforts to reduce burden are focused on funders and reviewers/panel members.  We suggest funders should acknowledge, assess and analyse the uncertainty around peer review, even using reviewers' uncertainty as an input to funding decisions. Funders could consider a lottery element in some parts of their funding allocation process, to reduce both burden and bias, and allow better evaluation of decision processes. Alternatively, the distribution of scores from different reviewers could be better utilised as a possible way to identify novel, innovative research. Above all, there is a need for open, transparent experimentation and evaluation of different ways to fund research. This also requires more openness across the wider scientific community to support such investigations, acknowledging the lack of evidence about the primacy of the current system and the impossibility of achieving perfection.

Credibility, peer review, and Nature, 1945–1990

PubMed Central

Baldwin, Melinda

2015-01-01

This paper examines the refereeing procedures at the scientific weekly Nature during and after World War II. In 1939 former editorial assistants L. J. F. Brimble and A. J. V. Gale assumed a joint editorship of Nature. The Brimble–Gale era is now most famous for the editors' unsystematic approach to external refereeing. Although Brimble and Gale did sometimes consult external referees, papers submitted or recommended by scientists whom the pair trusted were often not sent out for further review. Their successor, John Maddox, would also print papers he admired without external refereeing. It was not until 1973 that editor David Davies made external peer review a requirement for publication in Nature. Nature's example shows that as late as the 1960s a journal could be considered scientifically respectable even if its editors were known to eschew systematic external peer review. PMID:26495581

Studying the Study Section: How Group Decision Making in Person and via Videoconferencing Affects the Grant Peer Review Process. WCER Working Paper No. 2015-6

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Pier, Elizabeth L.; Raclaw, Joshua; Nathan, Mitchell J.; Kaatz, Anna; Carnes, Molly; Ford, Cecilia E.

2015-01-01

Grant peer review is a foundational component of scientific research. In the context of grant review meetings, the review process is a collaborative, socially mediated, locally constructed decision-making task. The current study examines how collaborative discussion affects reviewers' scores of grant proposals, how different review panels score…

What do we know about grant peer review in the health sciences?

PubMed Central

Guthrie, Susan; Ghiga, Ioana; Wooding, Steven

2018-01-01

Background: Peer review decisions award an estimated >95% of academic medical research funding, so it is crucial to understand how well they work and if they could be improved. Methods: This paper summarises evidence from 105 papers identified through a literature search on the effectiveness and burden of peer review for grant funding. Results: There is a remarkable paucity of evidence about the efficiency of peer review for funding allocation, given its centrality to the modern system of science. From the available evidence, we can identify some conclusions around the effectiveness and burden of peer review. The strongest evidence around effectiveness indicates a bias against innovative research. There is also fairly clear evidence that peer review is, at best, a weak predictor of future research performance, and that ratings vary considerably between reviewers. There is some evidence of age bias and cronyism. Good evidence shows that the burden of peer review is high and that around 75% of it falls on applicants. By contrast, many of the efforts to reduce burden are focused on funders and reviewers/panel members. Conclusions: We suggest funders should acknowledge, assess and analyse the uncertainty around peer review, even using reviewers’ uncertainty as an input to funding decisions. Funders could consider a lottery element in some parts of their funding allocation process, to reduce both burden and bias, and allow better evaluation of decision processes. Alternatively, the distribution of scores from different reviewers could be better utilised as a possible way to identify novel, innovative research. Above all, there is a need for open, transparent experimentation and evaluation of different ways to fund research. This also requires more openness across the wider scientific community to support such investigations, acknowledging the lack of evidence about the primacy of the current system and the impossibility of achieving perfection. PMID:29707193

Expanding capacity and promoting inclusion in introductory computer science: a focus on near-peer mentor preparation and code review

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Pon-Barry, Heather; Packard, Becky Wai-Ling; St. John, Audrey

2017-01-01

A dilemma within computer science departments is developing sustainable ways to expand capacity within introductory computer science courses while remaining committed to inclusive practices. Training near-peer mentors for peer code review is one solution. This paper describes the preparation of near-peer mentors for their role, with a focus on regular, consistent feedback via peer code review and inclusive pedagogy. Introductory computer science students provided consistently high ratings of the peer mentors' knowledge, approachability, and flexibility, and credited peer mentor meetings for their strengthened self-efficacy and understanding. Peer mentors noted the value of videotaped simulations with reflection, discussions of inclusion, and the cohort's weekly practicum for improving practice. Adaptations of peer mentoring for different types of institutions are discussed. Computer science educators, with hopes of improving the recruitment and retention of underrepresented groups, can benefit from expanding their peer support infrastructure and improving the quality of peer mentor preparation.

Research Program Peer Review: Purposes, Principles, Practices, Protocols

DTIC Science & Technology

2004-06-01

Statement 1994-95. Canberra: AGPS. Cook- Deegan , R.M. Merit Review for Federally Funded Science and Technology: A White Paper for the Council of the...18p. Craig -B, "SPE Peer-Review Critique", JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY, 1994, Vol 46, Iss 7, pp 563-563 Cram-DL Stebbins-M Eom-HS Ratto-N

Peer Review in Scientific Publications: Benefits, Critiques, & A Survival Guide

PubMed Central

Kelly, Jacalyn; Sadeghieh, Tara

2014-01-01

Peer review has been defined as a process of subjecting an author’s scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. It functions to encourage authors to meet the accepted high standards of their discipline and to control the dissemination of research data to ensure that unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations or personal views are not published without prior expert review. Despite its wide-spread use by most journals, the peer review process has also been widely criticised due to the slowness of the process to publish new findings and due to perceived bias by the editors and/or reviewers. Within the scientific community, peer review has become an essential component of the academic writing process. It helps ensure that papers published in scientific journals answer meaningful research questions and draw accurate conclusions based on professionally executed experimentation. Submission of low quality manuscripts has become increasingly prevalent, and peer review acts as a filter to prevent this work from reaching the scientific community. The major advantage of a peer review process is that peer-reviewed articles provide a trusted form of scientific communication. Since scientific knowledge is cumulative and builds on itself, this trust is particularly important. Despite the positive impacts of peer review, critics argue that the peer review process stifles innovation in experimentation, and acts as a poor screen against plagiarism. Despite its downfalls, there has not yet been a foolproof system developed to take the place of peer review, however, researchers have been looking into electronic means of improving the peer review process. Unfortunately, the recent explosion in online only/electronic journals has led to mass publication of a large number of scientific articles with little or no peer review. This poses significant risk to advances in scientific knowledge and its future potential. The current article summarizes the peer review process, highlights the pros and cons associated with different types of peer review, and describes new methods for improving peer review. PMID:27683470

The Impact of Peers on College Preparation: A Review of the Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis, University of Southern California, 2006

2006-01-01

This paper examines how peer relationships influence students' academic success. Beginning with a brief definition of peer groups, it turns to a more extensive discussion of a typology of peer groups and the ways in which peer groups function to influence academic success in general and college-going behavior specifically. To help all students…

Peer Tutoring at Colleges and Universities

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kim, Mikyong Minsun

2015-01-01

This paper focuses on the important roles of peer tutoring and peer tutoring services that utilize student tutors in higher education. First, the roles and potential benefits of peer tutoring are identified and reviewed as they apply to various dimensions of student development. Second, the impacts, benefits, and extended beneficiaries of peer…

A Peer-Reviewed Research Assignment for Large Classes.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Henderson, LaRhee; Buising, Charisse

2000-01-01

Introduces a writing exercise students work on in collaborative groups. Aims to enhance students' scientific research paper writing skills and provide experience working in collaborative groups. Presents evaluation criteria for peer-group evaluation of a poster presentation, intra-group evaluation of peer performance, and peer-group evaluation of…

What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them?

PubMed

Schroter, Sara; Black, Nick; Evans, Stephen; Godlee, Fiona; Osorio, Lyda; Smith, Richard

2008-10-01

To analyse data from a trial and report the frequencies with which major and minor errors are detected at a general medical journal, the types of errors missed and the impact of training on error detection. 607 peer reviewers at the BMJ were randomized to two intervention groups receiving different types of training (face-to-face training or a self-taught package) and a control group. Each reviewer was sent the same three test papers over the study period, each of which had nine major and five minor methodological errors inserted. BMJ peer reviewers. The quality of review, assessed using a validated instrument, and the number and type of errors detected before and after training. The number of major errors detected varied over the three papers. The interventions had small effects. At baseline (Paper 1) reviewers found an average of 2.58 of the nine major errors, with no notable difference between the groups. The mean number of errors reported was similar for the second and third papers, 2.71 and 3.0, respectively. Biased randomization was the error detected most frequently in all three papers, with over 60% of reviewers rejecting the papers identifying this error. Reviewers who did not reject the papers found fewer errors and the proportion finding biased randomization was less than 40% for each paper. Editors should not assume that reviewers will detect most major errors, particularly those concerned with the context of study. Short training packages have only a slight impact on improving error detection.

Workshop on quantum stochastic differential equations for the quantum simulation of physical systems

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-09-22

University of Tennessee. The web site for the Workshop is http://aesop.phys.utk.edu/QI/Workshop.html. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals ( N ...List the papers, including journal references, in the following categories: (b) Papers published in non-peer-reviewed journals ( N /A for none) (c...Lomonaco, A. Spörl, N . Pomplun, J. Myers, and S. J. Glaser, NMR Quantum Calculations of the Jones Polynomial, Phys. Rev. A 81, 032319 (2010). [13] S. J

How Environmental "Merchants of Doubt" Use Peer-Reviewed Publication as a Means to Commandeer Scientific Debate: A Case Study of a Publishing Problem.

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Siegel, D. I.

2015-12-01

This year, the USEPA reported no systemic problem with respect to pollution of potable waters by solutes or natural gas resulting from unconventional drilling for oil and gas, despite attempts by anti-fracking opponents to frighten the public about water pollution from rare circumstances (much as those who have cherry- picked climate data to suggest burning fossil fuels does not affect climate). Scientific "merchants of doubt" have figured out how to use peer-reviewed papers to advocate their bias, regardless of the side for which they advocate. I present a personal example. Prior to the EPA report, authors of a highly-cited peer-reviewed paper argued that more dissolved methane than usual should be expected in ground water located close to unconventional gas wells. This paper figured prominently in the New York State's recent ban on fracking. To test the reproducibility of this conclusion, colleagues and I redid the study but by sampling ~13,000 NE Pennsylvania domestic wells, densely arrayed near ~800 gas wells. Not surprising, we found no systemic relationship between methane in drinking water and proximity to gas wells; failed gas wells actually are rare. The peer reviewed system of publication has been broken for years, because of continual pressure to publish more to achieve academic success coupled to a flood of international submissions. Editors routinely have a difficult time finding senior scientists to agree to review papers, and so they wind up relying more on reviewers suggested by authors, who can and have gamed the peer review system through it. To resolve this problem, I suggest that journal editors be more far more draconian before releasing papers for review and that they enforce clear rubrics to insure that reviewers address reviews properly. Finally, conflict of interest disclosure needs to be clearer, since common assumption that bias inherently evolves from funded research outside of Federal and non-profit organizations, appears to be, at least to me, fundamentally flawed.

Letting the daylight in: Reviewing the reviewers and other ways to maximize transparency in science

PubMed Central

Wicherts, Jelte M.; Kievit, Rogier A.; Bakker, Marjan; Borsboom, Denny

2012-01-01

With the emergence of online publishing, opportunities to maximize transparency of scientific research have grown considerably. However, these possibilities are still only marginally used. We argue for the implementation of (1) peer-reviewed peer review, (2) transparent editorial hierarchies, and (3) online data publication. First, peer-reviewed peer review entails a community-wide review system in which reviews are published online and rated by peers. This ensures accountability of reviewers, thereby increasing academic quality of reviews. Second, reviewers who write many highly regarded reviews may move to higher editorial positions. Third, online publication of data ensures the possibility of independent verification of inferential claims in published papers. This counters statistical errors and overly positive reporting of statistical results. We illustrate the benefits of these strategies by discussing an example in which the classical publication system has gone awry, namely controversial IQ research. We argue that this case would have likely been avoided using more transparent publication practices. We argue that the proposed system leads to better reviews, meritocratic editorial hierarchies, and a higher degree of replicability of statistical analyses. PMID:22536180

Detection and Imaging of Improvised Explosive Devices

DTIC Science & Technology

2014-07-10

a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. University of Texas at El Paso 500 West University Avenue...El Paso , TX 79968 -0587 ABSTRACT Number of Papers published in peer-reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer-reviewed journals: Final...Imaging of Improvised Explosive Devices Institution: University of Texas at El Paso Department: Electrical and Computer Engineering Address: 500 W

Relating patenting and peer-review publications: an extended perspective on the vascular health and risk management literature.

PubMed

Mucke, Hermann A M

2011-01-01

This investigation identifies patent applications published under the international Patent Convention Treaty between July 2010 and January 2011 in three significant fields of vascular risk management (arterial hypertension, atherosclerosis, and aneurysms) and investigates whether the inventors have also published peer reviewed papers directly describing their claimed invention. Out of only 48 patent documents that specifically addressed at least one of the above-mentioned fields, 15 had immediate companion papers of which 13 were published earlier than the corresponding patent applications; the majority of these papers were published by noncorporate patentees. Although the majority of patent applications (30 documents) had at least one corporate assignee, 18 came from academic environments. As expected, medical devices dominated in the aneurysm segment while pharmacology dominated hypertension and atherosclerosis. Although information related to hypertension, atherosclerosis, or aneurysms that was claimed in international patent applications reached the public quicker through the corresponding peer review document if one was published, more than two-thirds of the patent applications had no such companion paper in a scientific journal. The patent literature, which is freely available online as full text, offers information to scientists and developers in the fields of vascular risk management that is not available from the peer reviewed literature.

How peer-review constrains cognition: on the frontline in the knowledge sector

PubMed Central

Cowley, Stephen J.

2015-01-01

Peer-review is neither reliable, fair, nor a valid basis for predicting ‘impact’: as quality control, peer-review is not fit for purpose. Endorsing the consensus, I offer a reframing: while a normative social process, peer-review also shapes the writing of a scientific paper. In so far as ‘cognition’ describes enabling conditions for flexible behavior, the practices of peer-review thus constrain knowledge-making. To pursue cognitive functions of peer-review, however, manuscripts must be seen as ‘symbolizations’, replicable patterns that use technologically enabled activity. On this bio-cognitive view, peer-review constrains knowledge-making by writers, editors, reviewers. Authors are prompted to recursively re-aggregate symbolizations to present what are deemed acceptable knowledge claims. How, then, can recursive re-embodiment be explored? In illustration, I sketch how the paper’s own content came to be re-aggregated: agonistic review drove reformatting of argument structure, changes in rhetorical ploys and careful choice of wordings. For this reason, the paper’s knowledge-claims can be traced to human activity that occurs in distributed cognitive systems. Peer-review is on the frontline in the knowledge sector in that it delimits what can count as knowing. Its systemic nature is therefore crucial to not only discipline-centered ‘real’ science but also its ‘post-academic’ counterparts. PMID:26579064

Collaborative Learning through Formative Peer Review with Technology

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Eaton, Carrie Diaz; Wade, Stephanie

2014-01-01

This paper describes a collaboration between a mathematician and a compositionist who developed a sequence of collaborative writing assignments for calculus. This sequence of developmentally appropriate assignments presents peer review as a collaborative process that promotes reflection, deepens understanding, and improves exposition. First, we…

Was Muller's 1946 Nobel Prize research for radiation-induced gene mutations peer-reviewed?

PubMed

Calabrese, Edward J

2018-06-06

This historical analysis indicates that it is highly unlikely that the Nobel Prize winning research of Hermann J. Muller was peer-reviewed. The published paper of Muller lacked a research methods section, cited no references, and failed to acknowledge and discuss the work of Gager and Blakeslee (PNAS 13:75-79, 1927) that claimed to have induced gene mutation via ionizing radiation six months prior to Muller's non-data Science paper (Muller, Science 66(1699):84-87, 1927a). Despite being well acclimated into the scientific world of peer-review, Muller choose to avoid the peer-review process on his most significant publication. It appears that Muller's actions were strongly influenced by his desire to claim primacy for the discovery of gene mutation. The actions of Muller have important ethical lessons and implications today, when self-interest trumps one's obligations to society and the scientific culture that supports the quest for new knowledge and discovery.

Pupils Making a Difference: Enhancing the Power of the Student Peer Group to Promote Positive Social, Emotional and Behavioural Outcomes

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cooper, Paul; Jacobs, Barbara

2011-01-01

In this paper, the authors review empirical evidence on the effects of peer groups on social, emotional and behavioural functioning. The paper shows that an understanding of the ways in which peer groups can influence the development of deviance and subvert the positive effects of interventions can be exploited in the promotion of positive social…

Scaffolded Writing and Rewriting in the Discipline: A Web-Based Reciprocal Peer Review System

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cho, Kwangsu; Schunn, Christian D.

2007-01-01

This paper describes how SWoRD (scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline), a web-based reciprocal peer review system, supports writing practice, particularly for large content courses in which writing is considered critical but not feasibly included. To help students gain content knowledge as well as writing and reviewing skills, SWoRD…

Multi-Disciplinary Peer-Mark Moderation of Group Work

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Willmot, Peter; Pond, Keith

2012-01-01

Self and peer assessment offers benefits for enhancing student learning. Peer moderation provides a convenient solution for awarding individual marks in group assignments. This paper provides a significant review of peer-mark moderation, and describes an award winning, web-based tool that was developed in the UK and is now spreading across the…

A re-audit of the use of definitions of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) in peer-reviewed literature.

PubMed

Byard, Roger W; Lee, Vivian

2012-11-01

The use of different definitions of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) may make comparison of data among studies difficult. Fifty randomly selected papers dealing with SIDS that were published between 2010 and 2011 in peer-reviewed journals were reviewed to determine whether one of three internationally accepted definitions of SIDS had been either written in the text or referenced. A significant improvement in the use of definitions has occurred since 2005, with the percentage of papers either quoting or referencing a standard definition increasing by 26%, from 42 to 68%. The 1989 NICHD definition remained the most commonly used definition (35.1%) followed by the 2004 San Diego definition (26.3%). Although the percentage of papers where either no definition was provided or where an idiosyncratic or mis-cited definition was used fell 26%, from 58 to 32%, nearly one in three papers published on SIDS in peer-reviewed journals that were included in this study still did not cite a standard definition. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd and Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine. All rights reserved.

RI: Rheology as a Tool for Understanding the Mechanics of Live Ant Aggregations, Part 1

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-11-04

measure rheological properties of biological fluids. Using this machine, we were able to characterize non -Newtonian fluids such as frog saliva...GA 30332 -0420 ABSTRACT Number of Papers published in peer-reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer-reviewed journals: Final Report...order to measure rheological properties of biological fluids. Using this machine, we were able to characterize non -Newtonian fluids such as frog

Predatory Journals, Peer Review, and Education Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Beall, Jeffrey

2017-01-01

This commentary examines the problem of predatory journals, low-quality open-access journals that seek to earn revenue from scholarly authors without following scholarly publishing best practices. Seeking to accept as many papers as possible, they typically do not perform a standard peer review, leading to the publication of improperly vetted…

Peer Evaluation of Teaching or "Fear" Evaluation: In Search of Compatibility

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Salih, Abdel Rahman Abdalla

2013-01-01

Peer evaluation or review of teaching is one of the factors of quality assurance system at the present time. However, peer evaluation is sometimes approached with trepidation and with the feeling that it may not be fair and free of bias. This paper examines teachers' perceptions of peer evaluation as an enhancement for quality teaching. A…

Fragments of peer review: A quantitative analysis of the literature (1969-2015)

PubMed Central

Grimaldo, Francisco; Marušić, Ana

2018-01-01

This paper examines research on peer review between 1969 and 2015 by looking at records indexed from the Scopus database. Although it is often argued that peer review has been poorly investigated, we found that the number of publications in this field doubled from 2005. A half of this work was indexed as research articles, a third as editorial notes and literature reviews and the rest were book chapters or letters. We identified the most prolific and influential scholars, the most cited publications and the most important journals in the field. Co-authorship network analysis showed that research on peer review is fragmented, with the largest group of co-authors including only 2.1% of the whole community. Co-citation network analysis indicated a fragmented structure also in terms of knowledge. This shows that despite its central role in research, peer review has been examined only through small-scale research projects. Our findings would suggest that there is need to encourage collaboration and knowledge sharing across different research communities. PMID:29466467

Peer Review of Assessment Network: Supporting Comparability of Standards

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Booth, Sara; Beckett, Jeff; Saunders, Cassandra

2016-01-01

Purpose: This paper aims to test the need in the Australian higher education (HE) sector for a national network for the peer review of assessment in response to the proposed HE standards framework and propose a sector-wide framework for calibrating and assuring achievement standards, both within and across disciplines, through the establishment of…

Feedback Drug Delivery Vehicles

DTIC Science & Technology

2012-06-28

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing...policy or decision, unless so designated by other documentation. 12. DISTRIBUTION AVAILIBILITY STATEMENT Approved for Public Release; Distribution... publications (other than abstracts): Received Paper TOTAL: Number of Non Peer-Reviewed Conference Proceeding publications (other than abstracts): Peer

Student Reflection and Learning through Peer Reviews

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Boase-Jelinek, Daniel; Parker, Jenni; Herrington, Jan

2013-01-01

This paper describes lessons learnt whilst using an online peer review system in an undergraduate unit for pre-service teachers. In this unit, students learn to use information technologies as part of their future teaching practice. The unit aims to foster graduates who become lifelong reflective educators by providing opportunities to explore and…

Responding to Children Victimized by Their Peers

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Nickerson, Amanda B.; Brock, Stephen E.; Chang, Yiping; O'Malley, Meagan D.

2006-01-01

Because victimization results from the dynamic interplay between the victim and his or her parents, peers, and teachers, responding to this problem should involve both direct and indirect interventions. This paper describes and reviews empirically supported direct interventions with victims, as well as indirect interventions with parents, peers,…

Two decades of external peer review of cancer care in general hospitals; the Dutch experience.

PubMed

Kilsdonk, Melvin J; Siesling, Sabine; Otter, Rene; van Harten, Wim H

2016-03-01

External peer review was introduced in general hospitals in the Netherlands in 1994 to assess and improve the multidisciplinary team approach in cancer care. This paper aims to explore the value, perceived impact, and (future) role of external peer review in cancer care. Semistructured interviews were held with clinicians, oncology nurses, and managers from fifteen general hospitals that participated in three rounds of peer review over a period of 16 years. Interviewees reflected on the goals and expectations, experiences, perceived impact, and future role of external peer review. Transcriptions of the interviews were coded to discover recurrent themes. Improving clinical care and organization were the main motives for participation. Positive impact was perceived on multiple aspects of care such as shared responsibilities, internal prioritization of cancer care, improved communication, and a clear structure and position of cancer care within general hospitals. Establishing a direct relationship between the external peer review and organizational or clinical impact proved to be difficult. Criticism was raised on the content of the program being too theoretical and organization-focussed after three rounds. According to most stakeholders, external peer review can improve multidisciplinary team work in cancer care; however, the acceptance is threatened by a perceived disbalance between effort and visible clinical impact. Leaner and more clinically focused programs are needed to keep repeated peer reviews challenging and worthwhile. © 2015 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The relationship between manuscript title structure and success: editorial decisions and citation performance for an ecological journal

PubMed Central

Fox, Charles W; Burns, C Sean

2015-01-01

A poorly chosen article title may make a paper difficult to discover or discourage readership when discovered, reducing an article's impact. Yet, it is unclear how the structure of a manuscript's title influences readership and impact. We used manuscript tracking data for all manuscripts submitted to the journal Functional Ecology from 2004 to 2013 and citation data for papers published in this journal from 1987 to 2011 to examine how title features changed and whether a manuscript's title structure was predictive of success during the manuscript review process and/or impact (citation) after publication. Titles of manuscripts submitted to Functional Ecology became marginally longer (after controlling for other variables), broader in focus (less frequent inclusion of genus and species names), and included more humor and subtitles over the period of the study. Papers with subtitles were less likely to be rejected by editors both pre- and post-peer review, although both effects were small and the presence of subtitles in published papers was not predictive of citations. Papers with specific names of study organisms in their titles fared poorly during editorial (but not peer) review and, if published, were less well cited than papers whose titles did not include specific names. Papers with intermediate length titles were more successful during editorial review, although the effect was small and title word count was not predictive of citations. No features of titles were predictive of reviewer willingness to review papers or the length of time a paper was in peer review. We conclude that titles have changed in structure over time, but features of title structure have only small or no relationship with success during editorial review and post-publication impact. The title feature that was most predictive of manuscript success: papers whose titles emphasize broader conceptual or comparative issues fare better both pre- and post-publication than do papers with organism-specific titles. PMID:26045949

The relationship between manuscript title structure and success: editorial decisions and citation performance for an ecological journal.

PubMed

Fox, Charles W; Burns, C Sean

2015-05-01

A poorly chosen article title may make a paper difficult to discover or discourage readership when discovered, reducing an article's impact. Yet, it is unclear how the structure of a manuscript's title influences readership and impact. We used manuscript tracking data for all manuscripts submitted to the journal Functional Ecology from 2004 to 2013 and citation data for papers published in this journal from 1987 to 2011 to examine how title features changed and whether a manuscript's title structure was predictive of success during the manuscript review process and/or impact (citation) after publication. Titles of manuscripts submitted to Functional Ecology became marginally longer (after controlling for other variables), broader in focus (less frequent inclusion of genus and species names), and included more humor and subtitles over the period of the study. Papers with subtitles were less likely to be rejected by editors both pre- and post-peer review, although both effects were small and the presence of subtitles in published papers was not predictive of citations. Papers with specific names of study organisms in their titles fared poorly during editorial (but not peer) review and, if published, were less well cited than papers whose titles did not include specific names. Papers with intermediate length titles were more successful during editorial review, although the effect was small and title word count was not predictive of citations. No features of titles were predictive of reviewer willingness to review papers or the length of time a paper was in peer review. We conclude that titles have changed in structure over time, but features of title structure have only small or no relationship with success during editorial review and post-publication impact. The title feature that was most predictive of manuscript success: papers whose titles emphasize broader conceptual or comparative issues fare better both pre- and post-publication than do papers with organism-specific titles.

Evaluating Management Information Systems, A Protocol for Automated Peer Review Systems

PubMed Central

Black, Gordon C.

1980-01-01

This paper discusses key issues in evaluating an automated Peer Review System. Included are the conceptual base, design, steps in planning structural components, operation parameters, criteria, costs and a detailed outline or protocol for use in the evaluation. At the heart of the Peer Review System is the criteria utilized for measuring quality. Criteria evaluation should embrace, as a minimum, appropriateness, validity and reliability, and completemess or comprehensiveness of content. Such an evaluation is not complete without determining the impact (clinical outcome) of the service system or the patient and the population served.

Enhancing Proof Writing via Cross-Institutional Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ernst, Dana C.; Hodge, Angie; Schultz, Andrew

2015-01-01

In the Spring of 2011, two of the authors of this paper taught number theory courses at their respective institutions. Twice during the semester, students in each class submitted proofs of two to three theorems to be peer reviewed by students in the other class. Each student wrote anonymous and formal referee reports of the submitted theorems,…

Factors Associated with Social Interactions between Deaf Children and Their Hearing Peers: A Systematic Literature Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Batten, Georgina; Oakes, Peter M.; Alexander, Tim

2014-01-01

Research indicates that deaf children can have marked social difficulties compared with their hearing peers. Factors that influence these social interactions need to be reviewed to inform interventions. A systematic search of 5 key databases and 3 specialized journals identified 14 papers that met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality of…

Instructors' Uses, Experiences, Thoughts and Suggestions regarding Calibrated Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gunersel, Adalet Baris; Simpson, Nancy J.

2010-01-01

This paper presents a qualitative study conducted with faculty members who participated in a project funded by the National Science Foundation focusing on student development with Calibrated Peer Review (CPR)[TM], a web-based tool created to promote writing and critical-thinking skills. The purpose of the study was to gain an understanding of…

Peer Review in Academic Promotion and Publishing: Its Meaning, Locus, and Future

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Harley, Diane; Acord, Sophia Krzys; Earl-Novell, Sarah

2010-01-01

As part of its Andrew W. Mellon Foundation-funded Future of Scholarly Communication Project, the Center for Studies in Higher Education (CSHE) has hosted two meetings to explore how peer review relates to scholarly communication and academic values. In preparation for an April 2010 workshop, four working papers were developed and circulated. They…

Print vs. Online Scholarly Publishing: Notes and Reflections on the Peer Review Process.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ryder, Martin

This paper addresses some of the major shifts in thinking about the nature of publishing and in basic beliefs regarding the peer review process in scholarly communication. Changes in the notion of ownership in the an age of technology are considered. Differences between the referee system with print publications and electronic text are outlined…

"Medical Education Online": A Case Study of an Open Access Journal in Health Professional Education

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Solomon, David J.

2007-01-01

Introduction: The development of the World Wide Web (WWW) has made it possible of small groups of colleagues or even single individuals to create peer-reviewed scholarly journals. This paper discusses the development of Medical Education Online (MEO) an open access peer-reviewed journal in health professional education. Description: MEO was first…

Online Peer Discourse in a Writing Classroom

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Choi, Jessie

2014-01-01

This paper is an attempt to explore the interaction discourse of second language undergraduate learners in the online peer review process of a writing classroom in Hong Kong. Specifically, the writer sought to investigate the types of online discourse learners have in the peer discussions on their writing, and to examine the role of explicit…

Enhancing the role of case-oriented peer review to improve quality and safety in radiation oncology: Executive summary

PubMed Central

Marks, Lawrence B.; Adams, Robert D.; Pawlicki, Todd; Blumberg, Albert L.; Hoopes, David; Brundage, Michael D.; Fraass, Benedick A.

2013-01-01

This report is part of a series of white papers commissioned for the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) Board of Directors as part of ASTRO's Target Safely Campaign, focusing on the role of peer review as an important component of a broad safety/quality assurance (QA) program. Peer review is one of the most effective means for assuring the quality of qualitative, and potentially controversial, patient-specific decisions in radiation oncology. This report summarizes many of the areas throughout radiation therapy that may benefit from the application of peer review. Each radiation oncology facility should evaluate the issues raised and develop improved ways to apply the concept of peer review to its individual process and workflow. This might consist of a daily multidisciplinary (eg, physicians, dosimetrists, physicists, therapists) meeting to review patients being considered for, or undergoing planning for, radiation therapy (eg, intention to treat and target delineation), as well as meetings to review patients already under treatment (eg, adequacy of image guidance). This report is intended to clarify and broaden the understanding of radiation oncology professionals regarding the meaning, roles, benefits, and targets for peer review as a routine quality assurance tool. It is hoped that this work will be a catalyst for further investigation, development, and study of the efficacy of peer review techniques and how these efforts can help improve the safety and quality of our treatments. PMID:24175002

A systematic review of the literature describing the outcomes of near-peer mentoring programs for first year medical students.

PubMed

Akinla, Olawunmi; Hagan, Pamela; Atiomo, William

2018-05-08

Transition into higher education has been identified as one of the most stressful periods for learners. Interventions targeting the transition phase such as near- peer mentoring might help address some of these challenges. We were however unable to identify a published systematic review of the literature describing outcomes of near-peer mentoring of medical students during the transition phase into medical school. The aim of this paper is to review the literature and describe the outcomes of near-peer mentoring schemes for first-year medical students in the transition phase. A search of different electronic databases was carried out, using the search terms peer, buddy, mentor*, counsel*, advise*, tutor*, student, medical, school. 1861 articles were identified, however only 5 studies met the inclusion criteria- primary mentees should be first-years, and mentors must be inclusive of second-years but not limited to them. In reporting this paper, the PRISMA guidelines were followed. Published material on near-peer mentoring for medical students is scarce. Three outcomes for peer mentoring were identified- professional and personal development, stress reduction, and ease of transitioning. Incidentally, peer-mentoring was also found to have facilitated the development of personal and professional attitudes in the mentors. The quality of the evaluation methods in the studies was however low to moderate. Near-peer-mentoring is a way of promoting professional and personal development. It is also promising to aid transition and maintain well-being of first-year medical students. However, larger, better quality longitudinal studies, are needed to ascertain its true value for these students.

Research funding. Big names or big ideas: do peer-review panels select the best science proposals?

PubMed

Li, Danielle; Agha, Leila

2015-04-24

This paper examines the success of peer-review panels in predicting the future quality of proposed research. We construct new data to track publication, citation, and patenting outcomes associated with more than 130,000 research project (R01) grants funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health from 1980 to 2008. We find that better peer-review scores are consistently associated with better research outcomes and that this relationship persists even when we include detailed controls for an investigator's publication history, grant history, institutional affiliations, career stage, and degree types. A one-standard deviation worse peer-review score among awarded grants is associated with 15% fewer citations, 7% fewer publications, 19% fewer high-impact publications, and 14% fewer follow-on patents. Copyright © 2015, American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Peer-Mediated Theatrical Engagement for Improving Reciprocal Social Interaction in Autism Spectrum Disorder

PubMed Central

Corbett, Blythe A.; Qualls, Lydia R.; Valencia, Blythe; Fecteau, Stéphanie-M.; Swain, Deanna M.

2014-01-01

The hallmark characteristic of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is poor reciprocal social communication. Interventions designed to improve this core deficit are critically needed. Social skills interventions such as direct training, peer mediation, and video modeling have contributed to improvements in various social skills in children with ASD. This paper reviews existing social competence interventions available for children with ASD while highlighting hypothesized critical components for advancing, maintaining, and generalizing skills, which include (1) peer mediation, (2) active learning, and (3) implementation in supportive, natural contexts. As a framework for these approaches, this conceptual paper describes SENSE Theatre, a novel intervention that combines trained peers that facilitate the performance-based theatrical treatment delivered in a supportive, community-based environment. A review of previous research shows early feasibility, setting the stage for more rigorous studies to aid in developing a standardized intervention package. PMID:25346926

STIR-Physics: Cold Atoms and Nanocrystals in Tapered Nanofiber and High-Q Resonator Potentials

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-11-02

STIR- Physics : Cold Atoms and Nanocrystals in Tapered Nanofiber and High-Q Resonator Potentials We worked on a tapered fiber in cold atomic cloud...reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer-reviewed journals: Final Report: STIR- Physics : Cold Atoms and Nanocrystals in Tapered Nanofiber...other than abstracts): Number of Peer-Reviewed Conference Proceeding publications (other than abstracts): Books Number of Manuscripts: 0.00Number of

Students' Perception of Peer Review in an EFL Classroom

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Harutyunyan, Liliya; Poveda, María Fernanda

2018-01-01

Even though there is plenty of published information about the advantages of peer review, little can be found on what the beneficiaries (i.e. the students) feel about this method and what they might expect from it. In this paper, we present an analysis of the perceptions of 44 students at one of the largest universities in Ecuador, who had just…

What's so Important about Peer Review of Teaching Portfolio Components? An Exploratory Analysis of Peer-Review Episodes within ETPP. Research Brief

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Turns, Jennifer; Yellin, Jessica; Huang, Yi-Min; Gygi, Kathleen

2007-01-01

Understanding and promoting effective teaching are central concerns of the engineering education community. This paper reports on research to investigate the processes by which construction of teaching portfolios in a socially supportive context can promote the advancement of teaching knowledge and ability. By characterizing how a specific…

Hybrid Physical Vapor Deposition Instrument for Advanced Functional Multilayers and Materials

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-04-27

Hybrid Physical Vapor Deposition Instrument for Advanced Functional Multilayers and Materials PI Maria received support to construct a physical... vapor deposition (PVD) system that combines electron beam (e- beam) evaporation, magnetron sputtering, pulsed laser ablation, and ion-assisted deposition ...peer-reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer-reviewed journals: Final Report: Hybrid Physical Vapor Deposition Instrument for Advanced

Re-Examining the Effects and Affects of Electronic Peer Reviews in a First-Year Composition Class

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Xu, Yi

2007-01-01

While many researchers have studied the application of computer-mediated communication (CMC) in peer review activities in L2 composition classes, few have directly compared the effect of asynchronous CMC (ACMC) versus written comments. This paper describes a small-scale project carried out in an ESL composition class to reexamine the effects and…

Those Who Teach Learn: Near-Peer Teaching as Outdoor Environmental Education Curriculum and Pedagogy

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bester, Lucas; Muller, Gregg; Munge, Brendon; Morse, Marcus; Meyers, Noel

2017-01-01

Near-peer teaching is used within higher education because of its efficacy for both student teachers and learners. Our purpose in this paper is to highlight the possibilities of applying near-peer teaching pedagogies in outdoor and environmental higher education contexts. We begin by reviewing its use in the higher education sector, mainly…

Peer Observation: A Professional Learning Tool for English Language Teachers in an EFL Institute

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ahmed, Ejaz; Nordin, Zaimuariffudin Shukri; Shah, Sayyed Rashid; Channa, Mansoor Ahmed

2018-01-01

The key aim of this study is to explore the perceptions of English as foreign language (EFL) teachers about peer observation as a tool for professional development that is implemented in an English Language Institute of a Saudi Arabian university. This paper reviews literature on peer observation to develop a conceptual and theoretical…

Establishing an Online HIV Peer Helping Programme: A Review of Process Challenges and Lessons Learned

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Harris, Gregory E.; Corcoran, Valerie; Myles, Adam; Lundrigan, Philip; White, Robert; Greidanus, Elaine; Savage, Stephanie L.; Pope, Leslie; McDonald, James; Yetman, Gerard

2015-01-01

Background: Online peer support can be a valuable approach to helping people living with HIV, especially in regions with large rural populations and relatively centralised HIV services. Design: This paper focuses on a community-university partnership aimed at developing an online peer support programme in the Canadian province of Newfoundland and…

Supporting Peer Assessment of Individual Contributions in Groupwork

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Raban, Richard; Litchfield, Andrew

2007-01-01

The ability to assess the work of others is a core attribute for most professionals. To develop this graduate attribute in our students requires the learning of self and peer evaluation, feedback, and review skills. This paper discusses the changing design of peer assessment and the impact of a new groupwork support tool within a capstone…

Manuscript peer review at the AJR: facts, figures, and quality assessment.

PubMed

Friedman, D P

1995-04-01

Concern by the government, funding institutions, and the public for quality assurance in all aspects of medical endeavors mandates critical examination of various professional activities. Although peer review is generally regarded as the best system for selecting and improving scientific papers for publication, the efficacy of this process has never been proved. Moreover, the administrative functions of the editorial staff are often poorly understood. The purpose of this article is to make peer review a the AJR less esoteric and more understandable by quantifying some of its activities. This information is then assessed as it relates to the quality of this important step in scientific publication.

Calibrated peer review assignments for the earth sciences

USGS Publications Warehouse

Rudd, J.A.; Wang, V.Z.; Cervato, C.; Ridky, R.W.

2009-01-01

Calibrated Peer Review ??? (CPR), a web-based instructional tool developed as part of the National Science Foundation reform initiatives in undergraduate science education, allows instructors to incorporate multiple writing assignments in large courses without overwhelming the instructor. This study reports successful implementation of CPR in a large, introductory geology course and student learning of geoscience content. For each CPR assignment in this study, students studied web-based and paper resources, wrote an essay, and reviewed seven essays (three from the instructor, three from peers, and their own) on the topic. Although many students expressed negative attitudes and concerns, particularly about the peer review process of this innovative instructional approach, they also recognized the learning potential of completing CPR assignments. Comparing instruction on earthquakes and plate boundaries using a CPR assignment vs. an instructional video lecture and homework essay with extensive instructor feedback, students mastered more content via CPR instruction.

Where is the trust in the peer review dynamic?

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ucko, Daniel

The motto of the Royal Society is ``nullius in verba'', which translates roughly as ``take nobody's word for it'', and this motto is furthermore emblematic of the conduct of science. We want facts and not opinions, verified results and not conjecture. From the time that we first started communicating scientific results, it has been recognized that scientific claims must be verified by someone who is not the maker of those claims, and who furthermore has no stake in the matter, in other words, a claim needs to be evaluated objectively. Peer review as a method of evaluation can be thought of as akin to an experiment, where the review process tests the hypothesis of a submitted paper. Peer review is however also a social process with human actors: authors, referees, and editors. As a process, peer review depends on trust, but in what way does that manifest? There are many agents in peer review: in addition to the human actors, there is also the institution that is the journal, as well as the publisher (e.g. APS) that stands behind the journal. People can also have trust in the very concept of peer review. If we accept as a proposition that publications are witnesses to science in the same way that people who attend scientific demonstrations are witnesses of an experiment, then how much do we trust this witness? A few further questions arise: If referees (and sometimes authors) are anonymous, what does this do to the mechanisms of trust? Is trust only possible between human agents, or can you trust a process or a journal in a similar way to trusting a certain car brand? Is an absence of trust the same as distrust? Is trust rational, or cognitive, or is it a practice? In this paper I will attempt to locate the trust and ask how trust is earned, and, conversely, how it can be lost, using peer review as example. I have a joint affiliation with Stony Brook University and APS and would like both listed, in that order, in the abstract.

The association between four citation metrics and peer rankings of research influence of Australian researchers in six fields of public health.

PubMed

Derrick, Gemma Elizabeth; Haynes, Abby; Chapman, Simon; Hall, Wayne D

2011-04-06

Doubt about the relevance, appropriateness and transparency of peer review has promoted the use of citation metrics as a viable adjunct or alternative in the assessment of research impact. It is also commonly acknowledged that research metrics will not replace peer review unless they are shown to correspond with the assessment of peers. This paper evaluates the relationship between researchers' influence as evaluated by their peers and various citation metrics representing different aspects of research output in 6 fields of public health in Australia. For four fields, the results showed a modest positive correlation between different research metrics and peer assessments of research influence. However, for two fields, tobacco and injury, negative or no correlations were found. This suggests a peer understanding of research influence within these fields differed from visibility in the mainstream, peer-reviewed scientific literature. This research therefore recommends the use of both peer review and metrics in a combined approach in assessing research influence. Future research evaluation frameworks intent on incorporating metrics should first analyse each field closely to determine what measures of research influence are valued highly by members of that research community. This will aid the development of comprehensive and relevant frameworks with which to fairly and transparently distribute research funds or approve promotion applications.

Peers and adolescent smoking.

PubMed

Kobus, Kimberly

2003-05-01

There is a considerable body of empirical research that has identified adolescent peer relationships as a primary factor involved in adolescent cigarette smoking. Despite this large research base, many questions remain unanswered about the mechanisms by which peers affect youths' smoking behavior. Understanding these processes of influence is key to the development of prevention and intervention programs designed to address adolescent smoking as a significant public health concern. In this paper, theoretical frameworks and empirical findings are reviewed critically which inform the current state of knowledge regarding peer influences on teenage smoking. Specifically, social learning theory, primary socialization theory, social identity theory and social network theory are discussed. Empirical findings regarding peer influence and selection, as well as multiple reference points in adolescent friendships, including best friendships, romantic relationships, peer groups and social crowds, are also reviewed. Review of this work reveals the contribution that peers have in adolescents' use of tobacco, in some cases promoting use, and in other cases deterring it. This review also suggests that peer influences on smoking are more subtle than commonly thought and need to be examined more carefully, including consideration of larger social contexts, e.g. the family, neighborhood, and media. Recommendations for future investigations are made, as well as suggestions for specific methodological approaches that offer promise for advancing our knowledge of the contribution of peers on adolescent tobacco use.

The Association between Four Citation Metrics and Peer Rankings of Research Influence of Australian Researchers in Six Fields of Public Health

PubMed Central

Derrick, Gemma Elizabeth; Haynes, Abby; Chapman, Simon; Hall, Wayne D.

2011-01-01

Doubt about the relevance, appropriateness and transparency of peer review has promoted the use of citation metrics as a viable adjunct or alternative in the assessment of research impact. It is also commonly acknowledged that research metrics will not replace peer review unless they are shown to correspond with the assessment of peers. This paper evaluates the relationship between researchers' influence as evaluated by their peers and various citation metrics representing different aspects of research output in 6 fields of public health in Australia. For four fields, the results showed a modest positive correlation between different research metrics and peer assessments of research influence. However, for two fields, tobacco and injury, negative or no correlations were found. This suggests a peer understanding of research influence within these fields differed from visibility in the mainstream, peer-reviewed scientific literature. This research therefore recommends the use of both peer review and metrics in a combined approach in assessing research influence. Future research evaluation frameworks intent on incorporating metrics should first analyse each field closely to determine what measures of research influence are valued highly by members of that research community. This will aid the development of comprehensive and relevant frameworks with which to fairly and transparently distribute research funds or approve promotion applications. PMID:21494691

The Joy of Teaching Literacy. The Thirty-Fourth Yearbook: A Double Peer Reviewed Publication of the Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Marin, Linda, Ed.; Boggs, Merry, Ed.; Szabo, Susan, Ed.; Morrision, Timothy, Ed.; Garza-Garcia, Lizabeth, Ed.

2012-01-01

The Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers (ALER) Yearbook, Volume 34, includes papers presented at the annual conference, which have gone through a double peer review process. It also includes the Presidential Address and the keynote addresses given at the conference. For ALER's 55th annual meeting, the Association of Literacy…

Uncovering Discipline-Specific Interpretations of the "Scholarship of Teaching": Peer Review and Faculty Perceptions of Scholarly Teaching. ASHE Annual Meeting Paper.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Quinlan, Kathleen M.

This study examined disciplinary differences in college teaching using data from a national study of peer review of teaching to look at values about teaching held by faculty in the contrasting disciplines of history and chemistry. Data for this study were from written exercises completed by faculty participants (14 historians and 12 chemists) and…

CES4Health.info: an online tool for peer reviewed publication and dissemination of diverse products of community-engaged scholarship.

PubMed

Jordan, Catherine; Seifer, Sarena D; Gelmon, Sherril B; Ryan, Katharine; McGinley, Piper

2011-01-01

Community-engaged scholarship (CES)-research, teaching, programmatic and other scholarly activities conducted through partnerships between academic and community partners-may result in innovative applied products such as manuals, policy briefs, curricula, videos, toolkits, and websites. Without accepted mechanisms for peer-reviewed publication and dissemination, these products often do not "count" toward faculty promotion and tenure (P&T) and have limited opportunities for broad impact. This paper reports on CES4Health.info, a unique online tool for peer-reviewed publication and dissemination of products of CES in forms other than journal articles. In its first year, CES4Health.info has published 24 products and documented the satisfaction of users, authors, and reviewers.

Peer Assessment for Learning from a Social Perspective: The Influence of Interpersonal Variables and Structural Features

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

van Gennip, Nanine A. E.; Segers, Mien S. R.; Tillema, Harm H.

2009-01-01

This paper reports a systematic literature review examining empirical studies on the effects of peer assessment for learning. Peer assessment is fundamentally a social process whose core activity is feedback given to and received from others, aimed at enhancing the performance of each individual group member and/or the group as a whole. This makes…

A narrative review of undergraduate peer-based healthcare ethics teaching.

PubMed

Hindmarch, Thomas; Allikmets, Silvia; Knights, Felicity

2015-12-12

This study explores the literature in establishing the value of undergraduate peer-based healthcare ethics teaching as an educational methodology. A narrative review of the literature concerning peer-based ethics teaching was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS databases, and the Cochrane Library, were systematically searched for studies of peer-based ethics or professionalism teaching. Selected studies related peer-based teaching to ethics education outcomes. Ten publications were identified. Selected studies were varied in their chosen intervention methodology and analysis. Collectively, the identified studies suggest peer-based ethics education is an effective and valued educational methodology in training healthcare professionals. One paper suggests peer-based ethics teaching has advantages over traditional didactic methods. Peer-based ethics teaching also receives positive feedback from student participants. However, the limited literature base demonstrates a clear need for more evaluation of this pedagogy. The current literature base suggests that undergraduate peer based healthcare ethics teaching is valuable in terms of efficacy and student satisfaction. We conclude that the medical community should invest in further study in order to capitalise upon the potential of peer-based ethics teaching in undergraduate healthcare education.

Thank You to Our 2017 Peer Reviewers

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hauck, Steven A.; Baratoux, David; Stanley, Sabine; Stanley

2018-02-01

Science operates best by sharing accurate new knowledge in clear ways. In order to check our assumptions, our methods, and our interpretations of the observations, experiments, analyses, and calculations that we do, we ask others to look at our work. We call this peer review—other experts who were not involved in a given study read and critically evaluate the descriptions of our work. They look for completeness, accuracy, whether work is new, and how clearly we have written the descriptions. We continue to be humbled by the time, effort, and careful insights that our colleagues share with each other through the process of peer review. In 2017, JGR Planets benefited from more than 610 reviews provided by 398 of our peers for papers submitted to the journal. Thank you all for your awesome efforts toward advancing planetary science now and for the future.

A Review of Sex Differences in Peer Relationship Processes: Potential Trade-offs for the Emotional and Behavioral Development of Girls and Boys

PubMed Central

Rose, Amanda J.; Rudolph, Karen D.

2011-01-01

Theory and research on sex differences in adjustment focus largely on parental, societal, and biological influences. However, it also is important to consider how peers contribute to girls’ and boys’ development. This paper provides a critical review of sex differences in: several peer-relationship processes, including behavioral and social-cognitive styles, stress and coping, and relationship provisions. Based on this review, a speculative peer-socialization model is presented that considers the implications of these sex differences for girls’ and boys’ emotional and behavioral development. Central to this model is the idea that sex-linked relationship processes have costs and benefits for girls’ and boys’ adjustment. Finally, we present recent research testing certain model components and propose approaches for testing understudied aspects of the model. PMID:16435959

Factors associated with the implementation of community-based peer-led health promotion programs: A scoping review.

PubMed

Lorthios-Guilledroit, Agathe; Richard, Lucie; Filiatrault, Johanne

2018-06-01

Peer education is growing in popularity as a useful health promotion strategy. However, optimal conditions for implementing peer-led health promotion programs (HPPs) remain unclear. This scoping review aimed to describe factors that can influence implementation of peer-led HPPs targeting adult populations. Five databases were searched using the keywords "health promotion/prevention", "implementation", "peers", and related terms. Studies were included if they reported at least one factor associated with the implementation of community-based peer-led HPPs. Fifty-five studies were selected for the analysis. The method known as "best fit framework synthesis" was used to analyze the factors identified in the selected papers. Many factors included in existing implementation conceptual frameworks were deemed applicable to peer-led HPPs. However, other factors related to individuals, programs, and implementation context also emerged from the analysis. Based on this synthesis, an adapted theoretical framework was elaborated, grounded in a complex adaptive system perspective and specifying potential mechanisms through which factors may influence implementation of community-based peer-led HPPs. Further research is needed to test the theoretical framework against empirical data. Findings from this scoping review increase our knowledge of the optimal conditions for implementing peer-led HPPs and thereby maximizing the benefits of such programs. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Does industry self-regulation protect young people from exposure to alcohol marketing? A review of compliance and complaint studies.

PubMed

Noel, Jonathan K; Babor, Thomas F

2017-01-01

Exposure to alcohol marketing is considered to be potentially harmful to adolescents. In addition to statutory regulation, industry self-regulation is a common way to protect adolescents from alcohol marketing exposures. This paper critically reviews research designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the alcohol industry's compliance procedures to manage complaints when alcohol marketing is considered to have violated a self-regulatory code. Peer-reviewed papers were identified through four literature search engines: PubMed, SCOPUS, PsychINFO and CINAHL. Non-peer-reviewed reports produced by public health agencies, alcohol research centers, non-governmental organizations, government research centers and national industry advertising associations were also included. The search process yielded three peer-reviewed papers, seven non-peer reviewed reports published by academic institutes and non-profit organizations and 20 industry reports. The evidence indicates that the complaint process lacks standardization across countries, industry adjudicators may be trained inadequately or biased and few complaints are upheld against advertisements pre-determined to contain violations of a self-regulatory code. The current alcohol industry marketing complaint process used in a wide variety of countries may be ineffective at removing potentially harmful content from the market-place. The process of determining the validity of complaints employed by most industry groups appears to suffer from serious conflict of interest and procedural weaknesses that could compromise objective adjudication of even well-documented complaints. In our opinion the current system of self-regulation needs major modifications if it is to serve public health objectives, and more systematic evaluations of the complaint process are needed. © 2016 Society for the Study of Addiction.

Literacy Is Transformative. The Thirty-Fifth Yearbook A Doubled Peer Reviewed Publication of the Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Szabo, Susan, Ed.; Martin, Linda, Ed.; Haas, Leslie, Ed.; Garza-Garcia, Lizabeth, Ed.

2013-01-01

For their 56th annual meeting, the Association of Educators and Researchers (ALER) met in Grand Rapids, Michigan at the Amway Grand Hotel. This year's conference theme was Literacy Is Transformative, which was also used as the title for this year's Yearbook, Volume 35. Included are double-peer reviewed papers, the presidential address,…

Randomised controlled trials of veterinary homeopathy: characterising the peer-reviewed research literature for systematic review.

PubMed

Mathie, Robert T; Hacke, Daniela; Clausen, Jürgen

2012-10-01

Systematic review of the research evidence in veterinary homeopathy has never previously been carried out. This paper presents the search methods, together with categorised lists of retrieved records, that enable us to identify the literature that is acceptable for future systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in veterinary homeopathy. All randomised and controlled trials of homeopathic intervention (prophylaxis and/or treatment of disease, in any species except man) were appraised according to pre-specified criteria. The following databases were systematically searched from their inception up to and including March 2011: AMED; Carstens-Stiftung Homeopathic Veterinary Clinical Research (HomVetCR) database; CINAHL; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; Embase; Hom-Inform; LILACS; PubMed; Science Citation Index; Scopus. One hundred and fifty records were retrieved; 38 satisfied the acceptance criteria (substantive report of a clinical treatment or prophylaxis trial in veterinary homeopathic medicine randomised and controlled and published in a peer-reviewed journal), and were thus eligible for future planned systematic review. Approximately half of the rejected records were theses. Seven species and 27 different species-specific medical conditions were represented in the 38 papers. Similar numbers of papers reported trials of treatment and prophylaxis (n=21 and n=17 respectively) and were controlled against placebo or other than placebo (n=18, n=20 respectively). Most research focused on non-individualised homeopathy (n=35 papers) compared with individualised homeopathy (n=3). The results provide a complete and clarified view of the RCT literature in veterinary homeopathy. We will systematically review the 38 substantive peer-reviewed journal articles under the main headings: treatment trials; prophylaxis trials. Copyright © 2012 The Faculty of Homeopathy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Concept Validation and Optimization for a Vent-Based Mine-Blast Mitigation System

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-01-17

the proposed concept has a relatively limited (but respectable) ability to reduce the detonation-induced total momentum transferred to, and the...concept, Multidiscipline Modeling in Materials and Structures, (04 2013): 218. doi: 10.1108/MMMS-04-2013-0029 TOTAL : 9 Number of Papers published in peer...for none) (c) Presentations Number of Presentations: Non Peer-Reviewed Conference Proceeding publications (other than abstracts): Received Paper TOTAL

Intergenerational Practice: Contributing to a Conceptual Framework

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Vieira, Sacha; Sousa, Liliana

2016-01-01

The ageing of the European population is creating a new demographic mix, increasing the relevance of intergenerational practice (IGP). To date, however, this field lacks an appropriate conceptual framework. This study aims to contribute to such a framework through an integrative review of peer-reviewed papers reporting on IGPs. Fifteen papers were…

The British research evidence for recovery, papers published between 2006 and 2009 (inclusive). Part two: a review of the grey literature including book chapters and policy documents.

PubMed

Stickley, T; Wright, N

2011-05-01

This paper is the second in a series of two which reviews the current UK evidence base for recovery in mental health. As outlined in the previous paper, over the last 4 years a vast amount has written about recovery in mental health (approximately 60% of all articles). Whereas the first review focused on the peer-reviewed evidence; this paper specifically focuses on the grey/non-peer-reviewed literature. In total, our search strategy yielded the following: 3 books, a further 11 book chapters, 12 papers, 6 policy documents and 3 publications from voluntary sector organizations. Each group of publications was analysed for content, and they are discursively presented by publication group. The findings are then presented as themes in the discussion section. The themes are: social, historical and political critique; philosophy of hope for the individual; individual identity and narrative; models and guidance for mental health practice. We conclude that there is a need for both empirical research into recovery and a clearer theoretical exposition of the concept. © 2010 Blackwell Publishing.

How does peer teaching compare to faculty teaching? A systematic review and meta-analysis (.).

PubMed

Rees, Eliot L; Quinn, Patrick J; Davies, Benjamin; Fotheringham, Victoria

2016-08-01

In undergraduate medical education, peer-teaching has become an established and common method to enhance student learning. Evidence suggests that peer-teaching provides learning benefits for both learners and tutors. We aimed to describe the outcomes for medical students taught by peers through systematic review and meta-analysis of existing literature. Seven databases were searched through 21 terms and their Boolean combinations. Studies reporting knowledge or skills outcomes of students taught by peers compared to those taught by faculty or qualified clinicians were included. Extracted data on students' knowledge and skills outcomes were synthesised through a random effects model meta-analysis. The search yielded 2292 studies. Five hundred and fifty-three duplicates and 1611 irrelevant articles were removed during title-screening. The abstracts of 128 papers were screened against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Ten studies have been included in the review. Meta-analyses showed no significant difference in peer-teaching compared to faculty teaching for knowledge or skills outcomes, standardised mean differences were 0.07 (95% CI: -0.07, 0.21) and 0.11 (95% CI: -0.07, 1.29), respectively. Students taught by peers do not have significantly different outcomes to those taught by faculty. As the process of teaching helps to develop both tutor knowledge and teaching skills, peer-teaching should be supported.

Special Issue: 14th International Symposium on Novel and Nano Materials

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Kim, Woo-Byoung; Choa, Yong-Ho; Ahn, Hyo-Jin; Park, Il-Kyu

2017-09-01

This Special Issue of Applied Surface Science is intended to provide a collection of peer-reviewed contributions presented at the 14th International Symposium on Novel Nano Materials (ISNNM) held in Budapest, Hungary as one of the most beautiful cities in Europe from July 3 to July 8, 2016. All selected papers underwent the regular peer review process as set by the journal of Applied Surface Science and its publisher (Elsevier).

Peer Review of Launch Environments

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Wilson, Timmy R.

2011-01-01

Catastrophic failures of launch vehicles during launch and ascent are currently modeled using equivalent trinitrotoluene (TNT) estimates. This approach tends to over-predict the blast effect with subsequent impact to launch vehicle and crew escape requirements. Bangham Engineering, located in Huntsville, Alabama, assembled a less-conservative model based on historical failure and test data coupled with physical models and estimates. This white paper summarizes NESC's peer review of the Bangham analytical work completed to date.

Exploring the World of Literacy. The Thirty-Sixth Yearbook: A Doubled Peer-Reviewed Publication of the Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Szabo, Susan, Ed.; Haas, Leslie, Ed.; Vasinda, Sheri, Ed.

2014-01-01

For their 57th annual conference, the Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers (ALER) met in Dallas, Texas at Addison Marriott Quorum by the Galleria. This year's conference theme was Exploring the World of Literacy, which was also used as the title for this year's Yearbook, Volume 36. Included are double-peer reviewed papers,…

Predictors of the accuracy of quotation of references in peer-reviewed orthopaedic literature in relation to publications on the scaphoid.

PubMed

Buijze, G A; Weening, A A; Poolman, R W; Bhandari, M; Ring, D

2012-02-01

Using inaccurate quotations can propagate misleading information, which might affect the management of patients. The aim of this study was to determine the predictors of quotation inaccuracy in the peer-reviewed orthopaedic literature related to the scaphoid. We randomly selected 100 papers from ten orthopaedic journals. All references were retrieved in full text when available or otherwise excluded. Two observers independently rated all quotations from the selected papers by comparing the claims made by the authors with the data and expressed opinions of the reference source. A statistical analysis determined which article-related factors were predictors of quotation inaccuracy. The mean total inaccuracy rate of the 3840 verified quotes was 7.6%. There was no correlation between the rate of inaccuracy and the impact factor of the journal. Multivariable analysis identified the journal and the type of study (clinical, biomechanical, methodological, case report or review) as important predictors of the total quotation inaccuracy rate. We concluded that inaccurate quotations in the peer-reviewed orthopaedic literature related to the scaphoid were common and slightly more so for certain journals and certain study types. Authors, reviewers and editorial staff play an important role in reducing this inaccuracy.

Ethics of reviewing scientific publications.

PubMed

Napolitani, Federica; Petrini, Carlo; Garattini, Silvio

2017-05-01

The approval or rejection of scientific publications can have important consequences for scientific knowledge, so considerable responsibility lies on those who have to assess or review them. Today it seems that the peer review process, far from being considered an outdated system to be abandoned, is experiencing a new upturn. This article proposes criteria for the conduct of reviewers and of those who select them. While commenting on new emerging models, it provides practical recommendations for improving the peer-review system, like strengthening the role of guidelines and training and supporting reviewers. The process of peer review is changing, it is getting more open and collaborative, but those same ethical principles which guided it from its very origin should remain untouched and be firmly consolidated. The paper highlights how the ethics of reviewing scientific publications is needed now more than ever, in particular with regard to competence, conflict of interest, willingness to discuss decisions, complete transparency and integrity. Copyright © 2016 European Federation of Internal Medicine. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

A narrative review of undergraduate peer-based healthcare ethics teaching

PubMed Central

Allikmets, Silvia; Knights, Felicity

2015-01-01

Objectives This study explores the literature in establishing the value of undergraduate peer-based healthcare ethics teaching as an educational methodology. Methods A narrative review of the literature concerning peer-based ethics teaching was conducted. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS databases, and the Cochrane Library, were systematically searched for studies of peer-based ethics or professionalism teaching. Selected studies related peer-based teaching to ethics education outcomes. Results Ten publications were identified. Selected studies were varied in their chosen intervention methodology and analysis. Collectively, the identified studies suggest peer-based ethics education is an effective and valued educational methodology in training healthcare professionals. One paper suggests peer-based ethics teaching has advantages over traditional didactic methods. Peer-based ethics teaching also receives positive feedback from student participants. However, the limited literature base demonstrates a clear need for more evaluation of this pedagogy. Conclusions The current literature base suggests that undergraduate peer based healthcare ethics teaching is valuable in terms of efficacy and student satisfaction. We conclude that the medical community should invest in further study in order to capitalise upon the potential of peer-based ethics teaching in undergraduate healthcare education. PMID:26668050

Rating the Quality of Open Textbooks: How Reviewer and Text Characteristics Predict Ratings

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fischer, Lane; Ernst, David; Mason, Stacie

2017-01-01

Using data collected from peer reviews for Open Textbook Library titles, this paper explores questions about rating the quality of open textbooks. The five research questions addressed the relationship between textbook and reviewer characteristics and ratings. Although reviewers gave textbooks high ratings generally, reviewers identified…

2015 CEC Annual Workshop on Electrochemistry

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-12-30

Street Suite 5.300 Austin , TX 78712 -1532 23-Aug-2015 ABSTRACT Number of Papers published in peer-reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer...SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: The Center for Electrochemistry (CEC) at the University of Texas at Austin held its seventh annual electrochemistry...workshop February 7–8, 2015 in Welch Hall on the campus of The University of Texas at Austin . There were 160 registered attendees for this conference

The golden rule of reviewing

USGS Publications Warehouse

McPeek, Mark A.; DeAngelis, Donald L.; Shaw, Ruth G.; Moore, Allen J.; Rausher, Mark D.; Strong, Donald R.; Ellison, Aaron M.; Barrett, Louise; Rieseberg, Loren; Breed, Michael D.; Sullivan, Jack; Osenberg, Craig W.; Holyoak, Marcel; Elgar, Mark A.

2009-01-01

A major bottleneck in the time required to publish a scientific or scholarly paper is the speed with which reviews by peers are returned to journals. Peer review is a reciprocal altruistic system in which each individual may perform every task—editors, reviewers, and authors—at different times. Journals have no way to coerce reviewers to return their critiques faster. To greatly shorten the time to publication, all actors in this altruistic network should abide by the Golden Rule of Reviewing: review for others as you would have others review for you. Say yes to reviewing whenever your duties and schedule allow; provide a thorough, fair, and constructive critique of the work; and do it at your first opportunity regardless of the deadline.

Perceptions of changes in practice following peer review in the National Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Resources and Outcomes Project.

PubMed

Rivas, Carol; Taylor, Stephanie; Abbott, Stephen; Clarke, Aileen; Griffiths, Chris; Roberts, C Michael; Stone, Robert

2012-01-01

The purpose of this paper is to examine perceptions of local service change and concepts of change amongst participants in a UK nationwide randomised controlled trial of informal, structured, reciprocated, multidisciplinary peer review with feedback to promote quality improvement: the National Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Resources and Outcomes Project (NCROP). The paper takes the form of a qualitative study, involving semi-structured interviews with 43 hospital respiratory consultants, nurses and general managers at 24 intervention and 11 control NCROP sites. Thematic analysis resulted in adoption of Joss and Kogan's quality indicators as an analytic framework. The paper finds that peer review was associated with positive changes, which may lead to sustained service improvement. Differences existed in perceptions of change among clinicians and between clinicians and managers. "Generic changes" (e.g. changes in interpersonal relations or cultural changes), were often not perceived as change. The study highlights the significance of generic change in evaluations of change processes. Most participants were clinicians limiting inter-professional comparisons. Some clinical staff failed to recognise changes they accomplished or their significance, perceiving change differently to others within their professional group. These findings have implications for policy and research. They should be considered when developing frameworks for assessing quality improvements and staff engagement with change. This is the first qualitative study exploring participants' experience of peer review for quality improvement in healthcare. The study adds to previous research into UK health service improvement, which has had a more restricted focus on inter-professional differences.

Does research participation make a difference in residency training?

PubMed

Macknin, Jonathan B; Brown, Amy; Marcus, Randall E

2014-01-01

The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery requirements state that an orthopaedic residency must offer at least 5 years of clinical education and some exposure to research. To expose residents to basic research, some programs, including ours, have a research track that allows for 1 year of basic science research. The degree to which research productivity during residency-which may be something that can perhaps be influenced by interventions like research tracks during residency-affects residency graduates' future research contributions is unknown. Our research goals were to determine whether (1) residents who published in a peer-reviewed journal during residency were more likely to publish in their careers after graduation; (2) residents who participated in an elective research year were more likely to publish at least one paper in a peer-reviewed journal during residency; and (3) residents who participated in the research year were more likely to choose academic careers. Using questionnaires, online PubMed searches, and office contact, the career paths (academic versus private practice) and publications in peer-reviewed journals of all 122 Case Western Reserve University orthopaedics residents who completed training from 1987 to 2006 were analyzed. Seventy-five percent of residents who published peer-reviewed research during residency continued with peer-reviewed publications in their careers versus 55% of residents who did not publish during residency (p = 0.02). No difference in career paths was observed between the Case Western Reserve University research and traditional track-trained surgeons. During residency, however, research track-trained surgeons were more likely to publish in peer-reviewed journals (71% versus 41% of traditional track-trained surgeons, p < 0.01). Residents who publish in a peer-reviewed journal during residency are more likely to continue publishing in their future careers as orthopaedic surgeons. Future studies are needed to elucidate the causative factors in the association between publishing in a peer-reviewed journal during training and further contributions later in an orthopaedic surgeon's career.

CRASH-2 Study of Tranexamic Acid to Treat Bleeding in Trauma Patients: A Controversy Fueled by Science and Social Media

PubMed Central

Binz, Sophia; McCollester, Jonathon; Thomas, Scott; Miller, Joseph; Pohlman, Timothy; Waxman, Dan; Shariff, Faisal; Tracy, Rebecca; Walsh, Mark

2015-01-01

This paper reviews the application of tranexamic acid, an antifibrinolytic, to trauma. CRASH-2, a large randomized controlled trial, was the first to show a reduction in mortality and recommend tranexamic acid use in bleeding trauma patients. However, this paper was not without controversy. Its patient recruitment, methodology, and conductance in moderate-to-low income countries cast doubt on its ability to be applied to trauma protocols in countries with mature trauma networks. In addition to traditional vetting in scientific, peer-reviewed journals, CRASH-2 came about at a time when advances in communication technology allowed debate and influence to be leveraged in new forms, specifically through the use of multimedia campaigns, social media, and Internet blogs. This paper presents a comprehensive view of tranexamic acid utilization in trauma from peer-reviewed evidence to novel multimedia influences. PMID:26448897

CRASH-2 Study of Tranexamic Acid to Treat Bleeding in Trauma Patients: A Controversy Fueled by Science and Social Media.

PubMed

Binz, Sophia; McCollester, Jonathon; Thomas, Scott; Miller, Joseph; Pohlman, Timothy; Waxman, Dan; Shariff, Faisal; Tracy, Rebecca; Walsh, Mark

2015-01-01

This paper reviews the application of tranexamic acid, an antifibrinolytic, to trauma. CRASH-2, a large randomized controlled trial, was the first to show a reduction in mortality and recommend tranexamic acid use in bleeding trauma patients. However, this paper was not without controversy. Its patient recruitment, methodology, and conductance in moderate-to-low income countries cast doubt on its ability to be applied to trauma protocols in countries with mature trauma networks. In addition to traditional vetting in scientific, peer-reviewed journals, CRASH-2 came about at a time when advances in communication technology allowed debate and influence to be leveraged in new forms, specifically through the use of multimedia campaigns, social media, and Internet blogs. This paper presents a comprehensive view of tranexamic acid utilization in trauma from peer-reviewed evidence to novel multimedia influences.

Research in Outdoor Education, Volume 6. A Peer-Reviewed Publication of Scholarship First Presented at the Biennial Research Symposium of the Coalition for Education in the Outdoors (6th, Bradford Woods, Indiana, January 11-13, 2002).

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bialeschki, M. Deborah, Ed.; Henderson, Karla A., Ed.; Young, Anderson B., Ed.; Andrejewski, Robert G., Ed.

This volume contains peer-reviewed research articles and abstracts based on papers presented at the sixth biennial research symposium of the Coalition for Education in the Outdoors. Introductory materials include the editors' introduction, "Milestones in Outdoor Education" (Anderson B. Young), and a tribute to the founder of the Indiana University…

Gender aspects in medical publication - the Wiener klinische Wochenschrift.

PubMed

Heckenberg, Andrea; Druml, Christiane

2010-03-01

Medicine is a discipline where there are still pronounced gender imbalances. Whereas worldwide about 50% of beginners in medical schools are female, only few of them reach leading positions. Our aim was to analyze how this situation is reflected in a peer-reviewed general medical-scientific journal. We screened all papers submitted to the Wiener klinische Wochenschrift - The Middle European Journal of Medicine between January 2001 and September 2009, analyzing the percentage of female first authors of submitted papers and accepted papers, the contribution of female authors depending on the type of article and medical specialty, and the percentage of invited female peer reviewers as well as the quality of their reviews. During the period studied, a total of 2507 manuscripts were submitted to Wiener klinische Wochenschrift. 26% of these papers had female first authors, and this proportion increased continuously from 16% in 2001 to 32% in 2007, whereafter it remained constant. The proportion of papers submitted by female first authors was dependent on the medical subspecialty (e.g. 48% female first authors of pediatric papers, 12% female first authors of cardiology papers). There was no difference in the acceptance rate of papers by male and female first authors; however, a somewhat higher rate of papers with female first authors was subject to rapid rejection (21% vs. 16%). Papers with female first authors more often named a different corresponding author than papers with male first authors, and in most of these cases the corresponding author was a man. More than 40% of all submitted original papers, 24% of the review articles, but only 10% of the editorials had female first authors. During the years studied only 5-11% of reviewers were women, despite that the quality of their reviews was generally better than those by men. Among the 21 members of the editorial board only one is a woman. Between 2001 and 2007 the percentage of manuscripts submitted to Wiener klinische Wochenschrift by female authors constantly increased and is now around 30%, reaching almost 50% in some specialties such as pediatrics. Nevertheless, there remains a massive gender imbalance in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift: review papers or invited editorials are only rarely authored by female researchers, a very low percentage of peer reviewers is female - although the quality of their reviews is generally better - and only one member of the editorial board is female. Even though this is mostly a reflection of the general situation in academic medicine, medical journals can and must take action and contribute to the elimination of these gender inequalities.

Acknowledgements to referees.

PubMed

De Angelis, Valerio

2015-01-01

The quality of The Journal of Headache and Pain depends on the qualified and regular collaboration of renowned scientists, who devoted their time to constructively review the submitted articles.We are indebted to the following experts who reviewed papers that completed the peer-reviewing process within 2014.

Open Evaluation: A Vision for Entirely Transparent Post-Publication Peer Review and Rating for Science

PubMed Central

Kriegeskorte, Nikolaus

2012-01-01

The two major functions of a scientific publishing system are to provide access to and evaluation of scientific papers. While open access (OA) is becoming a reality, open evaluation (OE), the other side of the coin, has received less attention. Evaluation steers the attention of the scientific community and thus the very course of science. It also influences the use of scientific findings in public policy. The current system of scientific publishing provides only journal prestige as an indication of the quality of new papers and relies on a non-transparent and noisy pre-publication peer-review process, which delays publication by many months on average. Here I propose an OE system, in which papers are evaluated post-publication in an ongoing fashion by means of open peer review and rating. Through signed ratings and reviews, scientists steer the attention of their field and build their reputation. Reviewers are motivated to be objective, because low-quality or self-serving signed evaluations will negatively impact their reputation. A core feature of this proposal is a division of powers between the accumulation of evaluative evidence and the analysis of this evidence by paper evaluation functions (PEFs). PEFs can be freely defined by individuals or groups (e.g., scientific societies) and provide a plurality of perspectives on the scientific literature. Simple PEFs will use averages of ratings, weighting reviewers (e.g., by H-index), and rating scales (e.g., by relevance to a decision process) in different ways. Complex PEFs will use advanced statistical techniques to infer the quality of a paper. Papers with initially promising ratings will be more deeply evaluated. The continual refinement of PEFs in response to attempts by individuals to influence evaluations in their own favor will make the system ungameable. OA and OE together have the power to revolutionize scientific publishing and usher in a new culture of transparency, constructive criticism, and collaboration. PMID:23087639

Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial

PubMed Central

Cortés, J; Ribera, J M; Cardellach, F; Selva-O’Callaghan, A; Kostov, B; García, L; Cirugeda, L; Altman, D G; González, J A; Sànchez, J A; Miras, F; Urrutia, A; Fonollosa, V; Rey-Joly, C; Vilardell, M

2011-01-01

Objective To investigate the effect of an additional review based on reporting guidelines such as STROBE and CONSORT on quality of manuscripts. Design Masked randomised trial. Population Original research manuscripts submitted to the Medicina Clínica journal from May 2008 to April 2009 and considered suitable for publication. Intervention Control group: conventional peer reviews alone. Intervention group: conventional review plus an additional review looking for missing items from reporting guidelines. Outcomes Manuscript quality, assessed with a 5 point Likert scale (primary: overall quality; secondary: average quality of specific items in paper). Main analysis compared groups as allocated, after adjustment for baseline factors (analysis of covariance); sensitivity analysis compared groups as reviewed. Adherence to reviewer suggestions assessed with Likert scale. Results Of 126 consecutive papers receiving conventional review, 34 were not suitable for publication. The remaining 92 papers were allocated to receive conventional reviews alone (n=41) or additional reviews (n=51). Four papers assigned to the conventional review group deviated from protocol; they received an additional review based on reporting guidelines. We saw an improvement in manuscript quality in favour of the additional review group (comparison as allocated, 0.25, 95% confidence interval –0.05 to 0.54; as reviewed, 0.33, 0.03 to 0.63). More papers with additional reviews than with conventional reviews alone improved from baseline (22 (43%) v eight (20%), difference 23.6% (3.2% to 44.0%), number needed to treat 4.2 (from 2.3 to 31.2), relative risk 2.21 (1.10 to 4.44)). Authors in the additional review group adhered more to suggestions from conventional reviews than to those from additional reviews (average increase 0.43 Likert points (0.19 to 0.67)). Conclusions Additional reviews based on reporting guidelines improve manuscript quality, although the observed effect was smaller than hypothesised and not definitively demonstrated. Authors adhere more to suggestions from conventional reviews than to those from additional reviews, showing difficulties in adhering to high methodological standards at the latest research phases. To boost paper quality and impact, authors should be aware of future requirements of reporting guidelines at the very beginning of their study. Trial registration and protocol Although registries do not include trials of peer review, the protocol design was submitted to sponsored research projects (Instituto de Salud Carlos III, PI081903). PMID:22108262

Strategic Planning, Assessment and Accountability: Their Impact on the Establishment of Centers of Excellence in Academic Departments. AIR 1998 Annual Forum Paper.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Pollicino, Elizabeth B.; Hall, Clover W.

This paper reviews the literature on academic quality programs and examines issues faced at one institution in which two initiatives emphasizing student outcomes and faculty performance as indicators of quality are underway. In its review of the literature the paper focuses on concepts such as total quality management, peer or student evaluation…

Problems with traditional science publishing and finding a wider niche for post-publication peer review.

PubMed

Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A; Dobránszki, Judit

2015-01-01

Science affects multiple basic sectors of society. Therefore, the findings made in science impact what takes place at a commercial level. More specifically, errors in the literature, incorrect findings, fraudulent data, poorly written scientific reports, or studies that cannot be reproduced not only serve as a burden on tax-payers' money, but they also serve to diminish public trust in science and its findings. Therefore, there is every need to fortify the validity of data that exists in the science literature, not only to build trust among peers, and to sustain that trust, but to reestablish trust in the public and private academic sectors that are witnessing a veritable battle-ground in the world of science publishing, in some ways spurred by the rapid evolution of the open access (OA) movement. Even though many science journals, traditional and OA, claim to be peer reviewed, the truth is that different levels of peer review occur, and in some cases no, insufficient, or pseudo-peer review takes place. This ultimately leads to the erosion of quality and importance of science, allowing essentially anything to become published, provided that an outlet can be found. In some cases, predatory OA journals serve this purpose, allowing papers to be published, often without any peer review or quality control. In the light of an explosion of such cases in predatory OA publishing, and in severe inefficiencies and possible bias in the peer review of even respectable science journals, as evidenced by the increasing attention given to retractions, there is an urgent need to reform the way in which authors, editors, and publishers conduct the first line of quality control, the peer review. One way to address the problem is through post-publication peer review (PPPR), an efficient complement to traditional peer-review that allows for the continuous improvement and strengthening of the quality of science publishing. PPPR may also serve as a way to renew trust in scientific findings by correcting the literature. This article explores what is broadly being said about PPPR in the literature, so as to establish awareness and a possible first-tier prototype for the sciences for which such a system is undeveloped or weak.

The ethics of peer and editorial requests for self-citation of their work and journal.

PubMed

Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A

2017-04-01

Peer reviewers are expected to be experts in a field of study and should be versed with the pertinent literature related with the manuscript they are reviewing. Editors might not necessarily be experts in a particular field, but they have the responsibility of overseeing the requests made by peers, and assessing whether these are ethically appropriate, or not. Thus, requests by peers to cite unrelated literature, which may or may not be their own literature, could be unethical, especially if the objective is to improve their own citations or to boost the citations of the journal for which they are reviewing. In contrast, requests to cite pertinent work that is in fact missing from the paper's literature, even if it may be the reviewer or editor's work, or from the same journal, is acceptable. Editors ultimately approve the requests and suggestions made by reviewers, so inappropriate suggestions made by peer reviewers are the responsibility of the editor and journal. There needs to be a bias-free mechanism in place that offers protection to authors who wish to complain, and consequences for editors who do not conduct an impartial decision. Authors have the right to challenge such suggestions, but may face unfair retaliation in the form of a rejection if they resist making changes that they perceive as being inappropriate.

Exhibit 5: Policy Statements and Position Papers.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Journal of Dental Education, 1989

1989-01-01

Policy statements and position papers adopted by the American Association of Dental Schools are presented. Policy statements cover education, research, delivery of care, and health concerns. Position papers concern peer review, freedoms and responsibilities of individuals and institutions, national health programs, interdisciplinary education,…

Comparison of outcomes and other variables between conference abstracts and subsequent peer-reviewed papers involving pre-harvest or abattoir-level interventions against foodborne pathogens.

PubMed

Snedeker, Kate G; Campbell, Mollie; Totton, Sarah C; Guthrie, Alessia; Sargeant, Jan M

2010-11-01

Accuracy in the reporting of studies in conference abstracts is important because the majority of studies in such abstracts are never further detailed in peer-reviewed publications, and data from such abstracts may be used in systematic reviews. Previous research on interventional studies in human biomedicine indicates that there is no guarantee of consistency between a conference abstract and paper in the reporting of results and other key variables. However, no research has been done to determine if this lack of reporting consistency in abstracts and papers extends to interventional studies in pre-harvest/harvest-level food safety. The goal of this study was to compare outcome results and other key variables between conference abstracts and subsequent peer-reviewed publications describing studies of pre-harvest and abattoir-level interventions against foodborne pathogens, and to determine whether the agreement in the results or key variables was associated with the time to full publication. A systematic search identified 59 conference abstracts with matching peer-reviewed papers (matches), and data on variables including outcome measures and results, pathogens, species, interventions, overall efficacy of intervention, sample size and housing were extracted from both the conference abstracts and the papers. The matching of variables between abstracts and papers was described, and logistic regression used to test for associations between variable matching and time to publication. Sample size was only provided for both abstract and paper in 24 matches; the same sample size was reported in 20 of these matches. Most other variables were reported in the majority of abstracts/papers, and with the exception of outcomes and intervention effect, the reporting of variables was relatively consistent. There was no significant difference in the numbers of authors, with the first author the same in 78.3% of matches. Of 231 outcome measures reported in both abstracts and papers, nearly one third (77% or 32.2%) had different results, with 32 changing direction of effect. More than a quarter of matches involved at least one significant change in outcome result. The overall conclusion on the efficacy of the intervention changed in 10.7% of matches. There was a significant association between increased time to publication and differences in the number of authors, and having fewer outcome measures in the abstract reported in the paper. These results suggest that data from conference abstracts should be considered with caution. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

The Use of Mock NSF-type Grant Proposals and Blind Peer Review as the Capstone Assignment in Upper-Level Neurobiology and Cell Biology Courses

PubMed Central

Itagaki, Haruhiko

2013-01-01

Although the use of grant proposals and blind peer review are standard in the natural sciences, their use as a pedagogical tool is rarely mentioned in the literature. As a consequence of dissatisfaction with term papers and literature reviews as the capstone writing experience in 300-level undergraduate biology courses, I have been experimenting with mock NSF-type grant proposals followed by blind peer review as the major assignment in my junior/senior-level classes. The improvement in educational outcomes and competencies due to this assignment appears to be substantial and worth the additional effort on both the students’ and instructor’s parts. Here, I outline the mechanics of this assignment and its advantages and disadvantages as well as the type of curriculum that is required to support this type of capstone assignment. PMID:24319395

Sarcomas in north west England: I. Histopathological peer review.

PubMed

Harris, M; Hartley, A L; Blair, V; Birch, J M; Banerjee, S S; Freemont, A J; McClure, J; McWilliam, L J

1991-08-01

A total of 468 cases of bone, soft tissue and visceral sarcomas (and certain other tumours) diagnosed during the years 1982-84 in North West England were entered in a study of histopathological peer review, incidence and survival. This paper describes the effects of peer review. Material was reviewed by a panel of five pathologists for 413 of the 450 cases originally registered as sarcomas with the Regional Cancer Registry. The diagnosis of sarcomas was confirmed in 76% cases and and there was agreement on sub-type for 53% cases. Measures of agreement were lowest for the two sub-types most commonly diagnosed i.e. malignant fibrous histiocytoma and leiomyosarcoma. Degree of agreement between individual pathologists and final panel diagnosis was also very variable but never less than 65%. It is concluded that second opinion is essential in cases of presumed sarcomas for studies of incidence and aetiology and to ensure that appropriate treatment is selected.

NASA Product Peer Review Process

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Jenks, Ken

2009-01-01

This viewgraph presentation describes NASA's product peer review process. The contents include: 1) Inspection/Peer Review at NASA; 2) Reasons for product peer reviews; 3) Different types of peer reviews; and 4) NASA requirements for peer reviews. This presentation also includes a demonstration of an actual product peer review.

Peer engagement in harm reduction strategies and services: a critical case study and evaluation framework from British Columbia, Canada.

PubMed

Greer, Alissa M; Luchenski, Serena A; Amlani, Ashraf A; Lacroix, Katie; Burmeister, Charlene; Buxton, Jane A

2016-05-27

Engaging people with drug use experience, or 'peers,' in decision-making helps to ensure harm reduction services reflect current need. There is little published on the implementation, evaluation, and effectiveness of meaningful peer engagement. This paper aims to describe and evaluate peer engagement in British Columbia from 2010-2014. A process evaluation framework specific to peer engagement was developed and used to assess progress made, lessons learned, and future opportunities under four domains: supportive environment, equitable participation, capacity building and empowerment, and improved programming and policy. The evaluation was conducted by reviewing primary and secondary qualitative data including focus groups, formal documents, and meeting minutes. Peer engagement was an iterative process that increased and improved over time as a consequence of reflexive learning. Practical ways to develop trust, redress power imbalances, and improve relationships were crosscutting themes. Lack of support, coordination, and building on existing capacity were factors that could undermine peer engagement. Peers involved across the province reviewed and provided feedback on these results. Recommendations from this evaluation can be applied to other peer engagement initiatives in decision-making settings to improve relationships between peers and professionals and to ensure programs and policies are relevant and equitable.

Asteroids, comets, meteors, and their interrelations. Part II: Editorial review

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Muinonen, Karri; Granvik, Mikael; Penttilä, Antti; Gritsevich, Maria

2016-04-01

The Asteroids, Comets, Meteors 2014 (ACM 2014) conference was organized in Helsinki in June 30-July 4, 2014, with the first collection of the peer-reviewed papers published in December 2015 in the Special Issue of Planetary and Space Science (Muinonen et al., 2015). The present issue contains the second collection of papers from ACM 2014.

Research on SNS and Education: The State of the Art and Its Challenges

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Rodríguez-Hoyos, Carlos; Haya Salmón, Ignacio; Fernández-Díaz, Elia

2015-01-01

This paper presents, for further discussion, a review of the scientific literature produced internationally on the use of Social Network Sites (SNS) in different levels of education and settings. A total of 62 articles published in international scientific journals with peer review have been analysed. The main objective of this paper is to discuss…

Appendix A: Policy Statements and Position Papers

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Journal of Dental Education, 1980

1980-01-01

Policy statements and position papers adopted by the American Association of Dental Schools are presented. They cover peer review, freedoms and responsibilities of individuals and institutions, national health programs, interdisciplinary education, and use of ionizing radiation. (MLW)

How to Write Articles that Get Published

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Publications are essential for sharing knowledge, and career advancement. Writing a research paper is a challenge. Most graduate programmes in medicine do not offer hands-on training in writing and publishing in scientific journals. Beginners find the art and science of scientific writing a daunting task. ‘How to write a scientific paper?, Is there a sure way to successful publication ?’ are the frequently asked questions. This paper aims to answer these questions and guide a beginner through the process of planning, writing, and correction of manuscripts that attract the readers and satisfies the peer reviewers. A well-structured paper in lucid and correct language that is easy to read and edit, and strictly follows the instruction to the authors from the editors finds favour from the readers and avoids outright rejection. Making right choice of journal is a decision critical to acceptance. Perseverance through the peer review process is the road to successful publication. PMID:25386508

Twenty years' research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: a meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies.

PubMed

Hawker, D S; Boulton, M J

2000-05-01

Cross-sectional quantitative designs are often used to investigate whether peer victimization is positively related to psychosocial maladjustment. This paper presents a meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies, published between 1978 and 1997, of the association of peer victimization with psychosocial maladjustment. Mean effect sizes were calculated for the association between peer victimization and each form of maladjustment (depression, loneliness, generalized and social anxiety, and global and social self-worth) assessed. The results suggested that victimization is most strongly related to depression, and least strongly related to anxiety. There was no evidence that victimization is more strongly related to social than to psychological forms of maladjustment. Effect sizes were stronger when the same informants were used to assess both victimization and maladjustment than when different informants were used. There were some design limitations to the studies reviewed, but all together their results provide a strong background for more complex research into the course and treatment of victims' distress.

Wolverine conservation and management.

Treesearch

L.F. Ruggiero; K.S. McKelvey; K.B. Aubry; J.P. Copeland; D.H. Pletscher; M.G. Hornocker

2007-01-01

This Special Section includes 8 peer-reviewed papers on the wolverine (Gulo gulo) in southern North America. These papers provide new information on current and historical distribution, habitat relations at multiple spatial scales, and interaction with humans. In aggregate, these papers substantially increase our knowledge of wolverine ecology and...

Wolverine conservation and management

Treesearch

Leonard F. Ruggiero; Kevin S. Mckelvey; Keith B. Aubry; Jeffrey P. Copeland; Daniel H. Pletscher; Maurice G. Hornocker

2007-01-01

This Special Section includes 8 peer-reviewed papers on the wolverine (Gulo gulo) in southern North America. These papers provide new information on current and historical distribution, habitat relations at multiple spatial scales, and interactions with humans. In aggregate, these papers substantially increase our knowledge of wolverine ecology and...

Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PubMed

Bruce, Rachel; Chauvin, Anthony; Trinquart, Ludovic; Ravaud, Philippe; Boutron, Isabelle

2016-06-10

The peer review process is a cornerstone of biomedical research. We aimed to evaluate the impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review for biomedical publications. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and WHO ICTRP databases, for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review for biomedical publications. We selected 22 reports of randomized controlled trials, for 25 comparisons evaluating training interventions (n = 5), the addition of a statistical peer reviewer (n = 2), use of a checklist (n = 2), open peer review (i.e., peer reviewers informed that their identity would be revealed; n = 7), blinded peer review (i.e., peer reviewers blinded to author names and affiliation; n = 6) and other interventions to increase the speed of the peer review process (n = 3). Results from only seven RCTs were published since 2004. As compared with the standard peer review process, training did not improve the quality of the peer review report and use of a checklist did not improve the quality of the final manuscript. Adding a statistical peer review improved the quality of the final manuscript (standardized mean difference (SMD), 0.58; 95 % CI, 0.19 to 0.98). Open peer review improved the quality of the peer review report (SMD, 0.14; 95 % CI, 0.05 to 0.24), did not affect the time peer reviewers spent on the peer review (mean difference, 0.18; 95 % CI, -0.06 to 0.43), and decreased the rate of rejection (odds ratio, 0.56; 95 % CI, 0.33 to 0.94). Blinded peer review did not affect the quality of the peer review report or rejection rate. Interventions to increase the speed of the peer review process were too heterogeneous to allow for pooling the results. Despite the essential role of peer review, only a few interventions have been assessed in randomized controlled trials. Evidence-based peer review needs to be developed in biomedical journals.

Proceedings of the ocean drilling program: New Jersey continental slope and rise

USGS Publications Warehouse

Mountain, Gregory S.; Miller, Kenneth G.; Blum, Peter; Alm, Per-Gunnar; Aubry, Marie-Pierre; Burckle, Lloyd H.; Christensen, Beth A.; Compton, J.; Damuth, John E.; Deconinck, Jean-François; De Verteuil, L.; Fulthorpe, Craig S.; Gartner, Stefan; Guerin, Gilles; Hesselbo, Stephen P.; Hoppie, Bryce; Katz, Miriam E.; Kotake, Nobuhiro; Lorenzo, Juan Manuel; McCracken, Stuart; McHugh, Cecilia; Quayle, Wendy C.; Saito, Yoshiki; Snyder, Scott W.; ten Kate, Warner G.; Urbat, M.; Van Fossen, Mickey C.; Vecsei, Adam

1996-01-01

The Scientific Results volumes of the Proceedings of the Ocean Drilling Program contain specialty papers presenting the results of extensive research in various aspects of scientific ocean drilling. The authors of the papers published in this volume have enabled future investigators to gain ready access to the results of their research, and I acknowledge their contributions with thanks. Each paper submitted to a Scientific Results volume undergoes rigorous peer review by at least two specialists in the author's research field. A paper typically goes through at least one revision cycle before being accepted for publication. We seek to maintain a peer-review system comparable to those of the most highly regarded journals in the geological sciences. Each Scientific Results volume has an Editorial Review Board that is responsible for obtaining peer reviews of papers submitted to the volume. This board usually is made up of the two co-chief scientists for the cruise, the ODP staff scientist for the cruise, and one external specialist who is familiar with the geology of the area investigated. In addition, the volume has an ODP staff editor who assists with manuscripts that require English-language attention and who coordinates volume assembly. Scientific Results volumes may also contain short reports of useful data that are not ready for final interpretation. Papers of this type, which may be found together in a section in the back of the volume, are called Data Reports and include no interpretation of results. Data Report papers are read carefully by at least one specialist to make sure they are well organized, comprehensive, and discuss the techniques or procedures thoroughly. To acknowledge the contributions made by this volume's Editorial Review Board, the Board members are designated Editors of the volume and are so listed on the title page. Reviewers of manuscripts for this volume, whose efforts are so essential to the success of the publication, are listed in the front of the book, without attribution to a particular manuscript. On behalf of the Ocean Drilling Program, I extend sincere appreciation to members of the Editorial Review Boards and to the reviewers for giving their generous contribution of time and effort, which ensures that only papers of high scientific quality are published in the Proceedings.

An open science peer review oath.

PubMed

Aleksic, Jelena; Alexa, Adrian; Attwood, Teresa K; Chue Hong, Neil; Dahlö, Martin; Davey, Robert; Dinkel, Holger; Förstner, Konrad U; Grigorov, Ivo; Hériché, Jean-Karim; Lahti, Leo; MacLean, Dan; Markie, Michael L; Molloy, Jenny; Schneider, Maria Victoria; Scott, Camille; Smith-Unna, Richard; Vieira, Bruno Miguel

2014-01-01

One of the foundations of the scientific method is to be able to reproduce experiments and corroborate the results of research that has been done before. However, with the increasing complexities of new technologies and techniques, coupled with the specialisation of experiments, reproducing research findings has become a growing challenge. Clearly, scientific methods must be conveyed succinctly, and with clarity and rigour, in order for research to be reproducible. Here, we propose steps to help increase the transparency of the scientific method and the reproducibility of research results: specifically, we introduce a peer-review oath and accompanying manifesto. These have been designed to offer guidelines to enable reviewers (with the minimum friction or bias) to follow and apply open science principles, and support the ideas of transparency, reproducibility and ultimately greater societal impact. Introducing the oath and manifesto at the stage of peer review will help to check that the research being published includes everything that other researchers would need to successfully repeat the work. Peer review is the lynchpin of the publishing system: encouraging the community to consciously (and conscientiously) uphold these principles should help to improve published papers, increase confidence in the reproducibility of the work and, ultimately, provide strategic benefits to authors and their institutions.

Rail-suicide prevention: Systematic literature review of evidence-based activities.

PubMed

Barker, Emma; Kolves, Kairi; De Leo, Diego

2017-09-01

Rail-related suicide is a relatively rare but extremely lethal method of suicide that can have far-reaching consequences. The aim of the systematic literature review was to analyze the existing literature on the effectiveness of rail-suicide prevention activities. Databases used were Scopus, Medline, and ProQuest. The search terms used were "suicid*," "prevent*," "rail*," or "train." English-language studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 1 January 1990 and 30 April 2015 that presented an overview of rail-related suicide prevention activities and included an analysis of effectiveness were used. We retrieved 1,229 results in the original search with nine papers presenting empirical evidence. Three studies in the review analyzed the effectiveness of platform screen doors and another three analyzed the installation of blue lights, two papers analyzed the effectiveness of suicide pits, and one included the influence of media reporting guidelines. Platform screen doors, suicide pits, blue lights, and improved media guidelines all have the potential to reduce rail-related suicide events and deaths. The review was restricted to English-language peer-reviewed papers published within the chosen time period. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

The Value of Peer Feedback Opportunities for Students in Writing Intensive Classes

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kennette, Lynne N.; Frank, Nichole M.

2013-01-01

The present study was conducted to examine the usefulness of peer feedback on APA-style research papers in a writing-intensive class. Subsequent to APA training, students were asked to review and provide feedback on a classmate's APA-style research report for both content and formatting. Performance on this research report was then compared to…

Combining Ontologies and Peer-to-Peer Technologies for Inter-Organizational Knowledge Management

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Stuckenschmidt, Heiner; Siberski, Wolf; Nejdl, Wolfgang

2005-01-01

Purpose: The purpose of the paper is to review the characteristics of systems that combine P2P technology with explicit ontologies and assess the benefits of these technologies for inter-organizational knowledge management. Design/methodology/approach: We characterize existing technologies with respect to a number of aspects that are relevant to…

Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author's perspective.

PubMed

Huisman, Janine; Smits, Jeroen

2017-01-01

To gain insight into the duration and quality of the scientific peer review process, we analyzed data from 3500 review experiences submitted by authors to the SciRev.sc website. Aspects studied are duration of the first review round, total review duration, immediate rejection time, the number, quality, and difficulty of referee reports, the time it takes authors to revise and resubmit their manuscript, and overall quality of the experience. We find clear differences in these aspects between scientific fields, with Medicine, Public health, and Natural sciences showing the shortest durations and Mathematics and Computer sciences, Social sciences, Economics and Business, and Humanities the longest. One-third of journals take more than 2 weeks for an immediate (desk) rejection and one sixth even more than 4 weeks. This suggests that besides the time reviewers take, inefficient editorial processes also play an important role. As might be expected, shorter peer review processes and those of accepted papers are rated more positively by authors. More surprising is that peer review processes in the fields linked to long processes are rated highest and those in the fields linked to short processes lowest. Hence authors' satisfaction is apparently influenced by their expectations regarding what is common in their field. Qualitative information provided by the authors indicates that editors can enhance author satisfaction by taking an independent position vis-à-vis reviewers and by communicating well with authors.

Operational research training: the course and beyond

PubMed Central

Harries, A. D.; Reid, A. J.; Edginton, M.; Hinderaker, S. G.; Satyanarayana, S.; Enarson, D. A.; Zachariah, R.

2012-01-01

Insufficient operational research (OR) is generated within programmes and health systems in low- and middle-income countries, partly due to limited capacity and skills to undertake and publish OR in peer-reviewed journals. To address this, a three-module course was piloted by the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease and Médecins Sans Frontières in 2009–2010, with 12 participants. Five received mentorship and financial support as OR Fellows. Eleven of 12 participants submitted a paper to a peer-reviewed journal within 4 weeks of the end of the course. Evaluation shows that participants continued OR activities beyond the course. During the subsequent year, they submitted and/or published 19 papers, made 10 posters and/or presentations, and many participated in training, mentoring and/or paper reviewing. Some described changes in policy and practice influenced by their research, and changes in their organisation’s approach to OR. They provided recommendations for improving and expanding OR. We conclude that participants can, with certain enabling conditions, take research questions through to publication, use skills gained to undertake and promote OR thereafter and contribute to improvement in policy and practice. An internet-based network will provide participants and graduates with a platform for collection of course outcomes and ongoing mentor- and peer-based support, resources and incentives. PMID:26392960

Determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among children and adolescents: a review of the literature. Part II: qualitative studies.

PubMed

Krølner, Rikke; Rasmussen, Mette; Brug, Johannes; Klepp, Knut-Inge; Wind, Marianne; Due, Pernille

2011-10-14

Large proportions of children do not fulfil the World Health Organization recommendation of eating at least 400 grams of fruit and vegetables (FV) per day. To promote an increased FV intake among children it is important to identify factors which influence their consumption. Both qualitative and quantitative studies are needed. Earlier reviews have analysed evidence from quantitative studies. The aim of this paper is to present a systematic review of qualitative studies of determinants of children's FV intake. Relevant studies were identified by searching Anthropology Plus, Cinahl, CSA illumine, Embase, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science using combinations of synonyms for FV intake, children/adolescents and qualitative methods as search terms. The literature search was completed by December 1st 2010. Papers were included if they applied qualitative methods to investigate 6-18-year-olds' perceptions of factors influencing their FV consumption. Quantitative studies, review studies, studies reported in other languages than English, and non-peer reviewed or unpublished manuscripts were excluded. The papers were reviewed systematically using standardised templates for summary of papers, quality assessment, and synthesis of findings across papers. The review included 31 studies, mostly based on US populations and focus group discussions. The synthesis identified the following potential determinants for FV intake which supplement the quantitative knowledge base: Time costs; lack of taste guarantee; satiety value; appropriate time/occasions/settings for eating FV; sensory and physical aspects; variety, visibility, methods of preparation; access to unhealthy food; the symbolic value of food for image, gender identity and social interaction with peers; short term outcome expectancies. The review highlights numerous potential determinants which have not been investigated thoroughly in quantitative studies. Future large scale quantitative studies should attempt to quantify the importance of these factors. Further, mechanisms behind gender, age and socioeconomic differences in FV consumption are proposed which should be tested quantitatively in order to better tailor interventions to vulnerable groups. Finally, the review provides input to the conceptualisation and measurements of concepts (i.e. peer influence, availability in schools) which may refine survey instruments and theoretical frameworks concerning eating behaviours.

Community pharmacy supply of emergency hormonal contraception: a structured literature review of international evidence.

PubMed

Anderson, C; Blenkinsopp, A

2006-01-01

We could find no previous published review of the evidence relating to pharmacy supply of emergency hormonal contraception (EHC). Our objectives were to review, summarize and evaluate the peer-reviewed evidence relating to community pharmacy supply of EHC both in the UK and internationally. Systematic searches were conducted for peer-reviewed international research from January 1990 to January 2005. The UK Health Development Agency's Evidence Base 2000 standards and the evidence categories used by the UK Department of Health were applied to each paper. We included 24 peer-reviewed papers. There was one randomized controlled trial (RCT); the remainder of the studies were qualitative or observational studies. Pharmacy supply of EHC enables most women to receive it within 24 h of unprotected sexual intercourse. Services were highly rated by women. One RCT showed that improving access to EHC did not reduce the use of other contraceptives, lead to an increase in risky sexual behaviour or increase the incidence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Users expressed some concerns about the appropriateness of receiving additional pharmacist advice regarding future contraception use and STIs. One study found pharmacy supply had led to a decrease in attendances at accident and emergency departments. There is good evidence that community pharmacy EHC services provide timely access to treatment and are highly rated by women.

28 CFR 34.109 - Qualifications of peer reviewers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... Section 34.109 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer Review § 34.109 Qualifications of peer reviewers. The general reviewer qualification criteria to...). Additional details concerning peer reviewer qualifications are provided in the OJJDP “Peer Review Guideline”. ...

Big Ideas: A Review of Astronomy Education Research 1974-2008

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Lelliott, Anthony; Rollnick, Marissa

2010-01-01

This paper reviews astronomy education research carried out among school students, teachers, and museum visitors over a 35-year period from 1974 until 2008. One hundred and three peer-reviewed journal articles were examined, the majority of whose research dealt with conceptions of astronomical phenomena with 40% investigating intervention…

Open Peer Review by a Selected-Papers Network

PubMed Central

Lee, Christopher

2011-01-01

A selected-papers (SP) network is a network in which researchers who read, write, and review articles subscribe to each other based on common interests. Instead of reviewing a manuscript in secret for the Editor of a journal, each reviewer simply publishes his review (typically of a paper he wishes to recommend) to his SP network subscribers. Once the SP network reviewers complete their review decisions, the authors can invite any journal editor they want to consider these reviews and initial audience size, and make a publication decision. Since all impact assessment, reviews, and revisions are complete, this decision process should be short. I show how the SP network can provide a new way of measuring impact, catalyze the emergence of new subfields, and accelerate discovery in existing fields, by providing each reader a fine-grained filter for high-impact. I present a three phase plan for building a basic SP network, and making it an effective peer review platform that can be used by journals, conferences, users of repositories such as arXiv, and users of search engines such as PubMed. I show how the SP network can greatly improve review and dissemination of research articles in areas that are not well-supported by existing journals. Finally, I illustrate how the SP network concept can work well with existing publication services such as journals, conferences, arXiv, PubMed, and online citation management sites. PMID:22291635

Collegiate Aviation Review 1998.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Carney, Thomas Q., Ed.; Luedtke, Jacqueline R., Ed.; Johnson, Jeffrey A., Ed.

1998-01-01

This document contains four peer-reviewed papers about university-level aviation education that were presented at the 1998 Fall Education Conference of the University Aviation Association. "Setting the Foundation for Effective Learning: Utilizing the Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor Domains to Establish Rigorous Performance Learning…

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation

PubMed Central

Jadad, Alejandro R; Moher, Michael; Browman, George P; Booker, Lynda; Sigouin, Christopher; Fuentes, Mario; Stevens, Robert

2000-01-01

Objective To evaluate the clinical, methodological, and reporting aspects of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the treatment of asthma and to compare those published by the Cochrane Collaboration with those published in paper based journals. Design Analysis of studies identified from Medline, CINAHL, HealthSTAR, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, personal collections, and reference lists. Studies Articles describing a systematic review or a meta-analysis of the treatment of asthma that were published as a full report, in any language or format, in a peer reviewed journal or the Cochrane Library. Main outcome measures General characteristics of studies reviewed and methodological characteristics (sources of articles; language restrictions; format, design, and publication status of studies included; type of data synthesis; and methodological quality). Results 50 systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. More than half were published in the past two years. Twelve reviews were published in the Cochrane Library and 38 were published in 22 peer reviewed journals. Forced expiratory volume in one second was the most frequently used outcome, but few reviews evaluated the effect of treatment on costs or patient preferences. Forty reviews were judged to have serious or extensive flaws. All six reviews associated with industry were in this group. Seven of the 10 most rigorous reviews were published in the Cochrane Library. Conclusions Most reviews published in peer reviewed journals or funded by industry have serious methodological flaws that limit their value to guide decisions. Cochrane reviews are more rigorous and better reported than those published in peer reviewed journals. PMID:10688558

Caries and periodontal disease in Indigenous adults in Australia: a case of limited and non-contemporary data.

PubMed

de Silva, Andrea M; Martin-Kerry, Jacqueline M; McKee, Katherine; Cole, Deborah

2017-08-01

Objective The aim of the present study was to identify all evidence about the prevalence and severity of clinically measured caries and periodontal disease in Indigenous adults in Australia published in peer-reviewed journals and to summarise trends over time. In addition, we examined whether the studies investigated associations between putative risk factors and levels of caries and periodontal disease. Methods PubMed was searched in September 2014, with no date limitations, for published peer-reviewed articles reporting the prevalence rates and/or severity of caries and periodontal disease in Indigenous adults living in Australia. Articles were excluded if measurement was not based on clinical assessment and if oral disease was reported only in a specific or targeted sample, and not the general population. Results The search identified 18 papers (reporting on 10 primary studies) that met the inclusion criteria. The studies published clinical data about dental caries and/or periodontal disease in Australian Indigenous adults. The studies reported on oral health for Indigenous adults living in rural (40%), urban (10%) and both urban and rural (50%) locations. Included studies showed that virtually all Indigenous adults living in rural locations had periodontal disease. The data also showed caries prevalence ranged from 46% to 93%. Although 10 studies were identified, the peer-reviewed literature was extremely limited and no published studies were identified that provided statistics for a significant proportion of Australia (Victoria, Tasmania, Queensland or the Australian Capital Territory). There were also inconsistencies in how the data were reported between studies, making comparisons difficult. Conclusions This review highlights a lack of robust and contemporary data to inform the development of policies and programs to address the disparities in oral health in Indigenous populations living in many parts of Australia. What is known about the topic? Many studies report that Indigenous people in Australia have poorer general health compared with non-Indigenous people. What does this paper add? This paper documents the available caries and periodontal disease prevalence and experience for Indigenous adults in Australia published in peer-reviewed journals. It demonstrates significant limitations in the data, including no data in several large Australian jurisdictions, inconsistency with reporting methods and most data available being for Indigenous adults living in rural locations. Therefore, the oral health data available in the peer-reviewed literature do not reflect the situation of all Indigenous people living in Australia. What are the implications for practitioners? It is important for oral health practitioners to have access to current and relevant statistics on the oral health of Indigenous Australians. However, we have highlighted significant evidence gaps for this population group within the peer-reviewed literature and identified the limitations of the available data upon which decisions are currently being made. This paper also identifies ways to capture and report oral health data in the future to enable more meaningful comparisons and relevance for use in policy development.

HST Peer Review, Where We've Been, Where We Are Now and Possibly Where the Future Lies

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Blacker, Brett S.; Macchetto, Duccio; Meylan, Georges; Stanghellini, Letizia; van der Marel, Roeland P.

2002-12-01

In some eyes, the Phase I proposal selection process is the most important activity handled by the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI). Proposing for HST and other missions consists of requesting observing time and/or archival research funding. This step is called Phase I, where the scientific merit of a proposal is considered by a community based peer-review process. Accepted proposals then proceed thru Phase II, where the observations are specified in sufficient detail to enable scheduling on the telescope. Each cycle the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) Telescope Allocation Committee (TAC) reviews proposals and awards observing time that is valued at $0.5B, when the total expenditures for HST over its lifetime are figured on an annual basis. This is in fact a very important endeavor that we continue to fine-tune and tweak. This process is open to the science community and we constantly receive comments and praise for this process. Several cycles ago we instituted several significant changes to the process to address concerns such as: Fewer, broader panels, with redundancy to avoid conflicts of interest; Redefinition of the TAC role, to focus on Larger programs; and incentives for the panels to award time to medium sized proposals. In the last cycle, we offered new initiatives to try to enhance the scientific output of the telescope. Some of these initiatives were: Hubble Treasury Program; AR Legacy Program; and the AR Theory Program. This paper will outline the current HST Peer review process. We will discuss why we made changes and how we made changes from our original system. We will also discuss some ideas as to where we may go in the future to generate a stronger science program for HST and to reduce the burden on the science community. This paper is an update of the status of the HST Peer Review Process that was described in the published paper "Evolution of the HST Proposal Selection Process".

Peer reviewing e-learning: opportunities, challenges, and solutions.

PubMed

Ruiz, Jorge G; Candler, Chris; Teasdale, Thomas A

2007-05-01

Peer review is the foundation of academic publication and a necessary step in the scrutiny of any scholarly work. Simply defined, peer review is the attentive, unbiased assessment of any scholarly work that is submitted for formal scrutiny. Although medical school faculty increasingly use technology in clinical teaching, e-learning materials are often not subjected to a rigorous peer review process. The authors contrast peer review of e-learning materials with that of print materials, describe peer review issues regarding e-learning materials, propose approaches to address the challenges of peer review of e-learning materials, and outline directions for refinement of the e-learning peer review process. At its core, the peer review of e-learning materials should not differ substantially from that of traditional manuscripts. However, e-learning introduces new demands that impel reviewers to consider aspects that are unique to educational technology, including pedagogy, format, usability, navigation, interactivity, delivery, ease of updating, distribution, and access. Four approaches are offered to ease the burden and improve the quality of e-learning peer review: develop peer review training, embrace multidisciplinary peer review, develop guidelines, and provide incentives and compensation. The authors conclude with suggestions about peer review research.

External quality mechanisms for health care: summary of the ExPeRT project on visitatie, accreditation, EFQM and ISO assessment in European Union countries. External Peer Review Techniques. European Foundation for Quality Management. International Organization for Standardization.

PubMed

Shaw, C D

2000-06-01

This paper is a summary of the operation, findings and conclusions of a European Union project on external peer review techniques, termed 'ExPeRT', to research the scope, mechanisms and use of external quality mechanisms in the improvement of health care. Many of the themes outlined are described in detail in other papers that have been prepared specifically for this issue of The International Journal for Quality in Health Care. Although the emphasis of this project and of this issue of the Journal is on Europe, the conclusions are more widely relevant.

28 CFR 34.106 - Number of peer reviewers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Number of peer reviewers. 34.106 Section 34.106 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer Review § 34.106 Number of peer reviewers. The number of peer reviewers will vary by program (as...

28 CFR 34.106 - Number of peer reviewers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false Number of peer reviewers. 34.106 Section 34.106 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer Review § 34.106 Number of peer reviewers. The number of peer reviewers will vary by program (as...

Policy Statements and Position Papers.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Journal of Dental Education, 1983

1983-01-01

Policy statements and position papers are presented that are intended as recommendations and guidelines for member institutions. They cover education, research, delivery of care, peer review, freedoms and responsibilities of individuals and institutions, national health programs, interdisciplinary education, radiation, and due process. (MLW)

WE-E-218-01: Writing and Reviewing Papers in Medical Physics.

PubMed

Hendee, W; Slattery, P; Rogers, D; Karellas, A

2012-06-01

There is an art to writing a scientific paper so that it communicates accurately, succinctly, and comprehensively. Developing this art comes with experience, and sharing that experience with younger physicists is an obligation of senior scientists, especially those with editorial responsibilities for the journal. In this workshop, the preparation of a scientific manuscript will be dissected so participants can appreciate how each part is developed and then assembled into a complete paper. Then the review process for the paper will be discussed, including how to examine a paper and write an insightful and constructive review. Finally, we will consider the challenge of accommodating the concerns and recommendations of a reviewer in preparing a revision of the paper. A second feature of the workshop will be a discussion of the process of electronic submission of a paper for consideration by Medical Physics. The web-based PeerX-Press engine for manuscript submission and management will be examined, with attention to special features such as epaps and line-referencing. Finally, new features of Medical Physics will be explained, such as Vision 20/20 manuscripts, Physics Letters and the standardized formatting of book reviews. 1. Improve the participants' abilities to write a scientific manuscript. 2. Understand the review process for Medical Physics manuscripts and how to participate in and benefit from it. 3. Appreciate the many features of the PeerX-Press electronic management process for Medical Physics manuscripts. 4. Develop a knowledge of new features of Medical Physics. © 2012 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Do peer review models affect clinicians' trust in journals? A survey of junior doctors.

PubMed

Patel, Jigisha; Pierce, Mary; Boughton, Stephanie L; Baldeweg, Stephanie E

2017-01-01

The aim of this survey was to determine the level of awareness and understanding of peer review and peer review models amongst junior hospital doctors and whether this influences clinical decision-making. A 30-question online anonymous survey was developed aimed at determining awareness of peer review models and the purpose of peer review, perceived trustworthiness of different peer review models and the role of peer review in clinical decision-making. It was sent to 800 trainee doctors in medical specialties on the University College London Partners trainee database. The response rate was (178/800) 22%. Most respondents were specialist registrars. Checking that research is conducted correctly (152/178, 85%) and the data interpreted correctly (148/178, 83%) were viewed as the most important purposes of peer review. Most respondents were aware of open (133/178, 75%), double-blind (125/178, 70%) and single-blind peer review (121/178, 68%). 101/178 (57%) had heard of collaborative, 87/178 (49%) of post publication and 29/178 (16%) of decoupled peer review. Of those who were aware of double-blind, single-blind open and collaborative peer review, 85 (68%), 82 (68%), 74 (56%) and 24 (24%), respectively, understood how they worked. The NEJM , Lancet and The BMJ were deemed to have most trustworthy peer review, 137/178 (77%), 129/178 (72%) and 115/178 (65%), respectively. That peer review had taken place was important for a journal content to be used for clinical decision-making 152/178 (85%), but the ability to see peer review reports was not as important 22/178 (12%). Most felt there was a need for peer review training and that this should be at the specialist registrar stage of training. Junior hospital doctors view peer review to be important as a means of quality control, but do not value the ability to scrutinize peer review themselves. The unquestioning acceptance of peer review as final validation in the field of medicine emphasises not only the responsibility held by medical journals to ensure peer review is done well but also the need to raise awareness amongst the medical community of the limitations of the current peer review process.

Guest Editorial

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Saravanan, Padmanapan; Babu, Dhanakotti Rajan; Chelvane, Jeyaramane Arout; Vizhi, Rajasekaran Ezhil

2016-11-01

This special issue of Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials (JMMM) is a collection of selected papers presented at the International Conference on Magnetic Materials and Applications (ICMAGMA-2015), held at VIT University, Vellore, India during December 2 - 4, 2015. The papers were screened and selected for publication after an intensive peer review, with a minimum of two reviewers for every paper. The editors would like to place on record the unstinted support received from over 100 reviewers which culminated in the selection of 49 manuscripts for publication. We take this opportunity to thank everyone for participating in the ICMAGMA-2015.

Clinical peer review in the United States: history, legal development and subsequent abuse.

PubMed

Vyas, Dinesh; Hozain, Ahmed E

2014-06-07

The Joint Commission on Accreditation requires hospitals to conduct peer review to retain accreditation. Despite the intended purpose of improving quality medical care, the peer review process has suffered several setbacks throughout its tenure. In the 1980s, abuse of peer review for personal economic interest led to a highly publicized multimillion-dollar verdict by the United States Supreme Court against the perpetrating physicians and hospital. The verdict led to decreased physician participation for fear of possible litigation. Believing that peer review was critical to quality medical care, Congress subsequently enacted the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) granting comprehensive legal immunity for peer reviewers to increase participation. While serving its intended goal, HCQIA has also granted peer reviewers significant immunity likely emboldening abuses resulting in Sham Peer Reviews. While legal reform of HCQIA is necessary to reduce sham peer reviews, further measures including the need for standardization of the peer review process alongside external organizational monitoring are critical to improving peer review and reducing the prevalence of sham peer reviews.

Clinical peer review in the United States: History, legal development and subsequent abuse

PubMed Central

Vyas, Dinesh; Hozain, Ahmed E

2014-01-01

The Joint Commission on Accreditation requires hospitals to conduct peer review to retain accreditation. Despite the intended purpose of improving quality medical care, the peer review process has suffered several setbacks throughout its tenure. In the 1980s, abuse of peer review for personal economic interest led to a highly publicized multimillion-dollar verdict by the United States Supreme Court against the perpetrating physicians and hospital. The verdict led to decreased physician participation for fear of possible litigation. Believing that peer review was critical to quality medical care, Congress subsequently enacted the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) granting comprehensive legal immunity for peer reviewers to increase participation. While serving its intended goal, HCQIA has also granted peer reviewers significant immunity likely emboldening abuses resulting in Sham Peer Reviews. While legal reform of HCQIA is necessary to reduce sham peer reviews, further measures including the need for standardization of the peer review process alongside external organizational monitoring are critical to improving peer review and reducing the prevalence of sham peer reviews. PMID:24914357

Practical and Theoretical Requirements for Controlling Rater Stringency in Peer Review.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cason, Gerald J.; Cason, Carolyn L.

This study describes a computer based, performance rating information processing system, performance rating theory, and programs for the application of the theory to obtain ratings free from the effects of reviewer stringency in reviewing abstracts of conference papers. Originally, the Performance Rating (PR) System was used to evaluate the…

Animal-Assisted Intervention for Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Literature Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

O'Haire, Marguerite E.

2013-01-01

The inclusion of animals in therapeutic activities, known as animal-assisted intervention (AAI), has been suggested as a treatment practice for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This paper presents a systematic review of the empirical research on AAI for ASD. Fourteen studies published in peer-reviewed journals qualified for inclusion. The…

Can research that is not intended or unlikely to be published be considered ethical?

PubMed

Barton, Christopher; Tam, Chun Wah Michael; Abbott, Penelope; Hall, Sally; Liaw, Siaw-Teng

2017-06-01

For research to be ethically acceptable, the potential benefits must justify any risks involved for participants. Dissemination of research findings through publication is one way of creating benefit, but not all researchers intend to publish their research. Other factors, such as lack of size or representativeness, generalisability or innovativeness, or negative findings mean the research is unlikely to be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal. This paper discusses ethical considerations in research where peer-reviewed publication is not intended or unlikely. Proposing research that is not intended or unlikely to be published in a peer-reviewed journal does not preclude it from being considered ethical. Additional benefits of such projects may include professional development of investigators, pilot data collection leading to more definitive studies, or developing collaborations with research users that increase relevance and improve utility of findings.

The gatekeepers of modern physics: periodicals and peer review in 1920s Britain.

PubMed

Clarke, Imogen

2015-03-01

This essay analyzes the processes behind the publication of physics papers in two British journals in the 1920s: the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series A and the Philosophical Magazine. On the surface, it looked as though the Philosophical Magazine was managed very informally, while the Proceedings had in place a seemingly rigid system of committee approval and peer review. This essay shows, however, that in practice the two journals were both influenced by networks of expertise that afforded small groups of physicists considerable control over the content of these prestigious scientific publications. This study explores the nature of peer review, suggesting how a historical approach can contribute to contemporary debates. In studying these relationships, the essay also considers the interplay of "classical" and "modern" ideas and physicists in 1920s Britain and cautions against an anachronistic approach to this classification.

Communicating the rigor behind science results

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Jackson, R.; Callery, S.

2015-12-01

Communicating the rigor behind science resultsNASA's Global Climate Change website and companion Facebook page have an exceptionally large reach. Moderating the vast quantity of questions, feedback and comments from these public platforms has provided a unique perspective on the way the public views science, the scientific method and how science is funded. Email feedback and social media interactions reveal widespread misperceptions about how science is carried out: There is considerable criticism and suspicion surrounding methods of funding, and the difficulty of obtaining grants is underestimated. There appears to be limited public awareness of the peer review process. This talk will highlight the need for better communication not only of science results, but the process of science--from proposal writing and getting funded to peer-review and fundamental science terminology. As a community of science communicators, we also need to highlight the inaccuracies sometimes introduced by media reports of peer-reviewed science papers.

A qualitative synthesis of the positive and negative impacts related to delivery of peer-based health interventions in prison settings.

PubMed

South, Jane; Woodall, James; Kinsella, Karina; Bagnall, Anne-Marie

2016-09-29

Peer interventions involving prisoners in delivering peer education and peer support in a prison setting can address health need and add capacity for health services operating in this setting. This paper reports on a qualitative synthesis conducted as part of a systematic review of prison-based peer interventions. One of the review questions aimed to investigate the positive and negative impacts of delivering peer interventions within prison settings. This covered organisational and process issues relating to peer interventions, including prisoner and staff views. A qualitative synthesis of qualitative and mixed method studies was undertaken. The overall study design comprised a systematic review involving searching, study selection, data extraction and validity assessment. Studies reporting interventions with prisoners or ex-prisoners delivering education or support to prisoners resident in any type of prison or young offender institution, all ages, male and female, were included. A thematic synthesis was undertaken with a subset of studies reporting qualitative data (n = 33). This involved free coding of text reporting qualitative findings to develop a set of codes, which were then grouped into thematic categories and mapped back to the review question. Themes on process issues and wider impacts were grouped into four thematic categories: peer recruitment training and support; organisational support; prisoner relationships; prison life. There was consistent qualitative evidence on the need for organisational support within the prison to ensure smooth implementation and on managing security risks when prisoners were involved in service delivery. A suite of factors affecting the delivery of peer interventions and the wider organisation of prison life were identified. Alongside reported benefits of peer delivery, some reasons for non-utilisation of services by other prisoners were found. There was weak qualitative evidence on wider impacts on the prison system, including better communication between staff and prisoners. Gaps in evidence were identified. The quality of included studies limited the strength of the conclusions. The main conclusion is that peer interventions cannot be seen as independent of prison life and health services need to work in partnership with prison services to deliver peer interventions. More research is needed on long-term impacts. PROSPERO ref: CRD42012002349 .

Appendix A. Policy Statement and Position Papers.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Journal of Dental Education, 1982

1982-01-01

Policy statements and position papers adopted by the American Association of Dental Schools address dental education at all levels, government relations, peer review, individual and institutional freedoms and responsibilities, national health programs, a definition of interdisciplinary education, use of ionizing radiation in dental education…

Open peer review at four STEM journals: an observational overview.

PubMed

Ford, Emily

2015-01-01

Open peer review, peer review where authors' and reviewers' identities are disclosed to one another, is a growing trend in scholarly publishing. Through observation of four journals in STEM disciplines, PLOS One, Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics, PeerJ, and F1000Research, an observational overview is conducted. The overview relies on defined characteristics of open peer review. Results show that despite differing open peer review implementations, each journal retains editorial involvement in scholarly publishing. Further, the analysis shows that only one of these implementations is fully transparent in its peer review and decision making process. Finally, the overview contends that journals should clearly outline peer review and editorial processes in order to allow for open peer review to be better understood and adopted by authors, reviewers, editors, and readers of science communications.

Consumer acceptance of and willingness to pay for food nanotechnology: a systematic review

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Giles, Emma L.; Kuznesof, Sharron; Clark, Beth; Hubbard, Carmen; Frewer, Lynn J.

2015-12-01

Consumer's attitudes to, and acceptance of, emerging technologies and their applications, are important determinants of their successful implementation and commercialisation. Understanding the range of socio-psychological, cultural and affective factors which may influence consumer responses to applications of nanotechnology will help "fine-tune" the development of consumer products in line with their expectations and preferences. This is particularly true of applications in the food area, where consumer concerns about technologies applied to food production may be elevated. This research applied systematic review methodology to synthesise current knowledge regarding societal acceptance or rejection of nanotechnology applied to agri-food production. The objective was to aggregate knowledge derived from different research areas to gain an overall picture of consumer responses to nanotechnology applied to food production. Relevant electronic databases of peer-reviewed literature were searched from the earliest date available, for peer-reviewed papers which reported primary empirical data on consumer and expert acceptance of agri-food nanotechnology, using a formal systematic review protocol. Inclusion criteria for papers to be included in the review were: empirical peer-reviewed papers written in English; a population sample of adults aged 18 years and over used in the research; a research focus on consumer and expert acceptance of agri-food nanotechnology; and research on attitudes towards, and willingness to pay for, different applications of agri-food nanotechnology. Two researchers independently appraised the papers using NVivo 10 QSR software. Studies examining consumer and expert acceptance were thematically analysed, and key information was collated. The results were synthesised in order to identify trends in information relevant to consumer acceptance of nanotechnology applied to food production. Eight key themes were identified from the 32 papers which were extracted from the literature. These themes were applied to understand the determinants of consumer acceptance of agri-food nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is more likely to be accepted by consumers when applied to development of novel packaging with distinct benefits rather than when integrated directly into agri-food products. Trust and confidence in agri-food nanotechnology and its governance need to be fostered through transparent regulation and development of societally beneficial impacts to increase consumer acceptance.

Consumer acceptance of and willingness to pay for food nanotechnology: a systematic review.

PubMed

Giles, Emma L; Kuznesof, Sharron; Clark, Beth; Hubbard, Carmen; Frewer, Lynn J

Consumer's attitudes to, and acceptance of, emerging technologies and their applications, are important determinants of their successful implementation and commercialisation. Understanding the range of socio-psychological, cultural and affective factors which may influence consumer responses to applications of nanotechnology will help "fine-tune" the development of consumer products in line with their expectations and preferences. This is particularly true of applications in the food area, where consumer concerns about technologies applied to food production may be elevated. This research applied systematic review methodology to synthesise current knowledge regarding societal acceptance or rejection of nanotechnology applied to agri-food production. The objective was to aggregate knowledge derived from different research areas to gain an overall picture of consumer responses to nanotechnology applied to food production. Relevant electronic databases of peer-reviewed literature were searched from the earliest date available, for peer-reviewed papers which reported primary empirical data on consumer and expert acceptance of agri-food nanotechnology, using a formal systematic review protocol. Inclusion criteria for papers to be included in the review were: empirical peer-reviewed papers written in English; a population sample of adults aged 18 years and over used in the research; a research focus on consumer and expert acceptance of agri-food nanotechnology; and research on attitudes towards, and willingness to pay for, different applications of agri-food nanotechnology. Two researchers independently appraised the papers using NVivo 10 QSR software. Studies examining consumer and expert acceptance were thematically analysed, and key information was collated. The results were synthesised in order to identify trends in information relevant to consumer acceptance of nanotechnology applied to food production. Eight key themes were identified from the 32 papers which were extracted from the literature. These themes were applied to understand the determinants of consumer acceptance of agri-food nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is more likely to be accepted by consumers when applied to development of novel packaging with distinct benefits rather than when integrated directly into agri-food products. Trust and confidence in agri-food nanotechnology and its governance need to be fostered through transparent regulation and development of societally beneficial impacts to increase consumer acceptance.

Methodologies for simulating impacts of climate change on crop production

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Ecophysiological models of crop growth have seen wide use in IPCC and related assessments. However, the diversity of modeling approaches constrains cross-study syntheses and increases potential for bias. We reviewed 139 peer-reviewed papers dealing with climate change and agriculture, considering si...

An Open Science Peer Review Oath

PubMed Central

Aleksic, Jelena; Alexa, Adrian; Attwood, Teresa K; Chue Hong, Neil; Dahlö, Martin; Davey, Robert; Dinkel, Holger; Förstner, Konrad U; Grigorov, Ivo; Hériché, Jean-Karim; Lahti, Leo; MacLean, Dan; Markie, Michael L; Molloy, Jenny; Schneider, Maria Victoria; Scott, Camille; Smith-Unna, Richard; Vieira, Bruno Miguel

2015-01-01

One of the foundations of the scientific method is to be able to reproduce experiments and corroborate the results of research that has been done before. However, with the increasing complexities of new technologies and techniques, coupled with the specialisation of experiments, reproducing research findings has become a growing challenge. Clearly, scientific methods must be conveyed succinctly, and with clarity and rigour, in order for research to be reproducible. Here, we propose steps to help increase the transparency of the scientific method and the reproducibility of research results: specifically, we introduce a peer-review oath and accompanying manifesto. These have been designed to offer guidelines to enable reviewers (with the minimum friction or bias) to follow and apply open science principles, and support the ideas of transparency, reproducibility and ultimately greater societal impact. Introducing the oath and manifesto at the stage of peer review will help to check that the research being published includes everything that other researchers would need to successfully repeat the work. Peer review is the lynchpin of the publishing system: encouraging the community to consciously (and conscientiously) uphold these principles should help to improve published papers, increase confidence in the reproducibility of the work and, ultimately, provide strategic benefits to authors and their institutions. PMID:25653839

Recent Worldwide Developments in eHealth and mHealth to more Effectively Manage Cancer and other Chronic Diseases – A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Ray, P.; Liaw, S.-T.

2016-01-01

Summary Objectives This paper is a systematic literature review intended to gain an understanding of the most original, excellent, state-of-the-art research in the application of eHealth (including mHealth) in the management of chronic diseases with a focus on cancer over the past two years. Method This review looks at peer-reviewed papers published between 2013 and 2015 and examines the background and trends in this area. It systematically searched peer-reviewed journals in databases PubMed, Proquest, Cochrane Library, Elsevier, Sage and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE Digital Library) using a set of pre-defined keywords. It then employed an iterative process to filter out less relevant publications. Results From an initial search return of 1,519,682 results returned, twenty nine of the most relevant peer reviewed articles were identified as most relevant. Conclusions Based on the results we conclude that innovative eHealth and its subset mHealth initiatives are rapidly emerging as an important means of managing cancer and other chronic diseases. The adoption is following different paths in the developed and developing worlds. Besides governance and regulatory issues, barriers still exist around information management, interoperability and integration. These include medical records available online information for clinicians and consumers on cancer and other chronic diseases, mobile app bundles that can help manage co-morbidities and the capacity of supporting communication technologies. PMID:27830236

Peer support for families of children with complex needs: Development and dissemination of a best practice toolkit.

PubMed

Schippke, J; Provvidenza, C; Kingsnorth, S

2017-11-01

Benefits of peer support interventions for families of children with disabilities and complex medical needs have been described in the literature. An opportunity to create an evidence-informed resource to synthesize best practices in peer support for program providers was identified. The objective of this paper is to describe the key activities used to develop and disseminate the Peer Support Best Practice Toolkit. This project was led by a team of knowledge translation experts at a large pediatric rehabilitation hospital using a knowledge exchange framework. An integrated knowledge translation approach was used to engage stakeholders in the development process through focus groups and a working group. To capture best practices in peer support, a rapid evidence review and review of related resources were completed. Case studies were also included to showcase practice-based evidence. The toolkit is freely available online for download and is structured into four sections: (a) background and models of peer support, (b) case studies of programs, (c) resources, and (d) rapid evidence review. A communications plan was developed to disseminate the resource and generate awareness through presentations, social media, and champion engagement. Eight months postlaunch, the peer support website received more than 2,400 webpage hits. Early indicators suggest high relevance of this resource among stakeholders. The toolkit format was valuable to synthesize and share best practices in peer support. Strengths of the work include the integrated approach used to develop the toolkit and the inclusion of both the published research literature and experiential evidence. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Process modeling and bottleneck mining in online peer-review systems.

PubMed

Premchaiswadi, Wichian; Porouhan, Parham

2015-01-01

This paper is divided into three main parts. In the first part of the study, we captured, collected and formatted an event log describing the handling of reviews for proceedings of an international conference in Thailand. In the second part, we used several process mining techniques in order to discover process models, social, organizational, and hierarchical structures from the proceeding's event log. In the third part, we detected the deviations and bottlenecks of the peer review process by comparing the observed events (i.e., authentic dataset) with a pre-defined model (i.e., master map). Finally, we investigated the performance information as well as the total waiting time in order to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the online submission and peer review system for the prospective conferences and seminars. Consequently, the main goals of the study were as follows: (1) to convert the collected event log into the appropriate format supported by process mining analysis tools, (2) to discover process models and to construct social networks based on the collected event log, and (3) to find deviations, discrepancies and bottlenecks between the collected event log and the master pre-defined model. The results showed that although each paper was initially sent to three different reviewers; it was not always possible to make a decision after the first round of reviewing; therefore, additional reviewers were invited. In total, all the accepted and rejected manuscripts were reviewed by an average of 3.9 and 3.2 expert reviewers, respectively. Moreover, obvious violations of the rules and regulations relating to careless or inappropriate peer review of a manuscript-committed by the editorial board and other staff-were identified. Nine blocks of activity in the authentic dataset were not completely compatible with the activities defined in the master model. Also, five of the activity traces were not correctly enabled, and seven activities were missed within the online submission system. On the other hand, dealing with the feedback (comments) received from the first and the third reviewers; the conference committee members and the organizers did not attend to those feedback/comments in a timely manner.

Appendix A: Policy Statements and Position Papers.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Journal of Dental Education, 1988

1988-01-01

Policy statements and position papers adopted by the American Association of Dental Schools, intended as recommendations and guidelines for member institutions, are presented. They cover education, research, delivery of care, health concerns, peer review, national health programs, interdisciplinary education, use of radiation, and due process.…

Laughter and the Management of Divergent Positions in Peer Review Interactions

PubMed Central

Raclaw, Joshua; Ford, Cecilia E.

2017-01-01

In this paper we focus on how participants in peer review interactions use laughter as a resource as they publicly report divergence of evaluative positions, divergence that is typical in the give and take of joint grant evaluation. Using the framework of conversation analysis, we examine the infusion of laughter and multimodal laugh-relevant practices into sequences of talk in meetings of grant reviewers deliberating on the evaluation and scoring of high-level scientific grant applications. We focus on a recurrent sequence in these meetings, what we call the score-reporting sequence, in which the assigned reviewers first announce the preliminary scores they have assigned to the grant. We demonstrate that such sequences are routine sites for the use of laugh practices to navigate the initial moments in which divergence of opinion is made explicit. In the context of meetings convened for the purposes of peer review, laughter thus serves as a valuable resource for managing the socially delicate but institutionally required reporting of divergence and disagreement that is endemic to meetings where these types of evaluative tasks are a focal activity. PMID:29170594

Engineering Issue Paper: Biotransformation Pathways of Dimethylarsinic (Cacodylic) Acid in the Environment

EPA Science Inventory

This EIP summarizes the state of the science regarding the biotransformation of DMA(V) and was developed from peer-reviewed literature, scientific documents, EPA reports, internet sources, input from experts in the field, and other pertinent sources. This EIP includes a review o...

Redefining the Practice of Peer Review Through Intelligent Automation Part 2: Data-Driven Peer Review Selection and Assignment.

PubMed

Reiner, Bruce I

2017-12-01

In conventional radiology peer review practice, a small number of exams (routinely 5% of the total volume) is randomly selected, which may significantly underestimate the true error rate within a given radiology practice. An alternative and preferable approach would be to create a data-driven model which mathematically quantifies a peer review risk score for each individual exam and uses this data to identify high risk exams and readers, and selectively target these exams for peer review. An analogous model can also be created to assist in the assignment of these peer review cases in keeping with specific priorities of the service provider. An additional option to enhance the peer review process would be to assign the peer review cases in a truly blinded fashion. In addition to eliminating traditional peer review bias, this approach has the potential to better define exam-specific standard of care, particularly when multiple readers participate in the peer review process.

The Impact of Computer-Mediated Communication Environments on Foreign Language Learning: A Review of the Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mahdi, Hassan Saleh

2014-01-01

This article reviews the literature on the implementation of computer-mediated communication (CMC) in language learning, aiming at understanding how CMC environments have been implemented to foster language learning. The paper draws on 40 recent research articles selected from 10 peer-reviewed journals, 2 book chapters and one conference…

Situating Disability within Comparative Education: A Review of the Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Brown, Alisha M. B.

2014-01-01

This paper is an inquiry into where the topic of disability falls within the vast field of comparative education research. It explores the extent to which disability is present in comparative education literature, and in what ways it is represented. A review of literature across the core comparative education peer-reviewed journals was conducted.…

Psychotropic Medications in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Systematic Review and Synthesis for Evidence-Based Practice

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Siegel, Matthew; Beaulieu, Amy A.

2012-01-01

This paper presents a systematic review, rating and synthesis of the empirical evidence for the use of psychotropic medications in children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Thirty-three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in peer-reviewed journals qualified for inclusion and were coded and analyzed using a systematic evaluative…

Child Sexual Abuse in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Literature Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Lalor, Kevin

2004-01-01

Objective: This article reviews the English-language literature on child sexual abuse in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). The focus is on the sexual abuse of children in the home/community, as opposed to the commercial sexual exploitation of children. Methods: English language, peer-reviewed papers cited in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) are…

Contemplative Education: A Systematic, Evidence-Based Review of the Effect of Meditation Interventions in Schools

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Waters, Lea; Barsky, Adam; Ridd, Amanda; Allen, Kelly

2015-01-01

Schools need reliable evidence about the outcomes of meditation programs before they consider if and how such programmes can influence learning agendas, curriculum and timetables. This paper reviewed evidence from 15 peer-reviewed studies of school meditation programmes with respect to three student outcomes: well-being, social competence and…

Group consensus peer review in radiation oncology: commitment to quality.

PubMed

Duggar, W Neil; Bhandari, Rahul; Yang, Chunli Claus; Vijayakumar, Srinivasan

2018-03-27

Peer review, especially prospective peer review, has been supported by professional organizations as an important element in optimal Radiation Oncology practice based on its demonstration of efficacy at detecting and preventing errors prior to patient treatment. Implementation of peer review is not without barriers, but solutions do exist to mitigate or eliminate some of those barriers. Peer review practice at our institution involves three key elements: new patient conference, treatment planning conference, and chart rounds. The treatment planning conference is an adaptation of the group consensus peer review model from radiology which utilizes a group of peers reviewing each treatment plan prior to implementation. The peer group in radiation oncology includes Radiation Oncologists, Physician Residents, Medical Physicists, Dosimetrists, and Therapists. Thus, technical and clinical aspects of each plan are evaluated simultaneously. Though peer review is held in high regard in Radiation Oncology, many barriers commonly exist preventing optimal implementation such as time intensiveness, repetition, and distraction from clinic time with patients. Through the use of automated review tools and commitment by individuals and administration in regards to staffing, scheduling, and responsibilities, these barriers have been mitigated to implement this Group Consensus Peer Review model into a Radiation Oncology Clinic. A Group Consensus Peer Review model has been implemented with strategies to address common barriers to effective and efficient peer review.

Determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption among children and adolescents: a review of the literature. Part II: qualitative studies

PubMed Central

2011-01-01

Background Large proportions of children do not fulfil the World Health Organization recommendation of eating at least 400 grams of fruit and vegetables (FV) per day. To promote an increased FV intake among children it is important to identify factors which influence their consumption. Both qualitative and quantitative studies are needed. Earlier reviews have analysed evidence from quantitative studies. The aim of this paper is to present a systematic review of qualitative studies of determinants of children's FV intake. Methods Relevant studies were identified by searching Anthropology Plus, Cinahl, CSA illumine, Embase, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, Medline, PsycINFO, and Web of Science using combinations of synonyms for FV intake, children/adolescents and qualitative methods as search terms. The literature search was completed by December 1st 2010. Papers were included if they applied qualitative methods to investigate 6-18-year-olds' perceptions of factors influencing their FV consumption. Quantitative studies, review studies, studies reported in other languages than English, and non-peer reviewed or unpublished manuscripts were excluded. The papers were reviewed systematically using standardised templates for summary of papers, quality assessment, and synthesis of findings across papers. Results The review included 31 studies, mostly based on US populations and focus group discussions. The synthesis identified the following potential determinants for FV intake which supplement the quantitative knowledge base: Time costs; lack of taste guarantee; satiety value; appropriate time/occasions/settings for eating FV; sensory and physical aspects; variety, visibility, methods of preparation; access to unhealthy food; the symbolic value of food for image, gender identity and social interaction with peers; short term outcome expectancies. Conclusions The review highlights numerous potential determinants which have not been investigated thoroughly in quantitative studies. Future large scale quantitative studies should attempt to quantify the importance of these factors. Further, mechanisms behind gender, age and socioeconomic differences in FV consumption are proposed which should be tested quantitatively in order to better tailor interventions to vulnerable groups. Finally, the review provides input to the conceptualisation and measurements of concepts (i.e. peer influence, availability in schools) which may refine survey instruments and theoretical frameworks concerning eating behaviours. PMID:21999291

Position Papers of the American Association of Dental Schools[.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Journal of Dental Education, 1986

1986-01-01

Position papers of the American Association of Dental Schools are presented concerning peer review in dentistry, individual and institutional freedoms and responsibilities, national health programs, the definition of interdisciplinary education, use of ionizing radiation in dental schools, and due process in student evaluation disputes. (MSE)

28 CFR 34.110 - Management of peer reviews.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Management of peer reviews. 34.110 Section 34.110 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer Review § 34.110 Management of peer reviews. A technical support contractor may assist in managing...

28 CFR 34.102 - Peer review procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

...” describes a process that evolves in accordance with experience and opportunities to effect improvements. The... Review § 34.102 Peer review procedures. The OJJDP peer review process is contained in an OJJDP “Peer... substantive and procedural matters related to the peer review process, the “Guideline” addresses such issues...

Clinical Nurse Specialists Guide Staff Nurses to Promote Practice Accountability Through Peer Review.

PubMed

Semper, Julie; Halvorson, Betty; Hersh, Mary; Torres, Clare; Lillington, Linda

2016-01-01

The aim of the study was to describe the clinical nurse specialist role in developing and implementing a staff nurse education program to promote practice accountability using peer review principles. Peer review is essential for professional nursing practice demanding a significant culture change. Clinical nurse specialists in a Magnet-designated community hospital were charged with developing a staff nurse peer review education program. Peer review is a recognized mechanism of professional self-regulation to ensure delivery of quality care. The American Nurses Association strongly urges incorporating peer review in professional nursing practice models. Clinical nurse specialists play a critical role in educating staff nurses about practice accountability. Clinical nurse specialists developed an education program guided by the American Nurses Association's principles of peer review. A baseline needs assessment identified potential barriers and learning needs. Content incorporated tools and strategies to build communication skills, collaboration, practice change, and peer accountability. The education program resulted in increased staff nurse knowledge about peer review and application of peer review principles in practice. Clinical nurse specialists played a critical role in helping staff nurses understand peer review and its application to practice. The clinical nurse specialist role will continue to be important in sustaining the application of peer review principles in practice.

A decade of research in Inuit children, youth, and maternal health in Canada: areas of concentrations and scarcities

PubMed Central

Sheppard, Amanda J.; Hetherington, Ross

2012-01-01

Inuit Canadians are on average about 20 years younger and have a 10-year lower life expectancy than other Canadians. While there have been improvements in Inuit health status over time, significant health disparities still remain. This paper will review the peer-reviewed literature related to Inuit child, youth, and maternal health between 2000 and 2010, investigate which thematic areas were examined, and determine what proportion of the research is related to each group. Establishing areas of research concentrations and scarcities may help direct future research where it is needed. We followed a systematic literature review and employed peer-reviewed research literature on child, youth, and maternal health which were selected from 3 sources, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Circumpolar Health Bibliographic Database. The resulting references were read, and summarized according to population group and thematic area. The thematic areas that emerged by frequency were: infectious disease; environment/environmental exposures; nutrition; birth outcomes; tobacco; chronic disease; health care; policy, human resources; interventions/programming; social determinants of health; mental health and wellbeing; genetics; injury; and dental health. The 72 papers that met the inclusion criteria were not mutually exclusive with respect to group studied. Fifty-nine papers (82%) concerned child health, 24 papers (33%) youth health, and 58 papers (81%) maternal health. The review documented high incidences of illness and significant public health problems; however, in the context of these issues, opportunities to develop research that could directly enhance health outcomes are explored. PMID:22868191

The ethics of peer review in bioethics

PubMed Central

Wendler, David; Miller, Franklin

2014-01-01

A good deal has been written on the ethics of peer review, especially in the scientific and medical literatures. In contrast, we are unaware of any articles on the ethics of peer review in bioethics. Recognising this gap, we evaluate the extant proposals regarding ethical standards for peer review in general and consider how they apply to bioethics. We argue that scholars have an obligation to perform peer review based on the extent to which they personally benefit from the peer review process. We also argue, contrary to existing proposals and guidelines, that it can be appropriate for peer reviewers to benefit in their own scholarship from the manuscripts they review. With respect to bioethics in particular, we endorse double-blind review and suggest several ways in which the peer review process might be improved. PMID:24131903

Rubus fruit phenolic research: the good, the bad, and the confusing

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Here we attempt to clarify contemporary scientific findings of Rubus fruit phenolics, focusing mainly on published peer-reviewed work from the last six years. Our review focuses on research papers that identified phenolics of Rubus fruit, although other edible parts of Rubus plants (i.e., leaves, ro...

Editorial: The publication of geoscientific model developments v1.1

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Executive Editors, GMD

2015-10-01

Version 1.0 of the editorial of the EGU (European Geosciences Union) journal, Geoscientific Model Development (GMD), was published in 2013. In that editorial an assessment was made of the progress the journal had made since it started, and some revisions to the editorial policy were introduced. After 2 years of experience with this revised editorial policy there are a few required updates, refinements and clarifications, so here we present version 1.1 of the editorial. The most significant amendments relate to the peer-review criteria as presented in the Framework for GMD manuscript types, which is published as an appendix to this paper and also available on the GMD manuscript types webpage. We also slightly refine and update the Publication guide and introduce a self-contained code and data policy. The changes are summarised as follows: - All manuscript types are now required to include code or data availability paragraphs, and model code must always be made available (in the case of copyright or other legal issues, to the editor at a minimum). - The role of evaluation in GMD papers is clarified, and a separate evaluation paper type is introduced. Model descriptions must already be published or in peer review when separate evaluation papers are submitted. - Observationally derived data should normally be published in a data journal rather than in GMD. Syntheses of data which were specifically designed for tasks such as model boundary conditions or direct evaluation of model output may, however, be published in GMD. - GMD publishes a broad range of different kinds of models, and this fact is now more explicitly acknowledged. - The main changes to the Publication guide are the addition of guidelines for editors when assessing papers at the initial review stage. Before sending papers for peer review, editors are required to make sure that papers comply with the Framework for GMD paper types and to carefully consider the topic of plagiarism. - A new appendix, the GMD code and data policy, is included. Version 1.1 of the manuscript types and Publication guide are included in the appendices with changed sentences marked in bold font.

Transformation of Adolescent Peer Relations in the Social Media Context: Part 1-A Theoretical Framework and Application to Dyadic Peer Relationships.

PubMed

Nesi, Jacqueline; Choukas-Bradley, Sophia; Prinstein, Mitchell J

2018-04-07

Investigators have long recognized that adolescents' peer experiences provide a crucial context for the acquisition of developmental competencies, as well as potential risks for a range of adjustment difficulties. However, recent years have seen an exponential increase in adolescents' adoption of social media tools, fundamentally reshaping the landscape of adolescent peer interactions. Although research has begun to examine social media use among adolescents, researchers have lacked a unifying framework for understanding the impact of social media on adolescents' peer experiences. This paper represents Part 1 of a two-part theoretical review, in which we offer a transformation framework to integrate interdisciplinary social media scholarship and guide future work on social media use and peer relations from a theory-driven perspective. We draw on prior conceptualizations of social media as a distinct interpersonal context and apply this understanding to adolescents' peer experiences, outlining features of social media with particular relevance to adolescent peer relations. We argue that social media transforms adolescent peer relationships in five key ways: by changing the frequency or immediacy of experiences, amplifying experiences and demands, altering the qualitative nature of interactions, facilitating new opportunities for compensatory behaviors, and creating entirely novel behaviors. We offer an illustration of the transformation framework applied to adolescents' dyadic friendship processes (i.e., experiences typically occurring between two individuals), reviewing existing evidence and offering theoretical implications. Overall, the transformation framework represents a departure from the prevailing approaches of prior peer relations work and a new model for understanding peer relations in the social media context.

The impact of peer support in the context of perinatal mental illness: a meta-ethnography.

PubMed

Jones, Catriona C G; Jomeen, Julie; Hayter, Mark

2014-05-01

this paper is a report of a systematic review and meta-ethnography to explore the impact of peer support in the context of perinatal mental illness (PMI). systematic review methods identified five qualitative studies about women's experiences of PMI, and the impact peer support has on their journey towards emotional well-being. Findings from the identified studies were synthesised into themes, using meta-ethnography. the meta-ethnography produced four themes; 'Isolation: the role of peer support', 'Seeking validation through peer support', 'The importance of social norms of motherhood', and 'Finding affirmation/a way forward; the impact of peer support'. These themes represent women's experiences of PMI, their encounters with peer support groups within that context, and the impact of such encounters on their mental health status. recognising the risk of isolation and having pathways of referral to peer support networks is important, as are practitioners roles in nurturing peer support networks in perinatal care. More research is required to establish the most successful formats/structures of peer support. Practitioners should also recognise their individual and collective professional duty to challenge stereotypical depictions of motherhood wherever they arise, as this 'gold standard' benchmark of good mothering engenders guilt about not being good enough, often leaving women feeling inadequate. isolation is a key factor in PMI. Practitioners should be instrumental in their acceptance and development of peer support for PMI, ensuring these networks are valued, nurtured and encouraged. This study illustrates the powerful effect of professional and social forces on how new mothers feel about themselves. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

45 CFR 1388.9 - Peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 45 Public Welfare 4 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Peer review. 1388.9 Section 1388.9 Public Welfare... PROGRAM THE UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED PROGRAMS § 1388.9 Peer review. (a) The purpose of the peer review... D, Section 152 of the Act, must be evaluated through the peer review process. (c) Panels must be...

Peer Review in Higher Education: Student Perceptions before and after Participation

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mulder, Raoul A.; Pearce, Jon M.; Baik, Chi

2014-01-01

Peer review is integral to academic endeavour, but opportunities for students to benefit from peer review in higher education remain limited, and relatively little is known about how student perceptions influence their appreciation of peer review. University student perceptions were examined before and after experiencing student peer review in…

Peer Review: Has It a Future?

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Soh, Kay Cheng

2013-01-01

Although its history is short, peer review has fast become a fixture of journal publications acquiring the status of a ritual in the academia. Many relevant and important issues have been raised leading to doubts about the value of peer review. The advent of electronic publishing further threatens the future of peer review. For peer review to…

40 CFR 194.27 - Peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... 40 Protection of Environment 24 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Peer review. 194.27 Section 194.27... § 194.27 Peer review. (a) Any compliance application shall include documentation of peer review that has... barrier evaluation as required in § 194.44. (b) Peer review processes required in paragraph (a) of this...

A prospective study on an innovative online forum for peer reviewing of surgical science.

PubMed

Almquist, Martin; von Allmen, Regula S; Carradice, Dan; Oosterling, Steven J; McFarlane, Kirsty; Wijnhoven, Bas

2017-01-01

Peer review is important to the scientific process. However, the present system has been criticised and accused of bias, lack of transparency, failure to detect significant breakthrough and error. At the British Journal of Surgery (BJS), after surveying authors' and reviewers' opinions on peer review, we piloted an open online forum with the aim of improving the peer review process. In December 2014, a web-based survey assessing attitudes towards open online review was sent to reviewers with a BJS account in Scholar One. From April to June 2015, authors were invited to allow their manuscripts to undergo online peer review in addition to the standard peer review process. The quality of each review was evaluated by editors and editorial assistants using a validated instrument based on a Likert scale. The survey was sent to 6635 reviewers. In all, 1454 (21.9%) responded. Support for online peer review was strong, with only 10% stating that they would not subject their manuscripts to online peer review. The most prevalent concern was about intellectual property, being highlighted in 118 of 284 comments (41.5%). Out of 265 eligible manuscripts, 110 were included in the online peer review trial. Around 7000 potential reviewers were invited to review each manuscript. In all, 44 of 110 manuscripts (40%) received 100 reviews from 59 reviewers, alongside 115 conventional reviews. The quality of the open forum reviews was lower than for conventional reviews (2.13 (± 0.75) versus 2.84 (± 0.71), P<0.001). Open online peer review is feasible in this setting, but it attracts few reviews, of lower quality than conventional peer reviews.

Status of Ongoing Work in Software TRAs/TRLs

DTIC Science & Technology

2010-04-29

to changes/updates being driven by corporate market dynamics • Changes not under control or under the influence of the PMO! • On programs with long...observed and reported esearc articles, peer- reviewed white papers, point papers, early conceptual models n a ca em c , experimental as c researc

Innovative Language Teaching and Learning at University: Enhancing Employability

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Álvarez-Mayo, Carmen, Ed.; Gallagher-Brett, Angela, Ed.; Michel, Franck, Ed.

2017-01-01

This second volume in this series of papers dedicated to innovative language teaching and learning at university focuses on enhancing employability. Throughout the book, which includes a selection of 14 peer-reviewed and edited short papers, authors share good practices drawing on research; reflect on their experience to promote student…

Integrated water resources management and infrastructure planning for water security in Southern Africa

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Mapani, Benjamin; Magole, Lapologang; Makurira, Hodson; Meck, Maideyi; Mkandawire, Theresa; Mul, Marloes; Ngongondo, Cosmo

2017-08-01

This volume has brought together papers that are peer reviewed emanating from the WaterNet/WARFSA/GWP-SA 16th Symposium. The papers cover the following themes: Hydrology, Water and Environment, Water and Land, Water and Society, Water Supply and Sanitation and Water Resources Management.

Appreciation of the 2015 JGR Space Physics Peer Reviewers

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Liemohn, Michael W.; Balikhin, Michael; Kepko, Larry; Rodger, Alan; Wang, Yuming

2016-01-01

The Editors of the Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics are deeply indebted to the many people among the research community that serve this journal through peer review. The journal could not exist without the time and effort invested by the community through this voluntary activity, providing expert evaluations and thoughtful assessments of the work of others. In 2015, the journal had 1506 scientists contribute to the process with at least one peer review, for a total of 3575 reviews completed, including additional reviews of resubmitted manuscripts. There were 277 reviewers that contributed four or more reports in 2015. The average number of reviews per referee in 2015 was, therefore, 2.4. Note that the total number of manuscript final decisions (i.e., accept or reject) for Journal of Geophysical Research (JGR) Space Physics was 1147 in 2015. Of this, 774 were accepted and 373 were declined, for an acceptance rate of 67% last year. If the 1334 "revision" decisions are included in the tally, then the total number of decisions made in 2015 was 2481. Working out the arithmetic, it means that on average, a manuscript gets about 1.2 revision decisions before a final accept-or-reject decision. This explains the 3.1 average number of reviews per manuscript throughout each paper's lifetime in the submission-revision editorial process. We are pleased and happy that the research community is willing and able to devote their resources toward this service endeavor. We appreciate each and every one of you that helped maintain the high quality of papers in JGR Space Physics last year. We look forward to another excellent year working with all of you through the year ahead.

The Effects of Resident Peer- and Self-Chart Review on Outpatient Laboratory Result Follow-up.

PubMed

Hale, Andrew J; Nall, Ryan W; Mukamal, Kenneth J; Libman, Howard; Smith, C Christopher; Sternberg, Scot B; Kim, Hans S; Kriegel, Gila

2016-05-01

Performing and teaching appropriate follow-up of outpatient laboratory results (LRs) is a challenge. The authors tested peer-review among residents as a potentially valuable intervention. Investigators assigned residents to perform self-review (n = 27), peer-review (n = 21), or self- + peer-review (n = 30) of outpatient charts. They also compared residence performance with that of historical controls (n = 20). In September 2012, residents examined 10 LRs from April 2012 onward. A second review in November 2012 ascertained whether performing chart review improved residents' practice behaviors. Initially, the least-square (LS) mean number of LRs without documentation of follow-up per resident in the self-, peer-, and self- + peer-review group was, respectively, 0.5 (SD 1.0), 1.0 (SD 1.7), and 0.9 (SD 1.3), and post intervention, this was 1.0 (SD 0.2), 0.3 (SD 0.2), and 0.6 (SD 0.2) (self- versus peer-review P = .03). Initially the LS mean follow-up time per resident in the self-, peer-, and self- + peer-review group was, respectively, 4.2 (SD 1.2), 6.9 (SD 1.4), and 5.9 (SD 1.2) days, and after the intervention, LS mean time was 5.0 (SD 0.5), 2.5 (SD 0.6), and 3.9 (SD 0.5) days (self- versus peer-review P < .01). Self-review was not associated with significant improvements in practice. In this comparison of self- and peer-review, only residents who performed peer-review demonstrated significant improvements in their documentation practices. These findings support the use of resident peer-review in improving LR follow-up, and potentially, in other, broader resident quality improvement initiatives.

A prospective study on an innovative online forum for peer reviewing of surgical science

PubMed Central

von Allmen, Regula S.; Carradice, Dan; Oosterling, Steven J.; McFarlane, Kirsty; Wijnhoven, Bas

2017-01-01

Background Peer review is important to the scientific process. However, the present system has been criticised and accused of bias, lack of transparency, failure to detect significant breakthrough and error. At the British Journal of Surgery (BJS), after surveying authors’ and reviewers’ opinions on peer review, we piloted an open online forum with the aim of improving the peer review process. Methods In December 2014, a web-based survey assessing attitudes towards open online review was sent to reviewers with a BJS account in Scholar One. From April to June 2015, authors were invited to allow their manuscripts to undergo online peer review in addition to the standard peer review process. The quality of each review was evaluated by editors and editorial assistants using a validated instrument based on a Likert scale. Results The survey was sent to 6635 reviewers. In all, 1454 (21.9%) responded. Support for online peer review was strong, with only 10% stating that they would not subject their manuscripts to online peer review. The most prevalent concern was about intellectual property, being highlighted in 118 of 284 comments (41.5%). Out of 265 eligible manuscripts, 110 were included in the online peer review trial. Around 7000 potential reviewers were invited to review each manuscript. In all, 44 of 110 manuscripts (40%) received 100 reviews from 59 reviewers, alongside 115 conventional reviews. The quality of the open forum reviews was lower than for conventional reviews (2.13 (± 0.75) versus 2.84 (± 0.71), P<0.001). Conclusion Open online peer review is feasible in this setting, but it attracts few reviews, of lower quality than conventional peer reviews. PMID:28662046

[Evaluating the rehabilitation process by means of peer review: examination of the methods used and findings of the 2000/2001 data collection in the somatic indications].

PubMed

Farin, E; Carl, C; Lichtenberg, S; Jäckel, W H; Maier-Riehle, B; Rütten-Köppel, E

2003-12-01

This paper reports the results of a peer review system that was implemented in the context of the quality assurance programme of the statutory German Pension Insurance scheme. The data reported refer to the 2000/2001 data collection period for medical rehabilitation in the somatic indications. Examination of inter-rater reliability for judgements of individual raters shows satisfactory results only in orthopaedics. In the quality assurance programme, rehabilitation centres are usually evaluated by the mean of 20 rater judgements. The reliability of this aggregated measure is satisfactory in all indications. The results of 561 rehabilitation centres show that those quality criteria are in particular need of improvement that refer to subjective concepts of patients (e. g., subjective theories of illness). Between peer review procedures in 1998 and 1999, the quality scores of rehabilitation centres had improved whereas between 1999 and 2000/2001, no further improvement can be shown. However, those rehabilitation centres with a low quality score in 1999 (lowest quartile of the distribution) underwent a positive development between 1999 and 2000/2001. Reasons for this trend and possibilities for improving interrater reliability of the peer review process as an element of the quality assurance programme of the German Pension Insurance scheme are discussed.

Variability in Students' Evaluating Processes in Peer Assessment with Calibrated Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Russell, J.; Van Horne, S.; Ward, A. S.; Bettis, E. A., III; Gikonyo, J.

2017-01-01

This study investigated students' evaluating process and their perceptions of peer assessment when they engaged in peer assessment using Calibrated Peer Review. Calibrated Peer Review is a web-based application that facilitates peer assessment of writing. One hundred and thirty-two students in an introductory environmental science course…

Peer Review as a Strategy for Improving Students' Writing Process

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Baker, Kimberly M.

2016-01-01

Peer review is an established strategy for improving the quality of students' writing. This study moves beyond the focus on outcomes to assess the peer-review process. In particular, this study focuses on the timing of the peer review, a highly structured feedback form, and student writers' revisions after engaging in peer review. This study draws…

Designing Peer Review for Pedagogical Success: What Can We Learn from Professional Science?

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Trautmann, Nancy M.

2009-01-01

This article compares peer review in professional versus education settings, summarizing key aspects of scientific peer review and reflecting on how these relate to the process as experienced by students. Consideration of professional peer review benefits educators in two ways. First, systems used for student peer review can employ some of the…

34 CFR 350.50 - What is the peer review process for this Program?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... 34 Education 2 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false What is the peer review process for this Program? 350... peer review process for this Program? (a) The Secretary refers each application for a grant governed by those regulations in this part to a peer review panel established by the Secretary. (b) Peer review...

The Power of Peer Reviewing to Enhance Writing in Horticulture: Greenhouse Management

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Anderson, Neil O.; Flash, Pamela

2014-01-01

Peer review is not included in undergraduate horticultural curricula. Our research objectives in an 8- year study, which ranged from 2000 to 2007 in two sections (2000-2002 non-peer reviewed and 2003-2007 peer-reviewed) of Greenhouse Management students at the University of Minnesota were to determine whether iterative peer reviews would result in…

28 CFR 34.102 - Peer review procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Peer review procedures. 34.102 Section 34.102 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer... substantive and procedural matters related to the peer review process, the “Guideline” addresses such issues...

28 CFR 34.102 - Peer review procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false Peer review procedures. 34.102 Section 34.102 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer... substantive and procedural matters related to the peer review process, the “Guideline” addresses such issues...

28 CFR 34.102 - Peer review procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2012-07-01 2012-07-01 false Peer review procedures. 34.102 Section 34.102 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer... substantive and procedural matters related to the peer review process, the “Guideline” addresses such issues...

28 CFR 34.102 - Peer review procedures.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false Peer review procedures. 34.102 Section 34.102 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer... substantive and procedural matters related to the peer review process, the “Guideline” addresses such issues...

A survey of radiation treatment planning peer-review activities in a provincial radiation oncology programme: current practice and future directions

PubMed Central

Brundage, Michael; Foxcroft, Sophie; McGowan, Tom; Gutierrez, Eric; Sharpe, Michael; Warde, Padraig

2013-01-01

Objectives To describe current patterns of practice of radiation oncology peer review within a provincial cancer system, identifying barriers and facilitators to its use with the ultimate aim of process improvement. Design A survey of radiation oncology programmes at provincial cancer centres. Setting All cancer centres within the province of Ontario, Canada (n=14). These are community-based outpatient facilities overseen by Cancer Care Ontario, the provincial cancer agency. Participants A delegate from each radiation oncology programme filled out a single survey based on input from their multidisciplinary team. Outcome measures Rated importance of peer review; current utilisation; format of the peer-review process; organisation and timing; case attributes; outcomes of the peer-review process and perceived barriers and facilitators to expanding peer-review processes. Results 14 (100%) centres responded. All rated the importance of peer review as at least 8/10 (10=extremely important). Detection of medical error and improvement of planning processes were the highest rated perceived benefits of peer review (each median 9/10). Six centres (43%) reviewed at least 50% of curative cases; four of these centres (29%) conducted peer review in more than 80% of cases treated with curative intent. Fewer than 20% of cases treated with palliative intent were reviewed in most centres. Five centres (36%) reported usually conducting peer review prior to the initiation of treatment. Five centres (36%) recorded the outcomes of peer review on the medical record. Thirteen centres (93%) planned to expand peer-review activities; a critical mass of radiation oncologists was the most important limiting factor (median 6/10). Conclusions Radiation oncology peer-review practices can vary even within a cancer system with provincial oversight. The application of guidelines and standards for peer-review processes, and monitoring of implementation and outcomes, will require effective knowledge translation activities. PMID:23903814

28 CFR 34.108 - Selection of reviewers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

....108 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer Review § 34.108 Selection of reviewers. The Program Manager, through the Director of the OJJDP program... by the Administrator. The selection process for peer reviewers is detailed in the OJJDP “Peer Review...

Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers.

PubMed

Ross-Hellauer, Tony; Deppe, Arvid; Schmidt, Birgit

2017-01-01

Open peer review (OPR) is a cornerstone of the emergent Open Science agenda. Yet to date no large-scale survey of attitudes towards OPR amongst academic editors, authors, reviewers and publishers has been undertaken. This paper presents the findings of an online survey, conducted for the OpenAIRE2020 project during September and October 2016, that sought to bridge this information gap in order to aid the development of appropriate OPR approaches by providing evidence about attitudes towards and levels of experience with OPR. The results of this cross-disciplinary survey, which received 3,062 full responses, show the majority (60.3%) of respondents to be believe that OPR as a general concept should be mainstream scholarly practice (although attitudes to individual traits varied, and open identities peer review was not generally favoured). Respondents were also in favour of other areas of Open Science, like Open Access (88.2%) and Open Data (80.3%). Among respondents we observed high levels of experience with OPR, with three out of four (76.2%) reporting having taken part in an OPR process as author, reviewer or editor. There were also high levels of support for most of the traits of OPR, particularly open interaction, open reports and final-version commenting. Respondents were against opening reviewer identities to authors, however, with more than half believing it would make peer review worse. Overall satisfaction with the peer review system used by scholarly journals seems to strongly vary across disciplines. Taken together, these findings are very encouraging for OPR's prospects for moving mainstream but indicate that due care must be taken to avoid a "one-size fits all" solution and to tailor such systems to differing (especially disciplinary) contexts. OPR is an evolving phenomenon and hence future studies are to be encouraged, especially to further explore differences between disciplines and monitor the evolution of attitudes.

Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers

PubMed Central

Deppe, Arvid; Schmidt, Birgit

2017-01-01

Open peer review (OPR) is a cornerstone of the emergent Open Science agenda. Yet to date no large-scale survey of attitudes towards OPR amongst academic editors, authors, reviewers and publishers has been undertaken. This paper presents the findings of an online survey, conducted for the OpenAIRE2020 project during September and October 2016, that sought to bridge this information gap in order to aid the development of appropriate OPR approaches by providing evidence about attitudes towards and levels of experience with OPR. The results of this cross-disciplinary survey, which received 3,062 full responses, show the majority (60.3%) of respondents to be believe that OPR as a general concept should be mainstream scholarly practice (although attitudes to individual traits varied, and open identities peer review was not generally favoured). Respondents were also in favour of other areas of Open Science, like Open Access (88.2%) and Open Data (80.3%). Among respondents we observed high levels of experience with OPR, with three out of four (76.2%) reporting having taken part in an OPR process as author, reviewer or editor. There were also high levels of support for most of the traits of OPR, particularly open interaction, open reports and final-version commenting. Respondents were against opening reviewer identities to authors, however, with more than half believing it would make peer review worse. Overall satisfaction with the peer review system used by scholarly journals seems to strongly vary across disciplines. Taken together, these findings are very encouraging for OPR’s prospects for moving mainstream but indicate that due care must be taken to avoid a “one-size fits all” solution and to tailor such systems to differing (especially disciplinary) contexts. OPR is an evolving phenomenon and hence future studies are to be encouraged, especially to further explore differences between disciplines and monitor the evolution of attitudes. PMID:29236721

7 CFR 3400.21 - Scientific peer review for research activities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... 7 Agriculture 15 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false Scientific peer review for research activities. 3400... § 3400.21 Scientific peer review for research activities. Scientific peer review is an evaluation of a... with the scientific knowledge and technical skills to conduct the proposed research work. Peer...

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Jagsi, Reshma, E-mail: rjagsi@med.umich.edu; Bennett, Katherine Egan; Griffith, Kent A.

Purpose: Peer reviewers' knowledge of author identity may influence review content, quality, and recommendations. Therefore, the International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics (“Red Journal”) implemented double-blinded peer review in 2011. Given the relatively small size of the specialty and the high frequency of preliminary abstract presentations, we sought to evaluate attitudes, the efficacy of blinding, and the potential impact on the disposition of submissions. Methods and Materials: In May through August 2012, all Red Journal reviewers and 1 author per manuscript completed questionnaires regarding demographics, attitudes, and perceptions of success of blinding. We also evaluated correlates of the outcomesmore » of peer review. Results: Questionnaires were received from 408 authors and 519 reviewers (100%). The majority of respondents favored double blinding; 6% of authors and 13% of reviewers disagreed that double blinding should continue in the Red Journal. In all, 50% of the reviewers did not suspect the identity of the author of the paper that they reviewed; 19% of reviewers believed that they could identify the author(s), and 31% suspected that they could. Similarly, 23% believed that they knew the institution(s) from which the paper originated, and 34% suspected that they did. Among those who at least suspected author identity, 42% indicated that prior presentations served as a clue, and 57% indicated that literature referenced did so. Of those who at least suspected origin and provided details (n=133), 13% were entirely incorrect. Rejection was more common in 2012 than 2011, and submissions from last authors with higher H-indices (>21) were more likely to survive initial review, without evidence of interactions between submission year and author gender or H-index. Conclusions: In a relatively small specialty in which preliminary research presentations are common and occur in a limited number of venues, reviewers are often familiar with research findings and suspect author identity even when manuscript review is blinded. Nevertheless, blinding appears to be effective in many cases, and support for continuing blinding was strong.« less

Random Versus Nonrandom Peer Review: A Case for More Meaningful Peer Review.

PubMed

Itri, Jason N; Donithan, Adam; Patel, Sohil H

2018-05-10

Random peer review programs are not optimized to discover cases with diagnostic error and thus have inherent limitations with respect to educational and quality improvement value. Nonrandom peer review offers an alternative approach in which diagnostic error cases are targeted for collection during routine clinical practice. The objective of this study was to compare error cases identified through random and nonrandom peer review approaches at an academic center. During the 1-year study period, the number of discrepancy cases and score of discrepancy were determined from each approach. The nonrandom peer review process collected 190 cases, of which 60 were scored as 2 (minor discrepancy), 94 as 3 (significant discrepancy), and 36 as 4 (major discrepancy). In the random peer review process, 1,690 cases were reviewed, of which 1,646 were scored as 1 (no discrepancy), 44 were scored as 2 (minor discrepancy), and none were scored as 3 or 4. Several teaching lessons and quality improvement measures were developed as a result of analysis of error cases collected through the nonrandom peer review process. Our experience supports the implementation of nonrandom peer review as a replacement to random peer review, with nonrandom peer review serving as a more effective method for collecting diagnostic error cases with educational and quality improvement value. Copyright © 2018 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Peer Review Practices for Evaluating Biomedical Research Grants: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

PubMed

Liaw, Lucy; Freedman, Jane E; Becker, Lance B; Mehta, Nehal N; Liscum, Laura

2017-08-04

The biomedical research enterprise depends on the fair and objective peer review of research grants, leading to the distribution of resources through efficient and robust competitive methods. In the United States, federal funding agencies and foundations collectively distribute billions of dollars annually to support biomedical research. For the American Heart Association, a Peer Review Subcommittee is charged with establishing the highest standards for peer review. This scientific statement reviews the current literature on peer review practices, describes the current American Heart Association peer review process and those of other agencies, analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of American Heart Association peer review practices, and recommends best practices for the future. © 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.

Ozone and caries: a review of the literature.

PubMed

Burke, F J Trevor

2012-05-01

Ozone, either in gaseous form or as ozonated water, has been available for use as a treatment for dental caries for a decade. This paper reviews the literature on the subject by examining the findings of publications in the peer review literature. Eighteen papers were identified by a literature search. From the review of these, it was concluded that, while some laboratory studies and some short duration clinical studies have suggested that ozone may be effective in the treatment of root caries or killing of oral micro-organisms, the clinical evidence for the use of ozone in treatment of caries is not compelling.

Perspective from the Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program.

PubMed

Rich, I M; Andejeski, Y; Alciati, M H; Crawford Bisceglio, I; Breslau, E S; McCall, L; Valadez, A

1998-12-01

The Department of Defense (DOD), Breast Cancer Research Program (BCRP) was established in 1993. Since its inception, Congress has appropriated more than 878 million dollars for the BCRP, a unique public-private partnership between the DOD, consumer advocacy, and scientific communities which has funded approximately 1,800 breast cancer research grants. Through this partnership, the BCRP designed a model program for consumer involvement in scientific peer review. This paper describes the BCRP's approach to the processes of recruitment, selection, and preparation of consumers for this expanded role. Further, factors critical to program implementation, such as effective program management, ongoing process improvement, strong program leadership, and allocation of resources, that led to the BCRP's success in developing the previously undefined role of breast cancer survivors as members of scientific peer review panels are discussed. The BCRP demonstrates the feasibility and unique contributions of consumers in scientific peer review and provides a critical foundation for future efforts to ensure consumer involvement in scientific research programs.

The Impact of Peer Review on Writing in a Psychology Course: Lessons Learned

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bhullar, Naureen; Rose, Karen C.; Utell, Janine M.; Healey, Kathryn N.

2014-01-01

The authors assessed the impact of peer review on student writing in four sections of an undergraduate Developmental Psychology course. They hypothesized that peer review would result in better writing in the peer review group compared to the group with no peer review. Writing was rated independently by two instructors who were blind to the…

The impact of exposure to peer suicidal self-directed violence on youth suicidal behavior: a critical review of the literature.

PubMed

Crepeau-Hobson, M Franci; Leech, Nancy L

2014-02-01

There is considerable evidence that being exposed to the suicide or suicidal behavior of another can increase the risk for suicide. Significant relationships between media coverage and youth suicide have been documented in the professional literature. Exposure to familial suicidal behavior has also been established as a risk factor for youth suicidal behavior; However, peer suicide exposure is not as clear cut as research results in this area have been mixed. In the current paper the empirical literature focused on the associations between exposure to peer suicides and suicide attempts and youth suicidal behavior is critically reviewed. Effect sizes were computed for each of the 23 studies included in the review to allow for cross-study comparisons. The results demonstrate that having a friend or acquaintance attempt suicide is significantly related to risk for suicidal thoughts and behavior. However, the support for the relationship between the suicide of a peer and youth suicidal behavior was less consistent. Implications for clinical practice and suicide postvention as well as areas of future research are discussed. © 2013 The American Association of Suicidology.

28 CFR 34.111 - Compensation.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES Peer Review § 34.111 Compensation. All peer reviewers will be eligible to be paid according to applicable regulations... provided in the OJJDP “Peer Review Guideline”. ...

Total Risk Integrated Methodology (TRIM) - Peer Review and Publications

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

Peer review: Consistent with Agency peer review policy, and the 1994 Agency Task Force on Environmental Regulatory Modeling, internal and external peer review has been an integral part of the TRIM development plan.

Scholarly publishing depends on peer reviewers.

PubMed

Fernandez-Llimos, Fernando

2018-01-01

The peer-review crisis is posing a risk to the scholarly peer-reviewed journal system. Journals have to ask many potential peer reviewers to obtain a minimum acceptable number of peers accepting reviewing a manuscript. Several solutions have been suggested to overcome this shortage. From reimbursing for the job, to eliminating pre-publication reviews, one cannot predict which is more dangerous for the future of scholarly publishing. And, why not acknowledging their contribution to the final version of the article published? PubMed created two categories of contributors: authors [AU] and collaborators [IR]. Why not a third category for the peer-reviewer?

The Power of Online Community and Citizen Science

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Cook, J.; Nuccitelli, D. A.; Winkler, B.; Cowtan, K.; Brimelow, J.

2012-12-01

The Internet offers innovative and creative means of disseminating content. But where the Internet comes into its own is in the non-linear power of community. Not only can communicators interact directly with their audience, more importantly, the audience can network with each other. This enables publishers to build communities rallied around common topics of interest. Online communities lead to exciting opportunities such as citizen science where communities crowd-source the collection or analysis of data. Skeptical Science is a case study in the development of a volunteer community that produces regular content developed within an internal review system that ensures a high level of accuracy and quality. The community also engages with the peer-reviewed literature, submitting responses to peer-reviewed papers, collecting meta-data used in other scientific research and conducting the largest ever survey of climate papers. Thus this online community both contributes to the outreach effort of climate communication and also seeks to add to the body of scientific knowledge.

Consequences of Outcome Reporting Bias in Education Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Williams, R. T.; Polanin, J. R.

2014-01-01

Publication bias is a term that typically refers to the well-known tendency for studies lacking statistically significant results to be less likely to be published in peer-reviewed journals. This happens because authors are less likely to submit, while editors and reviewers are less likely to accept for publication, papers that lack statistically…

A Return to the "Mexican Room": The Segregation of Arizona's English Learners

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gandara, Patricia; Orfield, Gary

2010-01-01

This paper reviews the research on the impact of segregation on Latino and English Language Learner (ELL) students, including new empirical research conducted in Arizona. It also reviews court decisions regarding students' rights to be integrated with their mainstream peers, and provides data on the increasing segregation of Arizona's Latino and…

An Evidence-Based Environmental Perspective Of Manufactured Silver Nanoparticle In Syntheses And Applications: A Systematic Review And Critical Appraisal Of Peer-Reviewed Scientific Papers

EPA Science Inventory

Most recently, renewed interest has arisen in manufactured silver nanoparticles because of their unusually enhanced physiochemical properties and biological activities compared to the bulk parent materials. A wide range of applications has emerged in consumer products ranging fr...

How long is too long in contemporary peer review? Perspectives from authors publishing in conservation biology journals.

PubMed

Nguyen, Vivian M; Haddaway, Neal R; Gutowsky, Lee F G; Wilson, Alexander D M; Gallagher, Austin J; Donaldson, Michael R; Hammerschlag, Neil; Cooke, Steven J

2015-01-01

Delays in peer reviewed publication may have consequences for both assessment of scientific prowess in academics as well as communication of important information to the knowledge receptor community. We present an analysis on the perspectives of authors publishing in conservation biology journals regarding their opinions on the importance of speed in peer-review as well as how to improve review times. Authors were invited to take part in an online questionnaire, of which the data was subjected to both qualitative (open coding, categorizing) and quantitative analyses (generalized linear models). We received 637 responses to a total of 6,547 e-mail invitations sent. Peer-review speed was generally perceived as slow, with authors experiencing a typical turnaround time of 14 weeks while their perceived optimal review time is six weeks. Male and younger respondents seem to have higher expectations of review speed than females and older respondents. Majority of participants attributed lengthy review times to the 'stress' on the peer-review system (i.e., reviewer and editor fatigue), while editor persistence and journal prestige were believed to speed up the review process. Negative consequences of lengthy review times appear to be greater for early career researchers and can also have impact on author morale (e.g. motivation or frustration). Competition among colleagues were also of concern to respondents. Incentivizing peer review was among the top suggested alterations to the system along with training graduate students in peer review, increased editorial persistence, and changes to the norms of peer-review such as opening the peer-review process to the public. It is clear that authors surveyed in this study view the peer-review system as under stress and we encourage scientists and publishers to push the envelope for new peer review models.

Androgen Receptor Splice Variants and Resistance to Taxane Chemotherapy

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-10-01

sequence (MTAS) on AR. Milestone: Identify the sequence of AR that is involved in microtubule-binding. Publish 1 peer-reviewed paper . Major Task 4...joined the project and worked on the validation of the PAXgene assay. 6. Products Publications, conference papers , and presentations...Journal publications. The following paper was published: Xichun Liu, Elisa Ledet, Dongying Li, Ary Dotiwala, Allie Steinberger, Jianzhuo

Improving Scientific Research and Writing Skills through Peer Review and Empirical Group Learning †

PubMed Central

Senkevitch, Emilee; Smith, Ann C.; Marbach-Ad, Gili; Song, Wenxia

2011-01-01

Here we describe a semester-long, multipart activity called “Read and wRite to reveal the Research process” (R3) that was designed to teach students the elements of a scientific research paper. We implemented R3 in an advanced immunology course. In R3, we paralleled the activities of reading, discussion, and presentation of relevant immunology work from primary research papers with student writing, discussion, and presentation of their own lab findings. We used reading, discussing, and writing activities to introduce students to the rationale for basic components of a scientific research paper, the method of composing a scientific paper, and the applications of course content to scientific research. As a final part of R3, students worked collaboratively to construct a Group Research Paper that reported on a hypothesis-driven research project, followed by a peer review activity that mimicked the last stage of the scientific publishing process. Assessment of student learning revealed a statistically significant gain in student performance on writing in the style of a research paper from the start of the semester to the end of the semester. PMID:23653760

The ethics of peer review in bioethics.

PubMed

Wendler, David; Miller, Franklin

2014-10-01

A good deal has been written on the ethics of peer review, especially in the scientific and medical literatures. In contrast, we are unaware of any articles on the ethics of peer review in bioethics. Recognising this gap, we evaluate the extant proposals regarding ethical standards for peer review in general and consider how they apply to bioethics. We argue that scholars have an obligation to perform peer review based on the extent to which they personally benefit from the peer review process. We also argue, contrary to existing proposals and guidelines, that it can be appropriate for peer reviewers to benefit in their own scholarship from the manuscripts they review. With respect to bioethics in particular, we endorse double-blind review and suggest several ways in which the peer review process might be improved. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Medical journal peer review: process and bias.

PubMed

Manchikanti, Laxmaiah; Kaye, Alan D; Boswell, Mark V; Hirsch, Joshua A

2015-01-01

Scientific peer review is pivotal in health care research in that it facilitates the evaluation of findings for competence, significance, and originality by qualified experts. While the origins of peer review can be traced to the societies of the eighteenth century, it became an institutionalized part of the scholarly process in the latter half of the twentieth century. This was a response to the growth of research and greater subject specialization. With the current increase in the number of specialty journals, the peer review process continues to evolve to meet the needs of patients, clinicians, and policy makers. The peer review process itself faces challenges. Unblinded peer review might suffer from positive or negative bias towards certain authors, specialties, and institutions. Peer review can also suffer when editors and/or reviewers might be unable to understand the contents of the submitted manuscript. This can result in an inability to detect major flaws, or revelations of major flaws after acceptance of publication by the editors. Other concerns include potentially long delays in publication and challenges uncovering plagiarism, duplication, corruption and scientific misconduct. Conversely, a multitude of these challenges have led to claims of scientific misconduct and an erosion of faith. These challenges have invited criticism of the peer review process itself. However, despite its imperfections, the peer review process enjoys widespread support in the scientific community. Peer review bias is one of the major focuses of today's scientific assessment of the literature. Various types of peer review bias include content-based bias, confirmation bias, bias due to conservatism, bias against interdisciplinary research, publication bias, and the bias of conflicts of interest. Consequently, peer review would benefit from various changes and improvements with appropriate training of reviewers to provide quality reviews to maintain the quality and integrity of research without bias. Thus, an appropriate, transparent peer review is not only ideal, but necessary for the future to facilitate scientific progress.

Peer Review and the Assessment of Higher Education Quality: An International Perspective. Higher Education Report No. 3.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Brennan, John; And Others

This report examines the practices of 19 peer review agencies in the United States, Britain, Denmark, Germany, France, the Netherlands, and Hong Kong to determine variations in peer review in the field of higher education. The report addresses: (1) the sources of authority for peer review; (2) the types and status of peer reviewers; (3) the…

Re-Viewing Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Flynn, Elizabeth A.

2011-01-01

In this article, the author revisits her essay, "Students as Readers of Their Classmates' Writing," by providing a review of the literature on peer review over the past three decades and comments on patterns she sees in waves of peer review research and theorizing. She describes her subsequent experience with peer review in her own classes, and…

Comparison of self-citation by peer reviewers in a journal with single-blind peer review versus a journal with open peer review.

PubMed

Levis, Alexander W; Leentjens, Albert F G; Levenson, James L; Lumley, Mark A; Thombs, Brett D

2015-12-01

Some peer reviewers may inappropriately, or coercively request that authors include references to the reviewers' own work. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether, compared to reviews for a journal with single-blind peer review, reviews for a journal with open peer review included (1) fewer self-citations; (2) a lower proportion of self-citations without a rationale; and (3) a lower ratio of proportions of citations without a rationale in self-citations versus citations to others' work. Peer reviews for published manuscripts submitted in 2012 to a single-blind peer review journal, the Journal of Psychosomatic Research, were previously evaluated (Thombs et al., 2015). These were compared to publically available peer reviews of manuscripts published in 2012 in an open review journal, BMC Psychiatry. Two investigators independently extracted data for both journals. There were no significant differences between journals in the proportion of all reviewer citations that were self-citations (Journal of Psychosomatic Research: 71/225, 32%; BMC Psychiatry: 90/315, 29%; p=.50), or in the proportion of self-citations without a rationale (Journal of Psychosomatic Research: 15/71, 21%; BMC Psychiatry: 12/90, 13%; p=.21). There was no significant difference between journals in the proportion of self-citations versus citations to others' work without a rationale (p=.31). Blind and open peer review methodologies have distinct advantages and disadvantages. The present study found that, in reasonably similar journals that use single-blind and open review, there were no substantive differences in the pattern of peer reviewer self-citations. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

With Whom Does LANL Publish? – A look at LANL collaborations from 1990 -2015 using the Web of Science

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Springer, Everett P.

Collaborations are critical to the science, technology, and engineering achievements at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). This report analyzed the collaborations as measured through peer-reviewed publications from the Web of Science (WoS) database for LANL for the 1990 – 2015 period. Both a cumulative analysis over the entire time period and annual analyses were performed. The results found that the Department of Energy national laboratories, University of California campuses, and other academic institutions collaborate with LANL on regular basis. Results provide insights into trends in peer-reviewed papers collaborations for LANL.

Behind the Spam: A ``Spectral Analysis'' of Predatory Publishers

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Beall, Jeffrey

2016-10-01

Most researchers today are bombarded with spam email solicitations from questionable scholarly publishers. These emails solicit article manuscripts, editorial board service, and even ad hoc peer reviews. These ``predatory'' publishers exploit the scholarly publishing process, patterning themselves after legitimate scholarly publishers yet performing little or no peer review and quickly accepting submitted manuscripts and collecting fees from submitting authors. These counterfeit publishers and journals have published much junk science? especially in the field of cosmology? threatening the integrity of the academic record. This paper examines the current state of predatory publishing and advises researchers how to navigate scholarly publishing to best avoid predatory publishers and other scholarly publishing-related perils.

Advancing Kinesiology through Improved Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Knudson, Duane V.; Morrow, James R., Jr.; Thomas, Jerry R.

2014-01-01

Peer review of scholarship is essential to journal quality, evidence, knowledge advancement, and application of that knowledge in any field. This commentary summarizes recent literature on issues related to peer-review quality and current review practice in kinesiology and provides recommendations to improve peer review in kinesiology journals. We…

Demystifying the peer-review process - workshop

EPA Science Inventory

Scientific writing and peer-review are integral parts of the publishing process. This workshop aims to demystify the peer-review process for early career scientists and provide insightful tips for streamlining the submission and peer review process for all researchers. Providing ...

Teenage Pregnancy: A Comparison of Certain Characteristics among Utah Youth.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Miller, Brent C.; And Others

This paper reports on a study of teenage sexual activity and pregnancy in Utah, conducted to understand ways of dealing with the State's rising adolescent fertility rate. The paper identifies social and cultural characteristics which distinguish sexually active youth from their abstinent peers. Related research is reviewed and methodology is…

Science, Philosophy & Religion. Working Papers Series Volume 1.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Schenck, David, Ed.

Lehigh University Technology Studies Resource Center has coordinated and produced a series of publications that focus on expanding an understanding of the social context of technology in contemporary society. This volume is the first in a series of working papers that aim to stimulate new research, facilitate dissemination, encourage peer review,…

Communicate To Evaluate: A Scottish Polytechnic Approach.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

McLachlan, J.; Wood, V.

The paper describes a critical peer review developed at Napier Polytechnic (NP) of Edinburgh, Scotland for the evaluation and monitoring of its courses. Illustrations of the system are based on the accounting courses offered by the Department of Accounting and Law. The paper first describes the creation of NP from an amalgamation of two colleges…

TechTrends 2010-2015: A Content Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Stauffer, Eric

2017-01-01

This study is a content analysis of articles published within the journal "TechTrends" from 2000 to 2015. The study reveals that the publication "TechTrends" has increased the overall number of peer reviewed original papers over the last 6 years. The author describes the proportion of these original papers per volume and…

Methodological Review of Studies on Educational Leaders and Emotions (1992-2012): Insights into the Meaning of an Emerging Research Field in Educational Administration

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Berkovich, Izhak; Eyal, Ori

2017-01-01

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to do methodological review of the literature on educational leaders and emotions that includes 49 empirical studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 1992 and 2012. Design/methodology/approach: The work systematically analyzes descriptive information, methods, and designs in these studies, and their…

"I sleep better at night:" How peer review of radiation treatment plans indirectly improves quality of care across radiation treatment programs.

PubMed

Brundage, Michael D; Hart, Margaret; O'Donnell, Jennifer; Reddeman, Lindsay; Gutierrez, Eric; Foxcroft, Sophie; Warde, Padraig

Peer review of radiation oncology treatment plans is increasingly recognized as an important component of quality assurance in radiation treatment planning and delivery. Peer review of treatment plans can directly improve the quality of those plans and can also have indirect effects on radiation treatment programs. We undertook a systematic, qualitative approach to describing the indirect benefits of peer review, factors that were seen to facilitate or act as barriers to the implementation of peer review, and strategies to address these barriers across a provincial jurisdiction of radiation oncology programs (ROPs). Semistructured qualitative interviews were held with radiation oncology department heads and radiation therapy managers (or delegates) in all 14 ROPs in Ontario, Canada. We used a theoretically guided phenomenological qualitative approach to design and analyze the interview content. Themes were recorded by 2 independent reviewers, and any discordance was resolved by consensus. A total of 28 interviews were completed with 32 interviewees. Twenty-two unique themes addressed perceived benefits of peer review, relating to either peer review structure (n = 3), process (n = 9), or outcome (n = 10). Of these 22 themes, 19 related to indirect benefits to ROPs. In addition, 18 themes related to factors that facilitated peer review activities and 30 themes related to key barriers to implementing peer review were identified. Findings were consistent with, and enhanced the understanding of, previous survey-based assessments of the benefits and challenges of implementing peer review programs. Although challenges and concerns regarding the implementation of peer review were evident, the indirect benefits to radiation programs are numerous, far outweigh the implementation challenges, and strongly complement the direct individual-patient benefits that result from peer review quality assurance of radiation treatment plans. Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Educational attainment and obesity: a systematic review.

PubMed

Cohen, A K; Rai, M; Rehkopf, D H; Abrams, B

2013-12-01

Although previous systematic reviews considered the relationship between socioeconomic status and obesity, almost 200 peer-reviewed articles have been published since the last review on that topic, and this paper focuses specifically on education, which has different implications. The authors systematically review the peer-reviewed literature from around the world considering the association between educational attainment and obesity. Databases from public health and medicine, education, psychology, economics, and other social sciences were searched, and articles published in English, French, Portuguese and Spanish were included. This paper includes 289 articles that report on 410 populations in 91 countries. The relationship between educational attainment and obesity was modified by both gender and the country's economic development level: an inverse association was more common in studies of higher-income countries and a positive association was more common in lower-income countries, with stronger social patterning among women. Relatively few studies reported on lower-income countries, controlled for a comprehensive set of potential confounding variables and/or attempted to assess causality through the use of quasi-experimental designs. Future research should address these gaps to understand if the relationship between educational attainment and obesity may be causal, thus supporting education policy as a tool for obesity prevention. © 2013 The Authors. obesity reviews © 2013 International Association for the Study of Obesity.

Mining Program Source Code for Improving Software Quality

DTIC Science & Technology

2013-01-01

conduct static verification on the software application under analysis to detect defects around APIs. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals...N/A for none) Enter List of papers submitted or published that acknowledge ARO support from the start of the project to the date of this printing...List the papers , including journal references, in the following categories: Received Paper 05/06/2013 21.00 Tao Xie, Suresh Thummalapenta, David Lo

Taking peer victimization research to the next level: complex interactions among genes, teacher attitudes/behaviors, peer ecologies, & classroom characteristics.

PubMed

Espelage, Dorothy L

2015-01-01

This commentary reviews research findings of the five papers in the special entitled "School-related Factors in the Development of Bullying Perpetration and Victimization", which represent critical areas that are often overlooked in the literature. First, one paper points to the complex interaction between a genetic disposition for aggression and classroom norms toward aggression. Second, an intervention paper unpacks the underlying mechanisms of an efficacious school-wide bully prevention program by opening the "black box" and testing for mediators. Third, the remaining studies employ a wide range of rigorous designs to identify how teachers' attitudes, behaviors, and classroom practices play a critical role in the prevalence of victimization and bullying in the classroom. Further, teachers' attitudes and behaviors are shown to be predictive of youth's willingness to intervene to assist a peer who is being victimized. Results are situated in what is known about bullying prevention, and how the findings from these studies could maximize the sensitivity of future prevention efforts.

On the evolving open peer review culture for chemical information science.

PubMed

Walters, W Patrick; Bajorath, Jürgen

2015-01-01

Compared to the traditional anonymous peer review process, open post-publication peer review provides additional opportunities -and challenges- for reviewers to judge scientific studies. In this editorial, we comment on the open peer review culture and provide some guidance for reviewers of manuscripts submitted to the Chemical Information Science channel of F1000Research.

A novel approach to quality improvement in a safety-net practice: concurrent peer review visits.

PubMed

Fiscella, Kevin; Volpe, Ellen; Winters, Paul; Brown, Melissa; Idris, Amna; Harren, Tricia

2010-12-01

Concurrent peer review visits are structured office visits conducted by clinician peers of the primary care clinician that are specifically designed to reduce competing demands, clinical inertia, and bias. We assessed whether a single concurrent peer review visit reduced clinical inertia and improved control of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes control among underserved patients. We conducted a randomized encouragement trial to evaluate concurrent peer review visits with a community health center. Seven hundred twenty-seven patients with hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and/or diabetes who were not at goal for systolic blood pressure (SBP), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and/or glycated hemoglobin (A1c) were randomly assigned to an invitation to participate in a concurrent peer review visit or to usual care. We compared change in these measures using mixed models and rates of therapeutic intensification during concurrent peer review visits with control visits. One hundred seventy-one patients completed a concurrent peer review visit. SBP improved significantly (p < .01) more among those completing concurrent peer review visits than among those who failed to respond to a concurrent peer review invitation or those randomized to usual care. There were no differences seen for changes in LDL-C or A1c. Concurrent peer review visits were associated with statistically significant greater clinician intensification of blood pressure (p < .001), lipid (p < .001), and diabetes (p < .005) treatment than either for control visits for patients in either the nonresponse group or usual care group. Concurrent peer review visits represent a promising strategy for improving blood pressure control and improving therapeutic intensification in community health centers.

Why Participate in Peer Review as a Journal Manuscript Reviewer: What's in It for You?

PubMed

Pytynia, Kristen B

2017-06-01

The peer review process for scientific journals relies on the efforts of volunteer reviewers. Reviewers are selected due to their expertise in their fields. With so many demands on professional time, the benefits of participating in peer review may not be obvious. However, reviewers benefit by exposure to the latest developments in their fields, facilitating their keeping up-to-date with the latest publications. Tenure committees look favorably on participation in peer review, and invitations to review underscore that the reviewer is a respected subject matter expert. Contacts made during the peer review process can lead to long-lasting collaboration. Continuing medical education credit can be obtained through various mechanisms. Overall, participating in peer review is an important part of career development and should be viewed as a critical component of advancement.

An automated electronic system for managing radiation treatment plan peer review reduces missed reviews at a large, high-volume academic center.

PubMed

Gabriel, Peter E; Woodhouse, Kristina D; Lin, Alexander; Finlay, Jarod C; Young, Richard B; Volz, Edna; Hahn, Stephen M; Metz, James M; Maity, Amit

Assuring quality in cancer care through peer review has become increasingly important in radiation oncology. In 2012, our department implemented an automated electronic system for managing radiation treatment plan peer review. The purpose of this study was to compare the overall impact of this electronic system to our previous manual, paper-based system. In an effort to improve management, an automated electronic system for case finding and documentation of review was developed and implemented. The rates of missed initial reviews, late reviews, and missed re-reviews were compared for the pre- versus postelectronic system cohorts using Pearson χ 2 test and relative risk. Major and minor changes or recommendations were documented and shared with the assigned clinical provider. The overall rate of missed reviews was 7.6% (38/500) before system implementation versus 0.4% (28/6985) under the electronic system (P < .001). In terms of relative risk, courses were 19.0 times (95% confidence interval, 11.8-30.7) more likely to be missed for initial review before the automated system. Missed re-reviews occurred in 23.1% (3/13) of courses in the preelectronic system cohort and 6.6% (10/152) of courses in the postelectronic system cohort (P = .034). Late reviews were more frequent during high travel or major holiday periods. Major changes were recommended in 2.2% and 2.8% in the pre- versus postelectronic systems, respectively. Minor changes were recommended in 5.3% of all postelectronic cases. The implementation of an automated electronic system for managing peer review in a large, complex department was effective in significantly reducing the number of missed reviews and missed re-reviews when compared to our previous manual system. Copyright © 2016 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

48 CFR 215.270 - Peer Reviews.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System 3 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Peer Reviews. 215.270 Section 215.270 Federal Acquisition Regulations System DEFENSE ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM, DEPARTMENT... of Proposals and Information 215.270 Peer Reviews. Agency officials shall conduct Peer Reviews in...

Optimal strategies to consider when peer reviewing a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PubMed

Moher, David

2015-11-02

Systematic reviews are popular. A recent estimate indicates that 11 new systematic reviews are published daily. Nevertheless, evidence indicates that the quality of reporting of systematic reviews is not optimal. One likely reason is that the authors' reports have received inadequate peer review. There are now many different types of systematic reviews and peer reviewing them can be enhanced by using a reporting guideline to supplement whatever template the journal editors have asked you, as a peer reviewer, to use. Additionally, keeping up with the current literature, whether as a content expert or being aware of advances in systematic review methods is likely be make for a more comprehensive and effective peer review. Providing a brief summary of what the systematic review has reported is an important first step in the peer review process (and not performed frequently enough). At its core, it provides the authors with some sense of what the peer reviewer believes was performed (Methods) and found (Results). Importantly, it also provides clarity regarding any potential problems in the methods, including statistical approaches for meta-analysis, results, and interpretation of the systematic review, for which the peer reviewer can seek explanations from the authors; these clarifications are best presented as questions to the authors.

Lessons from Peer Support Among Individuals with Mental Health Difficulties: A Review of the Literature

PubMed Central

Miyamoto, Yuki; Sono, Tamaki

2012-01-01

We conducted a comprehensive narrative review and used a systematic search strategy to identify studies related to peer support among adults with mental health difficulties. The purposes of this review were to describe the principles, effects and benefits of peer support documented in the published literature, to discuss challenging aspects of peer support and to investigate lessons from peer support. Fifty-one studies, including 8 review articles and 19 qualitative studies, met the inclusion criteria for this review. Most of the challenges for peer support were related to “role” and “relationship” issues; that is, how peer support providers relate to people who receive peer support and how peer support providers are treated in the system. The knowledge gained from peer support relationships, such as mutual responsibility and interdependence, might be a clue toward redefining the helper-helper relationship as well as the concepts of help and support. PMID:22563347

Retrospective analysis of the quality of reports by author-suggested and non-author-suggested reviewers in journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models

PubMed Central

Kowalczuk, Maria K; Dudbridge, Frank; Nanda, Shreeya; Harriman, Stephanie L; Patel, Jigisha; Moylan, Elizabeth C

2015-01-01

Objectives To assess whether reports from reviewers recommended by authors show a bias in quality and recommendation for editorial decision, compared with reviewers suggested by other parties, and whether reviewer reports for journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models differ with regard to report quality and reviewer recommendations. Design Retrospective analysis of the quality of reviewer reports using an established Review Quality Instrument, and analysis of reviewer recommendations and author satisfaction surveys. Setting BioMed Central biology and medical journals. BMC Infectious Diseases and BMC Microbiology are similar in size, rejection rates, impact factors and editorial processes, but the former uses open peer review while the latter uses single-blind peer review. The Journal of Inflammation has operated under both peer review models. Sample Two hundred reviewer reports submitted to BMC Infectious Diseases, 200 reviewer reports submitted to BMC Microbiology and 400 reviewer reports submitted to the Journal of Inflammation. Results For each journal, author-suggested reviewers provided reports of comparable quality to non-author-suggested reviewers, but were significantly more likely to recommend acceptance, irrespective of the peer review model (p<0.0001 for BMC Infectious Diseases, BMC Microbiology and the Journal of Inflammation). For BMC Infectious Diseases, the overall quality of reviewer reports measured by the Review Quality Instrument was 5% higher than for BMC Microbiology (p=0.042). For the Journal of Inflammation, the quality of reports was the same irrespective of the peer review model used. Conclusions Reviewers suggested by authors provide reports of comparable quality to non-author-suggested reviewers, but are significantly more likely to recommend acceptance. Open peer review reports for BMC Infectious Diseases were of higher quality than single-blind reports for BMC Microbiology. There was no difference in quality of peer review in the Journal of Inflammation under open peer review compared with single blind. PMID:26423855

42 CFR 24.5 - Peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 42 Public Health 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Peer review. 24.5 Section 24.5 Public Health PUBLIC....5 Peer review. An individual may not be considered for appointment into the SBRS unless his/her qualifications have been reviewed by a PHS peer review committee and the committee has recommended appointment to...

Rethinking Feedback Practices in Higher Education: A Peer Review Perspective

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Nicol, David; Thomson, Avril; Breslin, Caroline

2014-01-01

Peer review is a reciprocal process whereby students produce feedback reviews on the work of peers and receive feedback reviews from peers on their own work. Prior research has primarily examined the learning benefits that result from the receipt of feedback reviews, with few studies specifically exploring the merits of producing feedback reviews…

What is open peer review? A systematic review.

PubMed

Ross-Hellauer, Tony

2017-01-01

Background : "Open peer review" (OPR), despite being a major pillar of Open Science, has neither a standardized definition nor an agreed schema of its features and implementations. The literature reflects this, with numerous overlapping and contradictory definitions. While for some the term refers to peer review where the identities of both author and reviewer are disclosed to each other, for others it signifies systems where reviewer reports are published alongside articles. For others it signifies both of these conditions, and for yet others it describes systems where not only "invited experts" are able to comment. For still others, it includes a variety of combinations of these and other novel methods. Methods : Recognising the absence of a consensus view on what open peer review is, this article undertakes a systematic review of definitions of "open peer review" or "open review", to create a corpus of 122 definitions. These definitions are systematically analysed to build a coherent typology of the various innovations in peer review signified by the term, and hence provide the precise technical definition currently lacking. Results : This quantifiable data yields rich information on the range and extent of differing definitions over time and by broad subject area. Quantifying definitions in this way allows us to accurately portray exactly how ambiguously the phrase "open peer review" has been used thus far, for the literature offers 22 distinct configurations of seven traits, effectively meaning that there are 22 different definitions of OPR in the literature reviewed. Conclusions : I propose a pragmatic definition of open peer review as an umbrella term for a number of overlapping ways that peer review models can be adapted in line with the aims of Open Science, including making reviewer and author identities open, publishing review reports and enabling greater participation in the peer review process.

Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness (CERTAIN): evolution of a content management system for point-of-care clinical decision support.

PubMed

Barwise, Amelia; Garcia-Arguello, Lisbeth; Dong, Yue; Hulyalkar, Manasi; Vukoja, Marija; Schultz, Marcus J; Adhikari, Neill K J; Bonneton, Benjamin; Kilickaya, Oguz; Kashyap, Rahul; Gajic, Ognjen; Schmickl, Christopher N

2016-10-03

The Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness (CERTAIN) is an international collaborative project with the overall objective of standardizing the approach to the evaluation and treatment of critically ill patients world-wide, in accordance with best-practice principles. One of CERTAIN's key features is clinical decision support providing point-of-care information about common acute illness syndromes, procedures, and medications in an index card format. This paper describes 1) the process of developing and validating the content for point-of-care decision support, and 2) the content management system that facilitates frequent peer-review and allows rapid updates of content across different platforms (CERTAIN software, mobile apps, pdf-booklet) and different languages. Content was created based on survey results of acute care providers and validated using an open peer-review process. Over a 3 year period, CERTAIN content expanded to include 67 syndrome cards, 30 procedure cards, and 117 medication cards. 127 (59 %) cards have been peer-reviewed so far. Initially MS Word® and Dropbox® were used to create, store, and share content for peer-review. Recently Google Docs® was used to make the peer-review process more efficient. However, neither of these approaches met our security requirements nor has the capacity to instantly update the different CERTAIN platforms. Although we were able to successfully develop and validate a large inventory of clinical decision support cards in a short period of time, commercially available software solutions for content management are suboptimal. Novel custom solutions are necessary for efficient global point of care content system management.

Policy Statements and Position Papers.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Journal of Dental Education, 1984

1984-01-01

The American Association of Dental Schools position is presented on dental school curriculum and administration, peer review, freedoms and responsibilities of individuals and institutions, national health programs, interdisciplinary education, ionizing radiation in dental education facilities, and due process. (MSE)

US bill seeks to overturn NIH research-archiving rule

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Gwynne, Peter

2012-03-01

A bipartisan bill introduced in the US House of Representatives aims to reverse 2008 legislation that requires recipients of National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants to make copies of their peer-reviewed papers freely available online.

Cost model validation: a technical and cultural approach

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Hihn, J.; Rosenberg, L.; Roust, K.; Warfield, K.

2001-01-01

This paper summarizes how JPL's parametric mission cost model (PMCM) has been validated using both formal statistical methods and a variety of peer and management reviews in order to establish organizational acceptance of the cost model estimates.

“NaKnowBase”: A Nanomaterials Relational Database

EPA Science Inventory

NaKnowBase is an internal relational database populated with data from peer-reviewed ORD nanomaterials research publications. The database focuses on papers describing the actions of nanomaterials in environmental or biological media including their interactions, transformations...

Beliefs in the Future as a Positive Youth Development Construct: A Conceptual Review

PubMed Central

Sun, Rachel C. F.; Shek, Daniel T. L.

2012-01-01

Beliefs in the future are an internalization of hope and optimism about future outcomes. This paper reviews and compares several theories of hope and optimism and highlights the features constituting beliefs in the future. This paper points out that beliefs in the future include a series of goal-directed thoughts and motivation, such as setting up valued and attainable goals, planning pathways, and maintaining self-confidence and mastery, so as to keep adolescents engaged in the pursuit of goals. This kind of personal mastery, together with sociocultural values, family, school, and peers are the antecedents leading to beliefs in the future, which is related to adolescents' well-being and positive development. In order to cultivate adolescents' beliefs in the future, enabling their ability to manipulate goal-directed thoughts and motivation and providing a supportive environment including their family, school, peers, and the society are recommended. PMID:22654623

A systematic review of peer teaching and learning in clinical education.

PubMed

Secomb, Jacinta

2008-03-01

The purpose of this review is to provide a framework for peer teaching and learning in the clinical education of undergraduate health science students in clinical practice settings and make clear the positive and negative aspects of this teaching and learning strategy. The practice of using peers incidentally or purposefully in the clinical education of apprentice or undergraduate health science students is a well-established tradition and commonly practiced, but lacks definition in its implementation. The author conducted a search of health science and educational electronic databases using the terms peer, clinical education and undergraduate. The set limitations were publications after 1980 (2005 inclusive), English language and research papers. Selection of studies occurred: based on participant, intervention, research method and learning outcomes, following a rigorous critical and quality appraisal with a purposefully developed tool. The results have been both tabled and collated in a narrative summary. Twelve articles met the inclusion criteria, representing five countries and four health science disciplines. This review reported mostly positive outcomes on the effectiveness of peer teaching and learning; it can increase student's confidence in clinical practice and improve learning in the psychomotor and cognitive domains. Negative aspects were also identified; these include poor student learning if personalities or learning styles are not compatible and students spending less individualized time with the clinical instructor. Peer teaching and learning is an effective educational intervention for health science students on clinical placements. Preclinical education of students congruent with the academic timetable increases student educational outcomes from peer teaching and learning. Strategies are required prior to clinical placement to accommodate incompatible students or poor student learning. The findings from this systematic review, although not statistically significant, do have pragmatic implications for clinical practice. It can increase clinical placement opportunities for undergraduate health students, assist clinical staff with workload pressures and increase clinician time with clients, while further developing students' knowledge, skills and attitudes.

Detailed prospective peer review in a community radiation oncology clinic.

PubMed

Mitchell, James D; Chesnut, Thomas J; Eastham, David V; Demandante, Carlo N; Hoopes, David J

In 2012, we instituted detailed prospective peer review of new cases. We present the outcomes of peer review on patient management and time required for peer review. Peer review rounds were held 3 to 4 days weekly and required 2 physicians to review pertinent information from the electronic medical record and treatment planning system. Eight aspects were reviewed for each case: 1) workup and staging; 2) treatment intent and prescription; 3) position, immobilization, and simulation; 4) motion assessment and management; 5) target contours; 6) normal tissue contours; 7) target dosimetry; and 8) normal tissue dosimetry. Cases were marked as, "Meets standard of care," "Variation," or "Major deviation." Changes in treatment plan were noted. As our process evolved, we recorded the time spent reviewing each case. From 2012 to 2014, we collected peer review data on 442 of 465 (95%) radiation therapy patients treated in our hospital-based clinic. Overall, 91 (20.6%) of the cases were marked as having a variation, and 3 (0.7%) as major deviation. Forty-two (9.5%) of the cases were altered after peer review. An overall peer review score of "Variation" or "Major deviation" was highly associated with a change in treatment plan (P < .01). Changes in target contours were recommended in 10% of cases. Gastrointestinal cases were significantly associated with a change in treatment plan after peer review. Indicators on position, immobilization, simulation, target contours, target dosimetry, motion management, normal tissue contours, and normal tissue dosimetry were significantly associated with a change in treatment plan. The mean time spent on each case was 7 minutes. Prospective peer review is feasible in a community radiation oncology practice. Our process led to changes in 9.5% of cases. Peer review should focus on technical factors such as target contours and dosimetry. Peer review required 7 minutes per case. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Communities of practice and the construction of the professional identities of nurse educators: A review of the literature.

PubMed

Woods, Andrew; Cashin, Andrew; Stockhausen, Lynette

2016-02-01

To comprehensively review the Community of Practice literature from nursing contexts to explore whether and how these communities contribute to the social construction of nurse educator professional identity. Due to the wide scope of predominately qualitative literature on the topic, papers were analysed and themed inductively. CINAHL, MEDLINE, COCHRANE, EBSCO databases, Emerald, Proquest & Google Scholar. These online databases were searched for relevant peer-reviewed journal papers in the English language with no date range specified. The search terms 'nurs* educator' and 'nurs* teacher' were combined with each of the terms 'communit* of practice', 'identity' and 'role' resulting in 293 peer-reviewed journal papers. Where abstracts were missing, introductory and background sections were skimmed for related content. Papers that made incidental reference to either professional identity or a Community of Practice were excluded. In total, 63 primary study or discussion papers were found to have a focus on nurse educator identity and/or communities of practice in healthcare contexts. Papers specifically focused on communities of practice in nursing (n=33) could only be found from the last 10 years (2005-2015). Only five of these focused on nurse educators. Community of Practice theory and the professional teaching literature offers collaborative and active ways for nurse educators to further develop their professional identities. Despite the emergence of communities of practice in the nursing literature, further studies are required to explore how such a construct can facilitate the social construction of nurse educator professional identity. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

How Long Is Too Long in Contemporary Peer Review? Perspectives from Authors Publishing in Conservation Biology Journals

PubMed Central

Nguyen, Vivian M.; Haddaway, Neal R.; Gutowsky, Lee F. G.; Wilson, Alexander D. M.; Gallagher, Austin J.; Donaldson, Michael R.; Hammerschlag, Neil; Cooke, Steven J.

2015-01-01

Delays in peer reviewed publication may have consequences for both assessment of scientific prowess in academia as well as communication of important information to the knowledge receptor community. We present an analysis on the perspectives of authors publishing in conservation biology journals regarding their opinions on the importance of speed in peer-review as well as how to improve review times. Authors were invited to take part in an online questionnaire, of which the data was subjected to both qualitative (open coding, categorizing) and quantitative analyses (generalized linear models). We received 637 responses to 6,547 e-mail invitations sent. Peer-review speed was generally perceived as slow, with authors experiencing a typical turnaround time of 14 weeks while their perceived optimal review time was six weeks. Male and younger respondents seem to have higher expectations of review speed than females and older respondents. The majority of participants attributed lengthy review times to reviewer and editor fatigue, while editor persistence and journal prestige were believed to speed up the review process. Negative consequences of lengthy review times were perceived to be greater for early career researchers and to have impact on author morale (e.g. motivation or frustration). Competition among colleagues was also of concern to respondents. Incentivizing peer-review was among the top suggested alterations to the system along with training graduate students in peer-review, increased editorial persistence, and changes to the norms of peer-review such as opening the peer-review process to the public. It is clear that authors surveyed in this study viewed the peer-review system as under stress and we encourage scientists and publishers to push the envelope for new peer-review models. PMID:26267491

Delineation, peer review, and refinement of subregions of the conterminous United States

Treesearch

J.E. Keys; D.T. Cleland; W.H. McNab

2007-01-01

This paper briefly describes the background of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service National Hierarchical Framework of Ecological Units and the methods used for delineating map units at the subregion planning and analysis scale. The process for scientific review and continuous refinement of ecological units and associated data of subregions is also...

Literacy Outcomes in Deaf Students with Cochlear Implants: Current State of the Knowledge

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mayer, Connie; Trezek, Beverly J.

2018-01-01

The purpose of this paper is to examine the available peer-reviewed research regarding literacy achievement in deaf children with cochlear implants. A related goal is to identify gaps in the empirical literature and suggest directions for future research. Included in this review are studies that exclusively report reading and writing outcomes for…

Rigor, Transparency, and Reporting Social Science Research: Why Guidelines Don't Have to Kill Your Story

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Wharton, Tracy

2017-01-01

Dissemination of research is the most challenging aspect of building the evidence base. Despite peer review, evidence suggests that a substantial proportion of papers leave out details that are necessary to judge bias, consider replication, or initiate meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Reporting guidelines were created to ensure minimally…

Peer review in hematopoietic cell transplantation: are we doing our fair share?

PubMed

Giralt, S; Korngold, R; Lazarus, H M

2016-09-01

Peer review is believed to be important in maintaining the quality and integrity of research in academic endeavors. Recently, the value of the current peer review process, which is more than 100 years old has come into question. In the field of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), peer review was unable to prevent the publication of the largest and most notorious scientific fraud in our field. In order to assess how the HCT community views and how engaged it is with the peer review process, the American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation conducted a survey of all of its members in 2014. The survey was sent to all active members through multiple email communications in August and September 2014. Of a total of 1183 members, 149 responded. Almost all of the respondents had participated in the peer review process, with few respondents declining ever to review manuscripts. The most common cause for declining review requests was lack of time. Most respondents (68%) thought that the current peer review process was relatively fair and unbiased, whereas only 9% of the respondents stated that they did not believe in the peer review process. In conclusion, among the respondents of this survey most felt the peer review process to be valuable and fair, however, the lack of response suggests that further study into improving the peer review process in the field of HCT is warranted in the era of electronic publishing and communication.

The Potential of Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Johnson, Susan Moore; Fiarman, Sarah E.

2012-01-01

Peer review of teachers is controversial for several reasons. Some say peer reviewers encroach on the rightful domain of the principal as instructional leader. Others argue that, because peer evaluators are fellow teachers, they may be biased or unwilling to make hard decisions. Many teachers find the prospect of peer evaluation unsettling because…

Physicians' medication prescribing in primary care . in Riyadh City, Saudi Arabia. Literature review, part 3: prescribing errors.

PubMed

Qureshi, N A; Neyaz, Y; Khoja, T; Magzoub, M A; Haycox, A; Walley, T

2011-02-01

Medication errors are globally huge in magnitude and associated with high morbidity and mortality together with high costs and legal problems. Medication errors are caused by multiple factors related to health providers, consumers and health system, but most prescribing errors are preventable. This paper is the third of 3 review articles that form the background for a series of 5 interconnected studies of prescribing patterns and medication errors in the public and private primary health care sectors of Saudi Arabia. A MEDLINE search was conducted to identify papers published in peer-reviewed journals over the previous 3 decades. The paper reviews the etiology, prevention strategies, reporting mechanisms and the myriad consequences of medication errors.

High nonpublication rate from publication professionals hinders evidence-based publication practices

PubMed Central

Stretton, Serina; Kenreigh, Charlotte A.; Wagner, Linda T.; Woolley, Karen L.

2016-01-01

Background. The need for timely, ethical, and high-quality reporting of clinical trial results has seen a rise in demand for publication professionals. These publication experts, who are not ghostwriters, work with leading medical researchers and funders around the world to plan and prepare thousands of publications each year. Despite the involvement of publication professionals in an increasing number of peer-reviewed publications, especially those that affect patient care, there is limited evidence-based guidance in the peer-reviewed literature on their publication practices. Similar to the push for editors and the peer-review community to conduct and publish research on publication ethics and the peer-review process, the International Society for Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) has encouraged members to conduct and publish research on publication planning and practices. Our primary objective was to investigate the publication rate of research presented at ISMPP Annual Meetings. Methods. ISMPP Annual Meeting abstract lists (April 2009–April 2014) were searched in November 2014 and data were extracted into a pilot-tested spreadsheet. MEDLINE was searched in December 2014 to determine the publication rate (calculated as the % of presented abstracts published as full papers in peer-reviewed journals). Data were analyzed using the Cochran-Armitage trend test (significance: P < .05) by an independent academic statistician. Results. From 2009 to 2014, there were 220 abstracts submitted, 185 accepted, and 164 presented. There were four corresponding publications (publication rate 2.4%). Over time, ISMPP’s abstract acceptance rate (overall: 84.1%) did not change, but the number of abstracts presented increased significantly (P = .02). Most abstracts were presented as posters (81.1%) and most research was observational (72.6%). Most researchers came from the US (78.0%), followed by Europe (17.7%), and the Asia-Pacific region (11.2%). Discussion. Research presented at ISMPP Annual Meetings has rarely been published in peer-reviewed journals. The high rate of nonpublication by publication professionals has now been quantified and is of concern. Publication professionals should do more to contribute to evidence-based publication practices, including, and especially, their own. Unless the barriers to publication are identified and addressed, the practices of publication professionals, which affect thousands of peer-reviewed publications each year, will remain hidden and unproven. PMID:27190715

28 CFR 34.105 - Peer review methods.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Peer review methods. 34.105 Section 34... Review § 34.105 Peer review methods. (a) For both competitive and noncompetitive applications, peer... announcement or otherwise established by the Administrator, together with the assignment of numerical values...

7 CFR 3400.21 - Scientific peer review for research activities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 7 Agriculture 15 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Scientific peer review for research activities. 3400... STATE RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND EXTENSION SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SPECIAL RESEARCH GRANTS PROGRAM Peer and Merit Review Arranged by Grantees § 3400.21 Scientific peer review for research...

28 CFR 34.109 - Qualifications of peer reviewers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... be used in the selection of peer reviewers are: (a) Generalized knowledge of juvenile justice or... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false Qualifications of peer reviewers. 34.109 Section 34.109 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES...

28 CFR 34.109 - Qualifications of peer reviewers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... be used in the selection of peer reviewers are: (a) Generalized knowledge of juvenile justice or... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false Qualifications of peer reviewers. 34.109 Section 34.109 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES...

28 CFR 34.109 - Qualifications of peer reviewers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

... be used in the selection of peer reviewers are: (a) Generalized knowledge of juvenile justice or... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2012-07-01 2012-07-01 false Qualifications of peer reviewers. 34.109 Section 34.109 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES...

28 CFR 34.109 - Qualifications of peer reviewers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

... be used in the selection of peer reviewers are: (a) Generalized knowledge of juvenile justice or... 28 Judicial Administration 1 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Qualifications of peer reviewers. 34.109 Section 34.109 Judicial Administration DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OJJDP COMPETITION AND PEER REVIEW PROCEDURES...

Adolescent peer group identification and characteristics: A review of the literature

PubMed Central

Sussman, Steve; Pokhrel, Pallav; Ashmore, Richard D.; Brown, B. Bradford

2011-01-01

This study provides an exhaustive review of 44 peer-reviewed quantitative or qualitative data-based peer-reviewed studies completed on adolescent peer group identification. Adolescent peer group identification is one’s self-perceived or other-perceived membership in discrete teenage peer groups. The studies reviewed suggest that adolescent peer groups consist of five general categories differentiable by lifestyle characteristics: Elites, Athletes, Academics, Deviants, and Others. We found that the Deviant adolescent group category reported relatively greater participation in drug use and other problem behaviors across studies, whereas Academics and Athletes exhibited the least participation in these problem behaviors. Additional research is needed in this arena to better understand the operation of adolescent group labels. PMID:17188815

The Potential of Dual-Language Cross-Cultural Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ruecker, Todd

2011-01-01

This article explores the potential of dual-language cross-cultural peer review and how it improves on traditional monolingual and monocultural peer review. Drawing on scholarship related to international exchange programmes, peer review, and two-way immersion programmes in the United States as well as data collected while facilitating the…

7 CFR 550.17 - Peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 7 Agriculture 6 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Peer review. 550.17 Section 550.17 Agriculture... § 550.17 Peer review. Upon request of the REE Agency, cooperators may be requested to provide documentation in support of peer review activities and cooperator personnel may be requested to participate in...

7 CFR 3411.10 - Establishment and operation of peer review groups.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE NATIONAL RESEARCH INITIATIVE COMPETITIVE GRANTS PROGRAM Scientific Peer Review of Research Grant Applications § 3411.10 Establishment and operation of peer review groups. Subject to § 3411.5, the Administrator shall adopt procedures for the conduct of peer reviews and the...

Toward the Integration of Peer Reviewing and Computational Linguistics Approaches

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Park, Juhwa; Cho, Kwangsu

2017-01-01

Previous research has shown the effectiveness of peer reviewing on the improvement of writing quality. However, the fact that students themselves, arguably novices, judged the improvement leads to concerns about the validity of peer reviewing. We measured writing quality before and after peer reviewing using Coh-Metrix, which computationally…

Building the informatics infrastructure for comparative effectiveness research (CER): a review of the literature.

PubMed

Lopez, Marianne Hamilton; Holve, Erin; Sarkar, Indra Neil; Segal, Courtney

2012-07-01

Technological advances in clinical informatics have made large amounts of data accessible and potentially useful for research. As a result, a burgeoning literature addresses efforts to bridge the fields of health services research and biomedical informatics. The Electronic Data Methods Forum review examines peer-reviewed literature at the intersection of comparative effectiveness research and clinical informatics. The authors are specifically interested in characterizing this literature and identifying cross-cutting themes and gaps in the literature. A 3-step systematic literature search was conducted, including a structured search of PubMed, manual reviews of articles from selected publication lists, and manual reviews of research activities based on prospective electronic clinical data. Two thousand four hundred thirty-five citations were identified as potentially relevant. Ultimately, a full-text review was performed for 147 peer-reviewed papers. One hundred thirty-two articles were selected for inclusion in the review. Of these, 88 articles are the focus of the discussion in this paper. Three types of articles were identified, including papers that: (1) provide historical context or frameworks for using clinical informatics for research, (2) describe platforms and projects, and (3) discuss issues, challenges, and applications of natural language processing. In addition, 2 cross-cutting themes emerged: the challenges of conducting research in the absence of standardized ontologies and data collection; and unique data governance concerns related to the transfer, storage, deidentification, and access to electronic clinical data. Finally, the authors identified several current gaps on important topics such as the use of clinical informatics for cohort identification, cloud computing, and single point access to research data.

Prevention of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder among Military Health Care Workers: A Systematic Review

DTIC Science & Technology

2012-01-01

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is not uncommon among medical personnel serving in the military and that its prevention remains a significant...nonmedical personnel, the purpose for this paper is to perform a review of peer-reviewed and evidence- based literature for post-traumatic stress ...of traumatic stress , depressive symptoms, and psychosocial difficulties in veterans of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom: The role of

Educational attainment and obesity: A systematic review

PubMed Central

Cohen, Alison K.; Rai, Manisha; Rehkopf, David H.; Abrams, Barbara

2013-01-01

Background Although previous systematic reviews considered the relationship between socioeconomic status and obesity, almost 200 peer-reviewed articles have been published since the last review on that topic, and this paper focuses specifically on education, which has different implications. Methods The authors systematically review the peer-reviewed literature from around the world considering the association between educational attainment and obesity. Databases from public health and medicine, education, psychology, economics, and other social sciences were searched, and articles published in English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish were included. Results This paper includes 289 articles that report on 410 populations in 91 countries. The relationship between educational attainment and obesity was modified by both gender and the country's economic development level: an inverse association was more common in studies of higher-income countries and a positive association was more common in lower-income countries, with stronger social patterning among women. Relatively few studies reported on lower-income countries, controlled for a comprehensive set of potential confounding variables, and/or attempted to assess causality through the use of quasi-experimental designs. Conclusions Future research should address these gaps to understand if the relationship between educational attainment and obesity may be causal, thus supporting education policy as a tool for obesity prevention. PMID:23889851

Friendships with peers who are low or high in aggression as moderators of the link between peer victimization and declines in academic functioning.

PubMed

Schwartz, David; Gorman, Andrea Hopmeyer; Dodge, Kenneth A; Pettit, Gregory S; Bates, John E

2008-07-01

This paper reports two prospective investigations of the role of friendship in the relation between peer victimization and grade point averages (GPA). Study 1 included 199 children (105 boys, 94 girls; mean age of 9.1 years) and Study 2 included 310 children (151 boys, 159 girls; mean age of 8.5 years). These children were followed for two school years. In both projects, we assessed aggression, victimization, and friendship with a peer nomination inventory, and we obtained children's GPAs from a review of school records. Peer victimization was associated with academic declines only when children had either a high number of friends who were above the classroom mean on aggression or a low number of friends who were below the classroom mean on aggression. These results highlight the importance of aggression levels among friends for the academic adjustment of victimized children.

The Link between Harsh Home Environments and Negative Academic Trajectories is Exacerbated by Victimization in the Elementary School Peer Group

PubMed Central

Schwartz, David; Lansford, Jennifer E.; Dodge, Kenneth A.; Pettit, Gregory S.; Bates, John E.

2012-01-01

This paper presents a prospective investigation focusing on the moderating role of peer victimization on associations between harsh home environments in the preschool years and academic trajectories during elementary school. The participants were 388 children (198 boys, 190 girls) who we recruited as part of an ongoing multisite longitudinal investigation. Preschool home environment was assessed with structured interviews and questionnaires completed by parents. Peer victimization was assessed with a peer nomination inventory that was administered when the average age of the participants was approximately 8.5 years. Grade point averages (GPA) were obtained from reviews of school records, conducted for seven consecutive years. Indicators of restrictive punitive discipline and exposure to violence were associated with within-subject declines in academic functioning over seven years. However, these effects were exacerbated for those children who had also experienced victimization in the peer group during the intervening years. PMID:22506975

The Strategic Combination of Open-Access Peer-Review, Mainstream Media and Social Media to Improve Public Climate Literacy (Invited)

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Cook, J.; Nuccitelli, D. A.; Jacobs, P.

2013-12-01

The Skeptical Science website began in 2007, with the goal of refuting climate misinformation with peer-reviewed science. It achieved this by embracing a diversity of message formats and delivery methods. Myth rebuttals are available at beginner, intermediate and advanced levels, spanning from long, technical treatments to tweetable one-liners. Content has been translated into 20 different languages and made available via the web, an iPhone app and books while adopted by third parties in textbooks, university and MOOC curricula, books, Senate testimonies and TV documentaries. While social media has been a fruitful medium, we experimented with a new model in 2013, employing the strategic combination of open-access peer-review, mainstream media outreach and social media marketing. This strategy was adopted with the release of a paper quantifying the level of scientific consensus in published climate papers, resulting in broad mainstream media attention as well as acknowledgement from key public figures such as Al Gore, the UK Minister for Energy Edward Davey and President Obama. Our approach was informed by psychological research into both the importance of scientific consensus and how to reduce the influence of misconceptions. While multiple methods of delivery are important, equally important is the construction of the messages themselves. I will examine the science of crafting compelling messages and how combination with diverse message delivery can lead to impactful outcomes.

Highlights from Faraday Discussion 172: Carbon in Electrochemistry, Sheffield, UK, July 2014

DOE PAGES

Dyatkin, Boris; Ash, Philip A.; Sharma, Surbhi

2015-01-12

Faraday Discussions have been very true to their name, focusing genuinely on healthy, in-depth, and fruitful discussions rather than just serving as a platform for one to one researcher interaction and collaboration. So the first experience of a Faraday Discussion is always an eye-opener about how lively conference discussions can become. The format follows that presenters submit full papers a few months in advance which are lightly reviewed before all the papers are circulated to each of the registered participants. Participants arrive at the conference prepared with their queries and arguments after having read the circulated manuscripts. At the conferencemore » the authors present their work for five minutes each followed by extensive discussion of 20–25 minutes, which is practically a ‘‘live peer-review’’. Moreover, this experience of a discussion-cum-peer review with participants ranging for PhD students to experts in the relevant field is both a daunting and a very enriching experience at the same time. This has been the trend since the first Faraday Discussions held in London in 1907 in London which debated ‘‘osmotic pressure’’,1 and this format clearly sets it apart from any other conference to date. All discussions form part of the peer review process and are sequentially recorded and published with the accepted manuscripts.« less

Discussion of "Soil Moisture Measurements: Comparison of Instrumentation Performances" by Ventura Francesca, Facini Osvaldo, Piana Stefano, and Rossi Pisa Paola

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Despite the peer review process, it sometimes happens that scientific papers are published that give misleading or incorrect conclusions. Scientists with the USDA-ARS Soil and Water Management Research Unit, Bushland, Texas, found that a paper on soil water sensors published in an engineering journa...

Construction and Contextualization of Authority in STEM Fields: An Exploratory Paper

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kuglitsch, Rebecca; Bordeaux, Julia R.

2017-01-01

In this paper, we explore how librarians can teach students to deconstruct the concept of authority using questions and considering contextual needs in STEM fields. We argue that examining the complexities of common signifiers of authority, such as peer review, citation rates, and types of sources, as well as exploring contextual factors such as…

Collaborative Learning through Formative Peer Review: Pedagogy, Programs and Potential

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Sondergaard, Harald; Mulder, Raoul A.

2012-01-01

We examine student peer review, with an emphasis on formative practice and collaborative learning, rather than peer grading. Opportunities to engage students in such formative peer assessment are growing, as a range of online tools become available to manage and simplify the process of administering student peer review. We consider whether…

Writing to Learn: An Evaluation of the Calibrated Peer Review™ Program in Two Neuroscience Courses

PubMed Central

Prichard, J. Roxanne

2005-01-01

Although the majority of scientific information is communicated in written form, and peer review is the primary process by which it is validated, undergraduate students may receive little direct training in science writing or peer review. Here, I describe the use of Calibrated Peer Review™ (CPR), a free, web-based writing and peer review program designed to alleviate instructor workload, in two undergraduate neuroscience courses: an upper- level sensation and perception course (41 students, three assignments) and an introductory neuroscience course (50 students; two assignments). Using CPR online, students reviewed primary research articles on assigned ‘hot’ topics, wrote short essays in response to specific guiding questions, reviewed standard ‘calibration’ essays, and provided anonymous quantitative and qualitative peer reviews. An automated grading system calculated the final scores based on a student’s essay quality (as determined by the average of three peer reviews) and his or her accuracy in evaluating 1) three standard calibration essays, 2) three anonymous peer reviews, and 3) his or her self review. Thus, students were assessed not only on their skill at constructing logical, evidence-based arguments, but also on their ability to accurately evaluate their peers’ writing. According to both student self-reports and instructor observation, students’ writing and peer review skills improved over the course of the semester. Student evaluation of the CPR program was mixed; while some students felt like the peer review process enhanced their understanding of the material and improved their writing, others felt as though the process was biased and required too much time. Despite student critiques of the program, I still recommend the CPR program as an excellent and free resource for incorporating more writing, peer review, and critical thinking into an undergraduate neuroscience curriculum. PMID:23493247

Interventional radiology peer, a newly developed peer-review scoring system designed for interventional radiology practice.

PubMed

d'Othée, Bertrand Janne; Haskal, Ziv J

2013-10-01

Existing diagnostic radiology peer-review systems do not address the specificities of interventional radiology (IR) practice. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of a specifically developed interventional peer review method, IR Peer. Retrospective review of a prospectively encoded pilot database aimed at demonstrating the feasibility of IR Peer in a multiphysician practice was performed. This scoring system used morning peer review of selected IR cases from the previous day in the form of a five-item questionnaire and an ordinal answer scale that grades reviewers' agreement with imaging findings, procedural/technical management, early outcomes, and follow-up plan. Patient lists from IR Peer and morbidity and mortality (M&M) conferences were compared to evaluate the amount of overlap and capability of IR Peer to help detect adverse events (AEs). A total of 417 consecutive reviews of IR attending physician cases by peers were performed in 163 consecutive patients over 18 months, and 94% of cases were reviewed by two or three IR attending physicians. Each question was answered 99%-100% of the time. Answers showed disagreement in 10% of cases (2% by a single reviewer, 8% by several), most related to procedural technique. Overall AE incidence was 1.8%. IR Peer contributed 10.7% of cases to the M&M list. IR Peer is feasible, relevant, and easy to implement in a multiphysician IR practice. When used along with other quality-assurance processes, it might help in the detection of AEs for M&M; the latter will require further confirmatory research. © SIR, 2013.

Parkinson's Disease, Environment and Genes

EPA Science Inventory

This special issue of NeuroToxicology presents peer-reviewed papers based on presentations at the Nineteenth International Neurotoxicology Conference.

The 19th meeting in the International Neurotoxicology Conference Series (NTX XIX) was held August 25-28, 2001 at the Dou...

“NaKnowBase”: A Nanomaterials Relational Database

EPA Science Inventory

NaKnowBase is a relational database populated with data from peer-reviewed ORD nanomaterials research publications. The database focuses on papers describing the actions of nanomaterials in environmental or biological media including their interactions, transformations and poten...

EPA Published Research Related to the Hydraulic Fracturing Study

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

A list of publications that will support the draft assessment report on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources. These publications have undergone peer review through the journal where the paper has been published.

VERIFYING THE VOC CONTROL PERFORMANCE OF BIOREACTORS

EPA Science Inventory

The paper describes the verification testing approach used to collect high-quality, peer-reviewed data on the performance of bioreaction-based technologies for the control of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The verification protocol that describes the approach for these tests ...

The evolution of peer review as a basis for scientific publication: directional selection towards a robust discipline?

PubMed

Ferreira, Catarina; Bastille-Rousseau, Guillaume; Bennett, Amanda M; Ellington, E Hance; Terwissen, Christine; Austin, Cayla; Borlestean, Adrian; Boudreau, Melanie R; Chan, Kevin; Forsythe, Adrian; Hossie, Thomas J; Landolt, Kristen; Longhi, Jessica; Otis, Josée-Anne; Peers, Michael J L; Rae, Jason; Seguin, Jacob; Watt, Cristen; Wehtje, Morgan; Murray, Dennis L

2016-08-01

Peer review is pivotal to science and academia, as it represents a widely accepted strategy for ensuring quality control in scientific research. Yet, the peer-review system is poorly adapted to recent changes in the discipline and current societal needs. We provide historical context for the cultural lag that governs peer review that has eventually led to the system's current structural weaknesses (voluntary review, unstandardized review criteria, decentralized process). We argue that some current attempts to upgrade or otherwise modify the peer-review system are merely sticking-plaster solutions to these fundamental flaws, and therefore are unlikely to resolve them in the long term. We claim that for peer review to be relevant, effective, and contemporary with today's publishing demands across scientific disciplines, its main components need to be redesigned. We propose directional changes that are likely to improve the quality, rigour, and timeliness of peer review, and thereby ensure that this critical process serves the community it was created for. © 2015 Cambridge Philosophical Society.

Implementing Head and Neck Contouring Peer Review without Pathway Delay: The On-demand Approach.

PubMed

Fong, C; Sanghera, P; Good, J; Nightingale, P; Hartley, A

2017-12-01

Peer review of contour volume is a priority in the radiotherapy treatment quality assurance process for head and neck cancer. It is essential that incorporation of peer review activity does not introduce additional delays. An on-demand peer review process was piloted to assess the feasibility and efficiency of this approach, as compared with a historic scheduled weekly approach. Between November 2016 and April 2017 four head and neck clinicians in one centre took part in an on-demand peer review process. Cases were of radical or adjuvant intent of any histology and submitted on a voluntary basis. The outcome of contour peer review would be one of unchanged (UC), unchanged with variation or discretion noted (UV), minor change (M) or significant change (S). The time difference between the completion of the on-demand peer review was compared with the time difference to a hypothetical next Monday or Tuesday weekly peer review meeting. The time taken to review each case was also documented in the latter period of the pilot project. In total, 62 cases underwent peer review. Peer review on-demand provided dosimetrists with an average of an extra two working days available per case to meet treatment start dates. The proportion of cases with outcomes UC, UV, M and S were 45%, 16%, 26% and 13%, respectively. The mean peer review time spent per case was 17 min (12 cases). The main reason for S was discrepancy in imaging interpretation (4/8 cases). A lower proportion of oropharyngeal cases were submitted and had S outcomes. A higher proportion of complex cases, e.g. sinonasal/nasopharynx location or previous downstaging chemotherapy had S outcomes. The distribution of S outcomes appears to be similar regardless of clinician experience. The level of peer review activity among individuals differed by workload and job timetable. On-demand peer review of the head and neck contour volume is feasible, reduces delay to the start of dosimetry planning and bypasses the logistical barriers of weekly meetings. An audit of participation will be required to ensure successful implementation. Copyright © 2017 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Ancient texts to PubMed: a brief history of the peer-review process.

PubMed

Farrell, P R; Magida Farrell, L; Farrell, M K

2017-01-01

The formal evaluation of scientific literature by invited referees (peer reviewers) is a relatively recent phenomenon and now is considered a cornerstone of modern science. However, its roots can be traced back to antiquity. As the speed and complexity of scientific information and publishing increases in the digital age, peer review must continue to evolve. To understand the future direction of peer review, we must understand its past. Here, we briefly explore the history of scientific peer review. This may help us predict and design appropriate peer review for the new era. This work was originally presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies Annual Meeting in Baltimore, Maryland in the Spring of 2016.

Peer review in forensic science.

PubMed

Ballantyne, Kaye N; Edmond, Gary; Found, Bryan

2017-08-01

Peer review features prominently in the forensic sciences. Drawing on recent research and studies, this article examines different types of peer review, specifically: editorial peer review; peer review by the scientific community; technical and administrative review; and verification (and replication). The article reviews the different meanings of these quite disparate activities and their utility in relation to enhancing performance and reducing error. It explains how forensic practitioners should approach and use peer review, as well as how it should be described in expert reports and oral testimony. While peer review has considerable potential, and is a key component of modern quality management systems, its actual value in most forensic science settings has yet to be determined. In consequence, forensic practitioners should reflect on why they use specific review procedures and endeavour to make their actual practices and their potential value transparent to consumers; whether investigators, lawyers, jurors or judges. Claims that review increases the validity of a scientific technique or accuracy of opinions within a particular case should be avoided until empirical evidence is available to support such assertions. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Final Report from the External Peer Review of the IRIS ...

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

This document is the final report for the 2004 external peer review for the EPA IRIS Reassessment of the Inhalation Carcinogenicity of Naphthalene, prepared by the Office of Research and Development's National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), for the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Database. A panel of external peer reviewers met to discuss the IRIS report and their responses to the charge questions on July 30, 2004. This document contains the final written comments of the external peer reviewers. This document is the final report for the 2004 external peer review for the IRIS Reassessment of the Inhalation Carcinogenicity of Naphthalene, prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), for the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). A panel of external peer reviewers met to discuss their responses to the charge questions on July 30, 2004. This document contains the final written comments of the external peer reviewers.

The rites of writing papers: steps to successful publishing for psychiatrists.

PubMed

Brakoulias, Vlasios; Macfarlane, Matthew D; Looi, Jeffrey C

2015-02-01

To encourage psychiatrists to publish high-quality articles in peer-reviewed journals by demystifying the publishing process. This paper will describe the publishing process and outline key factors that ensure that publishing is an achievable goal for psychiatrists. The publishing process can be long and often this is related to delays associated with obtaining reviewers and their comments. Negative reviewer comments often relate to grammatical and typographical errors, an insufficient literature review, failure to adequately discuss limitations and conclusions that are not adequately supported by the results. Authors who systematically respond to their paper's reviewer comments are usually successful in having their papers accepted. Success in publishing is usually determined by a topic that appeals to the readership of a journal, a credible methodology and a paper that is well-written. Publishing is achievable for all psychiatrists providing they can write a paper that delivers a clear and concise message, are willing to address reviewer comments and that their paper is tailored to the readership of the journal. © The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists 2014.

Technology-Enhanced Peer Review: Benefits and Implications of Providing Multiple Reviews

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Papadopoulos, Pantelis M.; Lagkas, Thomas D.; Demetriadis, Stavros N.

2017-01-01

This study analyses the impact of self and peer feedback in technology-enhanced peer review settings. The impact of receiving peer comments ("receiver" perspective) is compared to that of reaching own insights by reviewing others' work ("giver" perspective). In this study, 38 sophomore students were randomly assigned in two…

Undergraduate Essay Writing: Online and Face-to-Face Peer Reviews

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Chong, Mike R.; Goff, Lori; Dej, Kimberly

2012-01-01

We implemented two different approaches of using peer review to support undergraduate essay assignments for students taking large second-year courses in life sciences and biology: a web-based online peer review (OPR) approach and a more traditional face-to-face peer review (FPR) approach that was conducted in tutorial settings. The essays…

7 CFR 3401.12 - Establishment and operation of peer review groups.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... 7 Agriculture 15 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Establishment and operation of peer review groups... GRANTS PROGRAM Scientific Peer Review of Research Applications for Funding § 3401.12 Establishment and operation of peer review groups. Subject to § 3401.7, the Administrator will adopt procedures for the...

The Importance of Peer Review: Thoughts on Knudson, Morrow, and Thomas (2014)

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fischman, Mark G.

2014-01-01

Knudson, Morrow, and Thomas (2014) recently summarized a number of important issues related to the quality of peer review and current peer-review practice in kinesiology. This writer endorses their six recommendations for improving peer review in kinesiology journals. The purpose of this commentary is to further highlight the importance of…

Focusing on Content: Discourse in L2 Peer Review Groups

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Vorobel, Oksana; Kim, Deoksoon

2014-01-01

Recent studies on peer review groups in second language classes have focused on various topics, including collaboration (Carr, 2008) and the effect of peer review versus teacher feedback on students' writing (Zhang, 1995). One area that has received little attention is the content of students' speech during peer review. This longitudinal case…

Peer Reviewers Learn from Giving Comments

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Cho, Young Hoan; Cho, Kwangsu

2011-01-01

Research on peer reviewing has revealed that comments received from peer reviewers are helpful when it comes to making revisions in an individual's writing, but the role of providing comments to peer writers has been little explored despite the potential value of such research. In this study, we explored how student reviewers learn by reviewing…

Analysis of Peer Review Comments: QM Recommendations and Feedback Intervention Theory

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Schwegler, Andria F.; Altman, Barbara W.

2015-01-01

Because feedback is a critical component of the continuous improvement cycle of the Quality Matters (QM) peer review process, the present research analyzed the feedback that peer reviewers provided to course developers after a voluntary, nonofficial QM peer review of online courses. Previous research reveals that the effects of feedback on…

Pre-University Chemistry Students in a Mimicked Scholarly Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

van Rens, Lisette; Hermarij, Philip; Pilot, Albert; Beishuizen, Jos; Hofman, Herman; Wal, Marjolein

2014-01-01

Peer review is a significant component in scientific research. Introducing peer review into inquiry processes may be regarded as an aim to develop student understanding regarding quality in inquiries. This study examines student understanding in inquiry peer reviews among pre-university chemistry students, aged 16-17, when they enact a design of a…

Assessing RN-to-RN peer review on clinical units.

PubMed

Pfeiffer, Judith A; Wickline, Mary A; Deetz, Jill; Berry, Elise S

2012-04-01

The primary purpose of this study was to measure informal registered nurse (RN)-to-RN peer review (defined as collegial communication about the quality of nursing care) at the work-unit level. Survey design with cluster sampling of 28 hospital or ambulatory care units (n = 541 respondents). Results were compared with existing patient safety and satisfaction data. A chi-squared test was used to compare responses against nurse characteristics. Nurses agreed that RN-to-RN peer review takes place on their units, but no correlation with patient safety and satisfaction data was found. Misunderstandings about the meaning of peer review were evident. Open-ended comments revealed barriers to peer review: fear of retribution, language barriers and lack of professionalism. Nurses need clarification of peer review. Issues with common language in a professional environment need to be addressed and nurses can learn collaboration from each other's cultures. Managers should support RN-to-RN peer review on clinical units. Methods used here may be useful to assess current departmental nurse peer review. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Peer Review in Radiology: A Resident and Fellow Perspective.

PubMed

Grenville, Jeffrey; Doucette-Preville, David; Vlachou, Paraskevi A; Mnatzakanian, Gevork N; Raikhlin, Antony; Colak, Errol

2016-02-01

The purpose of this study was to explore Canadian radiology residents' and fellows' understanding, attitudes, opinions, and preferences toward peer review. An Internet-based anonymous questionnaire designed to understand one's familiarity, attitudes, opinions, and preferences toward peer review was distributed to radiology residents and fellows across Canada. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, and answers were stratified by level of training. A total of 136 trainees responded to the survey with 92 completed survey responses available for descriptive statistics. Approximately half of respondents are familiar with peer review (49%), and 39% of trainees are involved in peer review. Most respondents (92%) expressed an interest in learning more about peer review; believe that it should be incorporated into the residency training curriculum (86%), be mandatory (72%), and that current participation will increase odds of future participation (91%). Most trainees (80%) are comfortable advising one another about errors, but less comfortable advising staff (21%). Residents and fellows welcome the opportunity to learn more about peer review and believe it should be incorporated into the residency training curriculum. Understanding the attitudes and perceptions held by trainees regarding peer review is important, as a means to optimize education and maximize current and future participation in peer review. Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Retrospective analysis of the quality of reports by author-suggested and non-author-suggested reviewers in journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models.

PubMed

Kowalczuk, Maria K; Dudbridge, Frank; Nanda, Shreeya; Harriman, Stephanie L; Patel, Jigisha; Moylan, Elizabeth C

2015-09-29

To assess whether reports from reviewers recommended by authors show a bias in quality and recommendation for editorial decision, compared with reviewers suggested by other parties, and whether reviewer reports for journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models differ with regard to report quality and reviewer recommendations. Retrospective analysis of the quality of reviewer reports using an established Review Quality Instrument, and analysis of reviewer recommendations and author satisfaction surveys. BioMed Central biology and medical journals. BMC Infectious Diseases and BMC Microbiology are similar in size, rejection rates, impact factors and editorial processes, but the former uses open peer review while the latter uses single-blind peer review. The Journal of Inflammation has operated under both peer review models. Two hundred reviewer reports submitted to BMC Infectious Diseases, 200 reviewer reports submitted to BMC Microbiology and 400 reviewer reports submitted to the Journal of Inflammation. For each journal, author-suggested reviewers provided reports of comparable quality to non-author-suggested reviewers, but were significantly more likely to recommend acceptance, irrespective of the peer review model (p<0.0001 for BMC Infectious Diseases, BMC Microbiology and the Journal of Inflammation). For BMC Infectious Diseases, the overall quality of reviewer reports measured by the Review Quality Instrument was 5% higher than for BMC Microbiology (p=0.042). For the Journal of Inflammation, the quality of reports was the same irrespective of the peer review model used. Reviewers suggested by authors provide reports of comparable quality to non-author-suggested reviewers, but are significantly more likely to recommend acceptance. Open peer review reports for BMC Infectious Diseases were of higher quality than single-blind reports for BMC Microbiology. There was no difference in quality of peer review in the Journal of Inflammation under open peer review compared with single blind. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Gender bias in scholarly peer review.

PubMed

Helmer, Markus; Schottdorf, Manuel; Neef, Andreas; Battaglia, Demian

2017-03-21

Peer review is the cornerstone of scholarly publishing and it is essential that peer reviewers are appointed on the basis of their expertise alone. However, it is difficult to check for any bias in the peer-review process because the identity of peer reviewers generally remains confidential. Here, using public information about the identities of 9000 editors and 43000 reviewers from the Frontiers series of journals, we show that women are underrepresented in the peer-review process, that editors of both genders operate with substantial same-gender preference (homophily), and that the mechanisms of this homophily are gender-dependent. We also show that homophily will persist even if numerical parity between genders is reached, highlighting the need for increased efforts to combat subtler forms of gender bias in scholarly publishing.

Children who are deaf or hard of hearing in inclusive educational settings: a literature review on interactions with peers.

PubMed

Xie, Yu-Han; Potměšil, Miloň; Peters, Brenda

2014-10-01

This review is conducted to describe how children who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH) interact with hearing peers in inclusive settings, illustrate the difficulties and challenges faced by them in interacting with peers, and identify effective interventions that promote their social interaction in inclusive education. A systematic search of databases and journals identified 21 papers that met the inclusion criteria. Two broad themes emerged from an analysis of the literatures, which included processes and outcomes of interactions with peers and intervention programs. The research indicates that children who are D/HH face great difficulties in communicating, initiating/entering, and maintaining interactions with hearing peers in inclusive settings. The co-enrollment and social skills training programs are considered to be effective interventions for their social interaction. Communication abilities and social skills of children who are D/HH, responses of children with normal hearing, and the effect of environment are highlighted as crucial aspects of social interactions. In addition, future research is needed to study the interaction between children who are D/HH and hearing peers in natural settings, at different stages of school life, as well as improving social interaction and establishing an inclusive classroom climate for children who are D/HH. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Meaningful Peer Review in Radiology: A Review of Current Practices and Potential Future Directions.

PubMed

Moriarity, Andrew K; Hawkins, C Matthew; Geis, J Raymond; Dreyer, Keith J; Kamer, Aaron P; Khandheria, Paras; Morey, Jose; Whitfill, James; Wiggins, Richard H; Itri, Jason N

2016-12-01

The current practice of peer review within radiology is well developed and widely implemented compared with other medical specialties. However, there are many factors that limit current peer review practices from reducing diagnostic errors and improving patient care. The development of "meaningful peer review" requires a transition away from compliance toward quality improvement, whereby the information and insights gained facilitate education and drive systematic improvements that reduce the frequency and impact of diagnostic error. The next generation of peer review requires significant improvements in IT functionality and integration, enabling features such as anonymization, adjudication by multiple specialists, categorization and analysis of errors, tracking, feedback, and easy export into teaching files and other media that require strong partnerships with vendors. In this article, the authors assess various peer review practices, with focused discussion on current limitations and future needs for meaningful peer review in radiology. Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Redefining the Practice of Peer Review Through Intelligent Automation-Part 3: Automated Report Analysis and Data Reconciliation.

PubMed

Reiner, Bruce I

2018-02-01

One method for addressing existing peer review limitations is the assignment of peer review cases on a completely blinded basis, in which the peer reviewer would create an independent report which can then be cross-referenced with the primary reader report of record. By leveraging existing computerized data mining techniques, one could in theory automate and objectify the process of report data extraction, classification, and analysis, while reducing time and resource requirements intrinsic to manual peer review report analysis. Once inter-report analysis has been performed, resulting inter-report discrepancies can be presented to the radiologist of record for review, along with the option to directly communicate with the peer reviewer through an electronic data reconciliation tool aimed at collaboratively resolving inter-report discrepancies and improving report accuracy. All associated report and reconciled data could in turn be recorded in a referenceable peer review database, which provides opportunity for context and user-specific education and decision support.

Research Integrity and Peer Review-past highlights and future directions.

PubMed

Boughton, Stephanie L; Kowalczuk, Maria K; Meerpohl, Joerg J; Wager, Elizabeth; Moylan, Elizabeth C

2018-01-01

In May 2016, we launched Research Integrity and Peer Review , an international, open access journal with fully open peer review (reviewers are identified on their reports and named reports are published alongside the article) to provide a home for research on research and publication ethics, research reporting, and research on peer review. As the journal enters its third year, we reflect on recent events and highlights for the journal and explore how the journal is faring in terms of gender and diversity in peer review. We also share the particular interests of our Editors-in-Chief regarding models of peer review, reporting quality, common research integrity issues that arise during the publishing process, and how people interact with the published literature. We continue to encourage further research into peer review, research and publication ethics and research reporting, as we believe that all new initiatives should be evidence-based. We also remain open to constructive discussions of the developments in the field that offer new solutions.

A systematic review of elephant impact across Africa

PubMed Central

Purdon, Andrew; van Aarde, Rudi J.

2017-01-01

Contradictory findings among scientific studies that address a particular issue may impede the conversion of science to management implementation. A systematic review of peer-reviewed studies to generate a single outcome may overcome this problem. The contentious topic of the impact that a megaherbivore such as the savanna elephant have for other species and their environment can benefit from such an approach. After some 68 years, 367 peer-reviewed papers covered the topic and 51 of these papers provided sufficient data to be included in a meta-analysis. We separated the direct impact that elephants had on trees and herbs from the indirect effects on other vertebrates, invertebrates, and soil properties. Elephants have an impact on tree structure and abundance but no overall negative cascading effects for species that share space with them. Primary productivity explained a small amount of variation of elephant impact on vegetation. Elephant numbers (density), study duration, rainfall, tree cover, and the presence of artificial water and fences failed to describe patterns of impact. We conclude that published information do not support the calls made for artificially manipulating elephant numbers to ameliorate elephant impact, and call for the management of space use by elephants to maintain savanna heterogeneity. PMID:28591179

Cooperation between referees and authors increases peer review accuracy.

PubMed

Leek, Jeffrey T; Taub, Margaret A; Pineda, Fernando J

2011-01-01

Peer review is fundamentally a cooperative process between scientists in a community who agree to review each other's work in an unbiased fashion. Peer review is the foundation for decisions concerning publication in journals, awarding of grants, and academic promotion. Here we perform a laboratory study of open and closed peer review based on an online game. We show that when reviewer behavior was made public under open review, reviewers were rewarded for refereeing and formed significantly more cooperative interactions (13% increase in cooperation, P = 0.018). We also show that referees and authors who participated in cooperative interactions had an 11% higher reviewing accuracy rate (P = 0.016). Our results suggest that increasing cooperation in the peer review process can lead to a decreased risk of reviewing errors.

How Does Student Peer Review Influence Perceptions, Engagement and Academic Outcomes? A Case Study

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mulder, Raoul; Baik, Chi; Naylor, Ryan; Pearce, Jon

2014-01-01

Involving students in peer review has many pedagogical benefits, but few studies have explicitly investigated relationships between the content of peer reviews, student perceptions and assessment outcomes. We conducted a case study of peer review within a third-year undergraduate subject at a research-intensive Australian university, in which we…

Do Peer Reviews Help Improve Student Writing Abilities in an EFL High School Classroom?

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kurihara, Noriko

2017-01-01

Several studies have reported the benefits of peer reviews in English as a second language (ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL) writing classrooms. However, there has been little empirical research on whether such peer reviews improve students' writing abilities. The current study investigated the effects of peer review on the development…

Predicting Academics' Willingness to Participate in Peer Review of Teaching: A Quantitative Investigation

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

White, Kiri; Boehm, Emilia; Chester, Andrea

2014-01-01

Peer review of teaching is a collegial process designed to help academics reflect on and improve their teaching practice. Considerable research supports the value of peer review of teaching. However, uptake of voluntary programs is typically low. Few studies have examined the predictors of engagement in voluntary peer review. This study surveyed…

LeaD-In: A Cultural Change Model for Peer Review of Teaching in Higher Education

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Barnard, A.; Nash, R.; McEvoy, K.; Shannon, S.; Waters, C.; Rochester, S.; Bolt, S.

2015-01-01

Peer review of teaching is recognized increasingly as one strategy for academic development even though historically peer review of teaching is often unsupported by policy, action and culture in many Australian universities. Higher education leaders report that academics generally do not engage with peer review of teaching in a systematic or…

Building Scholarly Writers: Student Perspectives on Peer Review in a Doctoral Writing Seminar

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Adamek, Margaret Ellen

2015-01-01

Peer review was used as a primary pedagogical tool in a scholarly writing course for social work doctoral students. To gauge student response to peer review and learning as a result of peer review, the instructor used narrative analysis to organize student comments into themes. Themes identified included initial trepidation, "no pain, no…

34 CFR 359.30 - How is peer review conducted under this program?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... 34 Education 2 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false How is peer review conducted under this program? 359.30 Section 359.30 Education Regulations of the Offices of the Department of Education (Continued) OFFICE OF...? § 359.30 How is peer review conducted under this program? Peer review is conducted under this program in...

Don't Tell It Like It Is: Preserving Collegiality in the Summative Peer Review of Teaching

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Iqbal, Isabeau A.

2014-01-01

While much literature has considered feedback and professional growth in formative peer reviews of teaching, there has been little empirical research conducted on these issues in the context of summative peer reviews. This article explores faculty members' perceptions of feedback practices in the summative peer review of teaching and reports on…

75 FR 24568 - Notice of Intent To Seek OMB Approval To Collect Information: Revision of a Form Pertaining to...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-05-05

... Peer Review of ARS Research Projects AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service (ARS), USDA. ACTION: Notice... scientific peer reviews of all research activities conducted by the USDA. The Office manages the ARS peer review system by centrally planning peer panel reviews for ARS research projects on a five-year cycle...

Adapting Peer Review to an Online Course: An Exploratory Case Study

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Knight, Linda V.; Steinbach, Theresa A.

2011-01-01

With demonstrated benefits to higher level learning, peer review in the classroom has been well researched and popular since at least the 1990s. However, little or no prior studies exist into the peer review process for online courses. Further, we found no prior research specifically addressing the operational aspects of online peer review. This…

Evaluation of the Inhalation Carcinogenicity of Ethylene Oxide ...

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

EPA is seeking peer review of the scientific basis supporting the human health hazard and dose-response assessment of ethylene oxide (cancer) that will appear in the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database. EPA seeks external peer review on how the Agency responded to the SAB panel recommendations, the exposure-response modeling of epidemiologic data, including new analyses since the 2007 external peer review, and on the adequacy, transparency, and clarity of the revised draft. The peer review will include an opportunity for the public to address the peer reviewers.

CHARACTERIZING THE INTRINSIC REMEDIATION OF MTBE AT FIELD SITES

EPA Science Inventory

The project resulted in four peer reviewed publications and numerous presentations and conference proceedings papers. Two students received their master’s degrees as a result of the project funding and are currently employed in the private sector. The proj...

QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF PATHOGENS IN DRINKING WATER

EPA Science Inventory

The project has been summarized in a series of peer-reviewed published papers as outlined in the Publication section of this report. Pathogens capable of causing waterborne diseases include bacteria, protozoa, and viruses. Fecal indicator bacteria are the primary microorganisms u...

International Society for the Social Studies Annual Conference Proceedings (Orlando, Florida, February 25-26, 2010). Volume 2010, Issue 1

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Russell, William Benedict, III, Ed.

2010-01-01

The "ISSS Annual Conference Proceedings" is a peer-reviewed professional publication published once a year following the annual conference. (Individual papers contain references.) [For the 2009 proceedings, see ED504973.

External Peer Review Report on the Defense Contract Management Agency Office of Independent Assessment Internal Review Team

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-11-02

External Peer Review Report on the Defense Contract Management Agency Office of Independent Assessment Internal Review Team N O V E M B E R 2 , 2 0 1 5... MANAGEMENT AGENCY SUBJECT: External Peer Review Report on the Defense Contract Management Agency Office of Independent Assessment Internal Review Team...Report No. DODIG-2016-007) Attached is the External Peer Review Report on the Defense Contract Management Agency Office of Independent Assessment

Scientific writing and the quality of papers: towards a higher impact.

PubMed

Cáceres, Ana Manhani; Gândara, Juliana Perina; Puglisi, Marina Leite

2011-12-01

Given the latent concern of scientists and editors on the quality of scientific writing, the aim of this paper was to present topics on the recommended structure of peer-reviewed papers. We described the key points of common sections of original papers and proposed two additional materials that may be useful for scientific writing: one particular guide to help the organization of the main ideas of the paper; and a table with examples of non desirable and desirable structures in scientific writing.

AQUATOX Peer Review Documents

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

AQUATOX Release 2 underwent an external peer review in early 2003, and Release 3 underwent an external peer review in late 2008. Reviewers stated model enhancements have made AQUATOX one of the most exciting tools in aquatic ecosystem management.

Peer Feedback in Anonymous Peer Review in an EFL Writing Class in Spain

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Coté, Robert A.

2014-01-01

The present study reports the results of a process of peer feedback through anonymous peer review in an EFL writing class. Numerous studies have reported on the benefits of peer review (PR) in the ESL/EFL writing classroom. However, the literature also identifies social issues that can negatively affect the outcome of face-to-face PR. In this…

Malaria epidemiological research in the Republic of Congo.

PubMed

Koukouikila-Koussounda, Felix; Ntoumi, Francine

2016-12-23

Reliable and comprehensive information on the burden of malaria is critical for guiding national and international efforts in malaria control. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of published data and available information on malaria resulting from field studies/investigations conducted in the Republic of Congo (RoC) from 1992 to 2015, as baseline for assisting public health authorities and researchers to define future research priorities as well as interventions. This review considers data from peer-reviewed articles and information from the National Malaria Control Programme reports, based on field investigations or samples collected from 1992 to 2015. Peer-reviewed papers were searched throughout online bibliographic databases PubMed, HINARI and Google Scholar using the following terms: "malaria", "Congo", "Brazzaville", "prevalence", "antimalarial", "efficacy", "falciparum", "genetic", "diversity". Original articles and reviews were included and selection of relevant papers was made. Twenty-eight published articles were included in this review and two additional records from the National Malaria Control Programme were also considered. The majority of studies were conducted in Brazzaville and Pointe-Noire. The present systematic review reveals that number of studies have been conducted in the RoC with regard to malaria. However, their results cannot formally be generalized at the country level. This suggests a need for implementing regular multisite investigations and surveys that may be representative of the country, calling for the support and lead of the Ministry of Health.

Shock Tube/Laser Absorption Studies of Jet Fuels at Low Temperatures (600-1200K)

DTIC Science & Technology

2013-08-27

diagnostics techniques; and the application of an aerosol shock tube to investigate low-vapor-pressure fuels. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed...journals (N/A for none) Enter List of papers submitted or published that acknowledge ARO support from the start of the project to the date of this...printing. List the papers , including journal references, in the following categories: Received Paper 06/14/2011 6.00 Sung Hyun Pyun, Jungwan Cho, David

Online Radiology Reporting with Peer Review as a Learning and Feedback Tool in Radiology; Implementation, Validity, and Student Impressions.

PubMed

McEvoy, Fintan J; Shen, Nicholas W; Nielsen, Dorte H; Buelund, Lene E; Holm, Peter

2017-02-01

Communicating radiological reports to peers has pedagogical value. Students may be uneasy with the process due to a lack of communication and peer review skills or to their failure to see value in the process. We describe a communication exercise with peer review in an undergraduate veterinary radiology course. The computer code used to manage the course and deliver images online is reported, and we provide links to the executable files. We tested to see if undergraduate peer review of radiological reports has validity and describe student impressions of the learning process. Peer review scores for student-generated radiological reports were compared to scores obtained in the summative multiple choice (MCQ) examination for the course. Student satisfaction was measured using a bespoke questionnaire. There was a weak positive correlation (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.32, p < 0.01) between peer review scores students received and the student scores obtained in the MCQ examination. The difference in peer review scores received by students grouped according to their level of course performance (high vs. low) was statistically significant (p < 0.05). No correlation was found between peer review scores awarded by the students and the scores they obtained in the MCQ examination (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.17, p = 0.14). In conclusion, we have created a realistic radiology imaging exercise with readily available software. The peer review scores are valid in that to a limited degree they reflect student future performance in an examination. Students valued the process of learning to communicate radiological findings but do not fully appreciated the value of peer review.

Evaluating the Pros and Cons of Different Peer Review Policies via Simulation.

PubMed

Zhu, Jia; Fung, Gabriel; Wong, Wai Hung; Li, Zhixu; Xu, Chuanhua

2016-08-01

In the academic world, peer review is one of the major processes in evaluating a scholars contribution. In this study, we are interested in quantifying the merits of different policies in a peer review process, such as single-blind review, double-blind review, and obtaining authors feedback. Currently, insufficient work has been undertaken to evaluate the benefits of different peer review policies. One of the major reasons for this situation is the inability to conduct any empirical study because data are presently unavailable. In this case, a computer simulation is one of the best ways to conduct a study. We perform a series of simulations to study the effects of different policies on a peer review process. In this study, we focus on the peer review process of a typical computer science conference. Our results point to the crucial role of program chairs in determining the quality and diversity of the articles to be accepted for publication. We demonstrate the importance of discussion among reviewers, suggest circumstances in which the double-blind review policy should be adopted, and question the credibility of the authors feedback mechanism. Finally, we stress that randomness plays an important role in the peer review process, and this role cannot be eliminated. Although our model may not capture every component of a peer review process, it covers some of the most essential elements. Thus, even the simulation results clearly cannot be taken as literal descriptions of an actual peer review process. However, we can at least still use them to identify alternative directions for future study.

7 CFR 3400.14 - Proposal review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SPECIAL RESEARCH GRANTS PROGRAM Scientific Peer Review of Research... employees of the Department, the respective peer review group, and ad hoc reviewers, as required. Written...-depth discussions will be provided by peer review group members prior to recommending applications for...

Peer Review for EPA's Biologically Based Dose-Response ...

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

EPA is developing a regulation for perchlorate in drinking water. As part the regulatory process EPA must develop a Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG). FDA and EPA scientists developed a biologically based dose-response (BBDR) model to assist in deriving the MCLG. This model is designed to determine under what conditions of iodine nutrition and exposure to perchlorate across sensitive lifestages would result in low serum free and total thyroxine (hypothyroxinemia). EPA is undertaking a peer review to provide a focused, objective independent peer evaluation of the draft model and its model results report. EPA is undertaking a peer review to provide a focused, objective independent peer evaluation of the draft model and its model results report. Peer review is an important component of the scientific process. The criticism, suggestions, and new ideas provided by the peer reviewers stimulate creative thought, strengthen the interpretation of the reviewed material, and confer credibility on the product. The peer review objective is to provide advice to EPA on steps that will yield a highly credible scientific product that is supported by the scientific community and a defensible perchlorate MCLG.

The Healthcare Needs of Latinos with Serious Mental Illness and the Potential of Peer Navigators.

PubMed

Corrigan, Patrick W; Torres, Alessandra; Lara, Juana L; Sheehan, Lindsay; Larson, Jonathon E

2017-07-01

Latinos with serious mental illness get sick and die much younger than other adults. In this paper, we review findings of a community based participatory research project meant to identify important healthcare needs, barriers to these needs, solutions to the barriers, and the promise of peer navigators as a solution. Findings from focus groups reflected general concerns of people with mental illness (e.g., insurance, engagement, accessibility) and Latinos with serious mental illness (e.g., immigration, language, and family). Feedback and analyses especially focused on the potential of peer navigators. Implications of these findings for integrated care of Latinos with serious mental illness are discussed.

Navigating manuscript assessment: The new practitioner's guide to primary literature peer review.

PubMed

Smith, Devlin V; Stokes, Laura B; Marx, Kayleigh; Aitken, Samuel L

2018-01-01

For pharmacists, the first years after graduation are spent developing their knowledge base, advancing as a practitioner, and honing their abilities as healthcare providers and drug information experts. New practitioners encounter many challenges during this time, which for many include publishing original research or reviewing manuscripts for colleagues and medical journals. Inexperience navigating the publication process, from submission to receipt of (and response to) peer review commentary, is often cited as a major barrier to timely publication of resident and new practitioner research. Serving as a peer reviewer in turn provides the new practitioner with insight on this process and can be an enlightening experience used to garner confidence in subsequently submitting their own formal manuscripts. A number of publications describing steps for peer review are available, however, many of these articles address more experienced reviewers or critique the peer review process itself. No definitive resource exists for new pharmacy practitioners interested in developing their peer review skills. The information presented in this summative guide should be used in conjunction with practice opportunities to help new practitioners develop proficiency at peer review.

[The impact of the annual scientific meetings of the Israel Society of Rheumatology as measured by publication rates of the abstracts in peer-reviewed journals].

PubMed

Perez, Shira; Hashkes, Philip J; Uziel, Yosef

2004-04-01

We aimed to examine the impact and quality of the research presented in the Israel Society of Rheumatology (ISR) annual scientific meetings by measuring publication rates of the abstracts in peer-reviewed journals and investigating the factors that influenced publication. We examined the outcome of all 79 abstracts submitted to the ISR for the 1998-2000 annual meetings. A MEDLINE search of all abstracts, by authors, topics and keywords was performed. Senior authors of abstracts not found to be published in this search were interviewed regarding publication and factors influencing submission. We described the effect of variable factors on the rate of publication. As of September 2002, 63 (80%) abstracts were published in peer-reviewed journals or are currently in-press. Most abstracts were published in prominent journals (with a high impact factor). The majority of the abstracts (61%) were published in rheumatologic journals, 65% of the studies originated from tertiary centers and 19% of the studies were multicenter. The most common diseases studied were antiphospholipid syndrome (20%), systemic lupus erythematosus (19%) and inflammatory arthritis (18%). Most of the studies were of disease pathogenesis (35%) and clinical manifestations (33%). The most common study designs were basic science (34%). An overall 57% of the studies reported "positive" results and 9% reported "negative" results. None of the factors studied were associated with publication or non-publication. The main cause cited by authors for not publishing their abstract was lack of time to prepare a full paper or a desire to further expand the study. Within this group of 16 authors of abstracts, 11 authors still plan to submit a paper. The ISR annual meetings have an important clinical scientific impact as measured by the high rate of abstracts published as full length articles in leading peer-reviewed journals.

Flexoelectricity in PZT Nanoribbons and Biomembranes

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-01-09

Flexoelectricity in PZT Nanoribbons and Biomembranes The objective of this grant was to study flexoelectric phenomena in solids and in biomembranes...Flexoelectricity in PZT Nanoribbons and Biomembranes Report Title The objective of this grant was to study flexoelectric phenomena in solids and...producing PZT nanoribbons for energy harvesters. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals (N/A for none) Enter List of papers submitted or

A Structured Writing Programme for Staff: Facilitating Knowledge, Skills, Confidence and Publishing Outcomes

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Devlin, Marcia; Radloff, Alex

2014-01-01

The growing interest in the higher education sector in publishing pedagogical research has led to a focus on professional development for staff who wish to engage in this endeavour. This paper describes and evaluates a specific programme designed to help university staff to prepare and submit a high-quality paper to a peer-reviewed journal.…

Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A Content Analysis of Peer-Reviewed Journal Papers from 2012 to 2015

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Al-Azawei, Ahmed; Serenelli, Fabio; Lundqvist, Karsten

2016-01-01

The Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework is increasingly drawing the attention of researchers and educators as an effective solution for filling the gap between learner ability and individual differences. This study aims to analyse the content of twelve papers, where the UDL was adopted. The articles were chosen from several databases and…

The effect of peer review on mortality rates.

PubMed

Krahwinkel, W; Schuler, E; Liebetrau, M; Meier-Hellmann, A; Zacher, J; Kuhlen, R

2016-10-01

Lowering of mortality rates in hospitals with mortality rates higher than accepted reference values for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), congestive heart failure (CHF), pneumonia, stroke, mechanical ventilation (MV) and colorectal surgery by using an external peer review process that identifies areas requiring rectification and implements protocols directed at improving these areas. Retrospective, observational, quality management study using administrative data to compare in-hospital mortality rates (pre and post an external peer review process that included adoption of improvement protocols) with reference values. German general hospitals of a large, private group. Hospitals with mortality rates higher than reference values. Peer review of medical records by experienced, outside physicians triggered by in-hospital mortality rates higher than expected. Inadequacies were identified, improvement protocols enforced and mortality rates subsequently re-examined. Mortality rates 1 year before and 1 year after peer review and protocol use. For AMI, CHF, pneumonia, stroke, MV and colorectal surgery, the mortality rates 1 year post-peer review were significantly decreased as compared to pre-peer review mortality rates. The standardized mortality ratio for all of the above diagnoses was 1.45, 1 year before peer review, and 0.97, 1 year after peer review. The absolute risk reduction of 7.3% translates into 710 deaths in this population which could have been prevented. Peer review triggered and conducted in the manner described here is associated with a significant lowering of in-hospital mortality rates in hospitals that previously had higher than expected mortality rates. © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care.

Examining the Predictive Validity of NIH Peer Review Scores

PubMed Central

Lindner, Mark D.; Nakamura, Richard K.

2015-01-01

The predictive validity of peer review at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has not yet been demonstrated empirically. It might be assumed that the most efficient and expedient test of the predictive validity of NIH peer review would be an examination of the correlation between percentile scores from peer review and bibliometric indices of the publications produced from funded projects. The present study used a large dataset to examine the rationale for such a study, to determine if it would satisfy the requirements for a test of predictive validity. The results show significant restriction of range in the applications selected for funding. Furthermore, those few applications that are funded with slightly worse peer review scores are not selected at random or representative of other applications in the same range. The funding institutes also negotiate with applicants to address issues identified during peer review. Therefore, the peer review scores assigned to the submitted applications, especially for those few funded applications with slightly worse peer review scores, do not reflect the changed and improved projects that are eventually funded. In addition, citation metrics by themselves are not valid or appropriate measures of scientific impact. The use of bibliometric indices on their own to measure scientific impact would likely increase the inefficiencies and problems with replicability already largely attributed to the current over-emphasis on bibliometric indices. Therefore, retrospective analyses of the correlation between percentile scores from peer review and bibliometric indices of the publications resulting from funded grant applications are not valid tests of the predictive validity of peer review at the NIH. PMID:26039440

Underutilisation of routinely collected data in the HIV programme in Zambia: a review of quantitatively analysed peer-reviewed articles.

PubMed

Munthali, Tendai; Musonda, Patrick; Mee, Paul; Gumede, Sehlulekile; Schaap, Ab; Mwinga, Alwyn; Phiri, Caroline; Kapata, Nathan; Michelo, Charles; Todd, Jim

2017-06-13

The extent to which routinely collected HIV data from Zambia has been used in peer-reviewed published articles remains unexplored. This paper is an analysis of peer-reviewed articles that utilised routinely collected HIV data from Zambia within six programme areas from 2004 to 2014. Articles on HIV, published in English, listed in the Directory of open access journals, African Journals Online, Google scholar, and PubMed were reviewed. Only articles from peer-reviewed journals, that utilised routinely collected data and included quantitative data analysis methods were included. Multi-country studies involving Zambia and another country, where the specific results for Zambia were not reported, as well as clinical trials and intervention studies that did not take place under routine care conditions were excluded, although community trials which referred patients to the routine clinics were included. Independent extraction was conducted using a predesigned data collection form. Pooled analysis was not possible due to diversity in topics reviewed. A total of 69 articles were extracted for review. Of these, 7 were excluded. From the 62 articles reviewed, 39 focused on HIV treatment and retention in care, 15 addressed prevention of mother-to-child transmission, 4 assessed social behavioural change, and 4 reported on voluntary counselling and testing. In our search, no articles were found on condom programming or voluntary male medical circumcision. The most common outcome measures reported were CD4+ count, clinical failure or mortality. The population analysed was children in 13 articles, women in 16 articles, and both adult men and women in 33 articles. During the 10 year period of review, only 62 articles were published analysing routinely collected HIV data in Zambia. Serious consideration needs to be made to maximise the utility of routinely collected data, and to benefit from the funds and efforts to collect these data. This could be achieved with government support of operational research and publication of findings based on routinely collected Zambian HIV data.

Feedback from community pharmacy users on the contribution of community pharmacy to improving the public's health: a systematic review of the peer reviewed and non‐peer reviewed literature 1990–2002

PubMed Central

Anderson, Claire; Blenkinsopp, Alison; Armstrong, Miriam

2004-01-01

Abstract Objective  To systematically review feedback from pharmacy users on their perceptions and experiences of health‐related advice and services provided from community pharmacies. Methods  The focus of the review was community pharmacy activities in relation to promoting health and well‐being, preventing ill‐health and maintaining health. Searches were conducted for peer‐reviewed (international) and non‐peer‐reviewed (UK) research. Electronic databases searched included MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts; hand searches of key journals and conference abstracts, key informants. Key informants in the UK were contacted to identify unpublished studies. The inclusion period was 1990 onwards. Data extraction and synthesis  Data were abstracted into a matrix by one author with a sample checked by a second. The Health Development Agency's Evidence Base 2000 standards and the evidence categories used by the Department of Health in the National Service Frameworks were applied to each item. Main results  Seven peer reviewed papers and 13 non‐peer reviewed reports were identified for inclusion in the review. Consumer usage of pharmacies is almost universal with prescription supplies and purchase of over the counter medicines predominating. Evidence shows that not only is usage low for general health advice, but that pharmacists are perceived as ‘drugs experts’ rather than experts on health and illness. Emergency hormonal contraception and head lice management schemes have been well received. There is a need to consider privacy and confidentiality surrounding advice giving. Conclusions  Users of community pharmacy‐based health development initiatives express a high level of satisfaction. If community pharmacies are to be used to their full extent, then actions to extending the public's awareness and acceptance of the pharmacist's role in giving advice will be crucial. Further research will be needed to measure any change in premises development on the public's perception of the level of privacy in pharmacies. PMID:15327458

77 FR 19126 - Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: New Threshold for Peer Reviews of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-03-30

... Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: New Threshold for Peer Reviews of Noncompetitive Contracts... Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to modify the threshold for noncompetitive contract peer reviews. DATES...-6088. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background This final rule reduces the threshold for DoD peer...

Scope of Policy Issues in eHealth: Results From a Structured Literature Review

PubMed Central

Durrani, Hammad; Nayani, Parvez; Fahim, Ammad

2012-01-01

Background eHealth is widely used as a tool for improving health care delivery and information. However, distinct policies and strategies are required for its proper implementation and integration at national and international levels. Objective To determine the scope of policy issues faced by individuals, institutions, or governments in implementing eHealth programs. Methods We conducted a structured review of both peer-reviewed and gray literature from 1998–2008. A Medline search for peer-reviewed articles found 40 papers focusing on different aspects of eHealth policy. In addition, a Google search found 20 national- and international-level policy papers and documents. We reviewed these articles to extract policy issues and solutions described at different levels of care. Results The literature search found 99 policy issues related to eHealth. We grouped these issues under the following themes: (1) networked care, (2) interjurisdictional practice, (3) diffusion of eHealth/digital divide, (4) eHealth integration with existing systems, (5) response to new initiatives, (6) goal-setting for eHealth policy, (7) evaluation and research, (8) investment, and (9) ethics in eHealth. Conclusions We provide a list of policy issues that should be understood and addressed by policy makers at global, jurisdictional, and institutional levels, to facilitate smooth and reliable planning of eHealth programs. PMID:22343270

Timeliness of epidemiological outbreak investigations in peer-reviewed European publications, January 2003 to August 2013.

PubMed

van de Venter, Ec; Oliver, I; Stuart, J M

2015-02-12

Timely outbreak investigations are central in containing communicable disease outbreaks; despite this, no guidance currently exists on expectations of timeliness for investigations. A literature review was conducted to assess the length of epidemiological outbreak investigations in Europe in peer-reviewed publications. We determined time intervals between outbreak declaration to hypothesis generation, and hypothesis generation to availability of results from an analytical study. Outbreaks were classified into two groups: those with a public health impact across regions within a country and requiring national coordination (level 3) and those with a severe or catastrophic impact requiring direction at national level (levels 4 and 5). Investigations in Europe published between 2003 and 2013 were reviewed. We identified 86 papers for review: 63 level 3 and 23 level 4 and 5 investigations. Time intervals were ascertained from 55 papers. The median period for completion of an analytical study was 15 days (range: 4-32) for levels 4 and 5 and 31 days (range: 9-213) for level 3 investigations. Key factors influencing the speed of completing analytical studies were outbreak level, severity of infection and study design. Our findings suggest that guidance for completing analytical studies could usefully be provided, with different time intervals according to outbreak severity.

The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise.

PubMed

Kovanis, Michail; Porcher, Raphaël; Ravaud, Philippe; Trinquart, Ludovic

2016-01-01

The growth in scientific production may threaten the capacity for the scientific community to handle the ever-increasing demand for peer review of scientific publications. There is little evidence regarding the sustainability of the peer-review system and how the scientific community copes with the burden it poses. We used mathematical modeling to estimate the overall quantitative annual demand for peer review and the supply in biomedical research. The modeling was informed by empirical data from various sources in the biomedical domain, including all articles indexed at MEDLINE. We found that for 2015, across a range of scenarios, the supply exceeded by 15% to 249% the demand for reviewers and reviews. However, 20% of the researchers performed 69% to 94% of the reviews. Among researchers actually contributing to peer review, 70% dedicated 1% or less of their research work-time to peer review while 5% dedicated 13% or more of it. An estimated 63.4 million hours were devoted to peer review in 2015, among which 18.9 million hours were provided by the top 5% contributing reviewers. Our results support that the system is sustainable in terms of volume but emphasizes a considerable imbalance in the distribution of the peer-review effort across the scientific community. Finally, various individual interactions between authors, editors and reviewers may reduce to some extent the number of reviewers who are available to editors at any point.

The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise

PubMed Central

Porcher, Raphaël; Ravaud, Philippe; Trinquart, Ludovic

2016-01-01

The growth in scientific production may threaten the capacity for the scientific community to handle the ever-increasing demand for peer review of scientific publications. There is little evidence regarding the sustainability of the peer-review system and how the scientific community copes with the burden it poses. We used mathematical modeling to estimate the overall quantitative annual demand for peer review and the supply in biomedical research. The modeling was informed by empirical data from various sources in the biomedical domain, including all articles indexed at MEDLINE. We found that for 2015, across a range of scenarios, the supply exceeded by 15% to 249% the demand for reviewers and reviews. However, 20% of the researchers performed 69% to 94% of the reviews. Among researchers actually contributing to peer review, 70% dedicated 1% or less of their research work-time to peer review while 5% dedicated 13% or more of it. An estimated 63.4 million hours were devoted to peer review in 2015, among which 18.9 million hours were provided by the top 5% contributing reviewers. Our results support that the system is sustainable in terms of volume but emphasizes a considerable imbalance in the distribution of the peer-review effort across the scientific community. Finally, various individual interactions between authors, editors and reviewers may reduce to some extent the number of reviewers who are available to editors at any point. PMID:27832157

Gender bias in scholarly peer review

PubMed Central

Helmer, Markus; Schottdorf, Manuel; Neef, Andreas; Battaglia, Demian

2017-01-01

Peer review is the cornerstone of scholarly publishing and it is essential that peer reviewers are appointed on the basis of their expertise alone. However, it is difficult to check for any bias in the peer-review process because the identity of peer reviewers generally remains confidential. Here, using public information about the identities of 9000 editors and 43000 reviewers from the Frontiers series of journals, we show that women are underrepresented in the peer-review process, that editors of both genders operate with substantial same-gender preference (homophily), and that the mechanisms of this homophily are gender-dependent. We also show that homophily will persist even if numerical parity between genders is reached, highlighting the need for increased efforts to combat subtler forms of gender bias in scholarly publishing. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21718.001 PMID:28322725

Quality assurance in radiology: peer review and peer feedback.

PubMed

Strickland, N H

2015-11-01

Peer review in radiology means an assessment of the accuracy of a report issued by another radiologist. Inevitably, this involves a judgement opinion from the reviewing radiologist. Peer feedback is the means by which any form of peer review is communicated back to the original author of the report. This article defines terms, discusses the current status, identifies problems, and provides some recommendations as to the way forward, concentrating upon the software requirements for efficient peer review and peer feedback of reported imaging studies. Radiologists undertake routine peer review in their everyday clinical practice, particularly when reporting and preparing for multidisciplinary team meetings. More formal peer review of reported imaging studies has been advocated as a quality assurance measure to promote good clinical practice. It is also a way of assessing the competency of reporting radiologists referred for investigation to bodies such as the General Medical Council (GMC). The literature shows, firstly, that there is a very wide reported range of discrepancy rates in many studies, which have used a variety of non-comparable methodologies; and secondly, that applying scoring systems in formal peer review is often meaningless, unhelpful, and can even be detrimental. There is currently a lack of electronic peer feedback system software on the market to inform radiologists of any review of their work that has occurred or to provide them with clinical outcome information on cases they have previously reported. Learning opportunities are therefore missed. Radiologists should actively engage with the medical informatics industry to design optimal peer review and feedback software with features to meet their needs. Such a system should be easy to use, be fully integrated with the radiological information and picture archiving systems used clinically, and contain a free-text comment box, without a numerical scoring system. It should form a temporary record that cannot be permanently archived. It must provide automated feedback to the original author. Peer feedback, as part of everyday reporting, should enhance daily learning for radiologists. Software requirements for everyday peer feedback differ from those needed for a formal peer review process, which might only be necessary in the setting of a formal GMC enquiry into a particular radiologist's reporting competence, for example. Copyright © 2015 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Doing Peer Review: Reflections from an International Group of Postdoctoral Fellows

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Merry, Lisa; Jarvis, Kimberly; Kupoluyi, Joseph; Lual, Jomama One Jomama

2017-01-01

There is very little written regarding developing the skills of doing peer reviews. In this piece we use our own experience as postdoctoral fellows to offer our reflections on how to get the most out of doing peer reviews as a trainee researcher. We touch upon the variety and complexity of peer reviews, the debates concerning the nature and…

A proposal for an 'equal peer-review' statement.

PubMed

Moustafa, Khaled

2015-08-01

To make the peer-review process as objective as possible, I suggest the introduction of an 'equal peer-review' statement that preserves author anonymity across the board, thus removing any potential bias related to nominal or institutional 'prestige'; this would guarantee an equal peer-review process for all authors and grant applicants. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Peer Review in Class: Metrics and Variations in a Senior Course

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Yankulov, Krassimir; Couto, Richard

2012-01-01

Peer reviews are the generally accepted mode of quality assessment in scholarly communities; however, they are rarely used for evaluation at college levels. Over a period of 5 years, we have performed a peer review simulation at a senior level course in molecular genetics at the University of Guelph and have accumulated 393 student peer reviews.…

Love Canal Emergency Declaration Area habitability study. Volume 5. Peer review summary: TRC (Technical Review Committee) responses. Final report

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Not Available

Environmental studies were conducted to provide data that could be used by the Commissioner of Health for the State of New York in determining whether the Emergency Declaration Area surrounding the Love Canal hazardous-waste site is habitable. These volumes (II through IV) were reviewed by a peer-review panel of expert scientists. The scientists concluded that each of the three environmental studies was well planned and well executed. Volume V summarizes the peer review and gives additional information or clarifications as requested during the peer review. Volume V also provides additional supplemental statistical analyses requested by the peer reviewer panel.

A randomised trial of peer review: the UK National Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Resources and Outcomes Project.

PubMed

Roberts, C M; Stone, R A; Buckingham, R J; Pursey, N A; Harrison, B D W; Lowe, D; Potter, J M

2010-06-01

Peer review has been widely employed within the NHS to facilitate health quality improvement but has not been rigorously evaluated. This article reports the largest randomised trial of peer review ever conducted in the UK. The peer review intervention was a reciprocal supportive exercise that included clinicians, hospital management, commissioners and patients which focused on the quality of the provision of four specific evidence-based aspects of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease care. Follow up at 12 months demonstrated few quantitative differences in the number or quality of services offered in the two groups. Qualitative data in contrast suggested many benefits of peer review in most but not all intervention units and some control teams. Findings suggest peer review in this format is a positive experience for most participants but is ineffective in some situations. Its longer term benefits and cost effectiveness require further study. The generic findings of this study have potential implications for the application of peer review throughout the NHS.

Standardizing the evaluation of scientific and academic performance in neurosurgery--critical review of the "h" index and its variants.

PubMed

Aoun, Salah G; Bendok, Bernard R; Rahme, Rudy J; Dacey, Ralph G; Batjer, H Hunt

2013-11-01

Assessing the academic impact and output of scientists and physicians is essential to the academic promotion process and has largely depended on peer review. The inherent subjectivity of peer review, however, has led to an interest to incorporate objective measures into more established methods of academic assessment and promotion. Journal impact factor has been used to add objectivity to the process but this index alone does not capture all aspects of academic impact and achievement. The "h" index and its variants have been designed to compensate for these shortcomings, and have been successfully used in the fields of physics, mathematics, and biology, and more recently in medicine. Leaders in academic neurosurgery should be aware of the advantages offered by each of these indices, as well as of their individual shortcomings, to be able to efficiently use them to refine the peer-review process. This review critically analyzes indices that are currently available to evaluate the academic impact of scientists and physicians. These indices include the total citation count, the total number of papers, the impact factor, as well as the "h" index with eight of its most common variants. The analysis focuses on their use in the field of academic neurosurgery, and discusses means to implement them in current review processes. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Mentored peer reviewing for PhD faculty and students.

PubMed

Xu, Jiayun; Kim, Kyounghae; Kurtz, Melissa; Nolan, Marie T

2016-02-01

There is a need for scholars to be prepared as peer reviewers in order to ensure the continual publication of quality science. However, developing the skills to craft a constructive critique can be difficult. In this commentary, we discuss the use of a group peer review mentoring model for PhD students to gain experience in peer review from a faculty member who is experienced in peer review. Central to this model, was the opportunity for each student and faculty mentor to openly discuss their critique of the manuscript. Through this enriching experience, novice researchers were able to learn the elements of a good peer review, better determine a manuscript's substantive contribution to science, and advance the quality of their own manuscript writing. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Improving the peer review skills of young rheumatologists and researchers in rheumatology: the EMEUNET Peer Review Mentoring Program.

PubMed

Rodríguez-Carrio, Javier; Putrik, Polina; Sepriano, Alexandre; Moltó, Anna; Nikiphorou, Elena; Gossec, Laure; Kvien, Tore K; Ramiro, Sofia

2018-01-01

Although peer review plays a central role in the maintenance of high standards in scientific research, training of reviewing skills is not included in the common education programmes. The Emerging EULAR (European League Against Rheumatism) Network (EMEUNET) developed a programme to address this unmet need. The EMEUNET Peer Review Mentoring Program for Rheumatology Journals promotes a systematic training of reviewing skills by engaging mentees in a 'real world' peer review experience supervised by experienced mentors with support from rheumatology journals. This viewpoint provides an overview of this initiative and its outcomes, and discusses its potential limitations. Over 4 years, 18 mentors and 86 mentees have participated. Among the 33 participants who have completed the programme, 13 (39.3%) have become independent reviewers for Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases after the training. This programme has been recently evaluated by a survey and qualitative interviews, revealing a high interest in this initiative. The main strengths (involvement of a top journal and learning opportunities) and weaknesses of the programme (limited number of places and insufficient dissemination) were identified. Overall, this programme represents an innovative and successful approach to peer review training. Continuous evaluation and improvement are key to its functioning. The EMEUNET Peer Review Mentoring Program may be used as a reference for peer review training in areas outside rheumatology.

Health effects of indebtedness: a systematic review

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Background In the aftermath of the global financial crisis, millions of households have been left with debts that they are unable to manage. Indebtedness may impair the wellbeing of those affected by it for years to come. This systematic review focuses on the long-term consequences of indebtedness on health. Methods The method used in the paper is a systematic review. First, bibliographic databases were searched for peer-reviewed articles. Second, the references and citations of the included articles were searched for additional articles. Results The results from our sample of 33 peer-reviewed studies demonstrate serious health effects related to indebtedness. Individuals with unmet loan payments had suicidal ideation and suffered from depression more often than those without such financial problems. Unpaid financial obligations were also related to poorer subjective health and health-related behaviour. Debt counselling and other programmes to mitigate debt-related stress are needed to alleviate the adverse effects of indebtedness on health. Conclusions The results demonstrate that indebtedness has serious effects on health. PMID:24885280

Predicting Productivity Returns on Investment: Thirty Years of Peer Review, Grant Funding, and Publication of Highly Cited Papers at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

PubMed

Lauer, Michael S; Danthi, Narasimhan S; Kaltman, Jonathan; Wu, Colin

2015-07-17

There are conflicting data about the ability of peer review percentile rankings to predict grant productivity, as measured through publications and citations. To understand the nature of these apparent conflicting findings, we analyzed bibliometric outcomes of 6873 de novo cardiovascular R01 grants funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) between 1980 and 2011. Our outcomes focus on top-10% articles, meaning articles that were cited more often than 90% of other articles on the same topic, of the same type (eg, article, editorial), and published in the same year. The 6873 grants yielded 62 468 articles, of which 13 507 (or 22%) were top-10% articles. There was a modest association between better grant percentile ranking and number of top-10% articles. However, discrimination was poor (area under receiver operating characteristic curve [ROC], 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.53). Furthermore, better percentile ranking was also associated with higher annual and total inflation-adjusted grant budgets. There was no association between grant percentile ranking and grant outcome as assessed by number of top-10% articles per $million spent. Hence, the seemingly conflicting findings on peer review percentile ranking of grants and subsequent productivity largely reflect differing questions and outcomes. Taken together, these findings raise questions about how best National Institutes of Health (NIH) should use peer review assessments to make complex funding decisions. © 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.

The International Society for the Social Studies Annual Conference Proceedings (Orlando, Florida, February 24-25, 2011). Volume 2011, Issue 1

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Russell, William Benedict, III, Ed.

2011-01-01

The "ISSS Annual Conference Proceedings" is a peer-reviewed professional publication published once a year following the annual conference. (Individual papers contain references.) [For the 2010 proceedings, see ED509647.

Molecular Mechanism of hTERT Function in Mitochondria

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-10-20

NUMBER: INSTITUTION: University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Janine Santos TYPE REPORT: Final Report DATE RECEIVED...Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey 185 South Orange Avenue Newark, NJ 07101 -1709 ABSTRACT Number of Papers published in peer-reviewed journals: Final Report

Valuing the Ozone-Related Health Benefits of Methane Emission Controls

EPA Science Inventory

A recently published paper presented a range of estimates of the monetized ozone-related mortality benefits of reducing methane emissions (Sarofim et al. 2015). This peer review regards the application of the Sarofim et al. methodology to regulatory impact assessments. Sarofim...

Western Airborne Contaminants Assessment Project Database

EPA Science Inventory

WACAP has received considerable recognition from the media with over 200 local, national and international media outlets. At present count, 10 peer-reviewed papers have been published. In response to the WACAP results, the NPS convened multi-agency workshops with WACAP PIs and l...

Climbing the Pyramid

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Planey, James; Hug, Barbara

2012-01-01

Today's students are inundated with information--via social-networking websites, personal blogs, collaborative wikis, online-only publications, and so on--that ranges from biased personal opinions to peer-reviewed scientific papers. Some sources describe science events accurately; others don't. Students should understand how this media coverage…

Revealing the Effects of Cognitive Education Programmes through Dynamic Assessment

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Tzuriel, David

2011-01-01

The major objective of this paper is to demonstrate the effectiveness of dynamic assessment (DA) in revealing outcomes of cognitive education programmes. Three programmes based on "mediated learning experience" theory are reviewed: "Feuerstein's Instrumental Enrichment", "Bright Start", and "Peer Mediation with…

Evaluation of the Inhalation Carcinogenicity of Ethylene Oxide ...

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

EPA is initiating a public comment period prior to peer review of the scientific basis supporting the human health hazard and dose-response assessment of ethylene oxide (cancer) that will appear in the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database. EPA seeks external peer review on how the Agency responded to the SAB panel recommendations, the exposure-response modeling of epidemiologic data, including new analyses since the 2007 external peer review, and on the adequacy, transparency, and clarity of the revised draft. The peer review will include an opportunity for the public to address the peer reviewers.

History of Presolar Grains

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Bernatowicz, Thomas J.

2005-01-01

Papers on the History of Presolar Grains. This has been a very productive period in which much of the laboratory work conducted in the previous year and during this funding cycle were brought to completion. In the last year we have published or submitted for peer review 4 research papers, 4 review papers, and 11 abstracts in research areas supported under this grant. Brief synopses of the results of the research papers are presented, followed by short summaries of the topics discussed in the review papers. Several areas of research are of course being actively pursued, and the appended list of abstracts gives citations to this ongoing work. In a paper submitted to the Astrophysical Journal, the results of an investigation into the physical conditions in the mass outflows of asymptotic giant branch (AGB) carbon stars that are required for the formation of micron-sized presolar graphite grains, with and without previously formed internal crystals of titanium carbide (TIC) are reported.

What is open peer review? A systematic review

PubMed Central

Ross-Hellauer, Tony

2017-01-01

Background: “Open peer review” (OPR), despite being a major pillar of Open Science, has neither a standardized definition nor an agreed schema of its features and implementations. The literature reflects this, with numerous overlapping and contradictory definitions. While for some the term refers to peer review where the identities of both author and reviewer are disclosed to each other, for others it signifies systems where reviewer reports are published alongside articles. For others it signifies both of these conditions, and for yet others it describes systems where not only “invited experts” are able to comment. For still others, it includes a variety of combinations of these and other novel methods. Methods: Recognising the absence of a consensus view on what open peer review is, this article undertakes a systematic review of definitions of “open peer review” or “open review”, to create a corpus of 122 definitions. These definitions are systematically analysed to build a coherent typology of the various innovations in peer review signified by the term, and hence provide the precise technical definition currently lacking. Results: This quantifiable data yields rich information on the range and extent of differing definitions over time and by broad subject area. Quantifying definitions in this way allows us to accurately portray exactly how ambiguously the phrase “open peer review” has been used thus far, for the literature offers 22 distinct configurations of seven traits, effectively meaning that there are 22 different definitions of OPR in the literature reviewed. Conclusions: I propose a pragmatic definition of open peer review as an umbrella term for a number of overlapping ways that peer review models can be adapted in line with the aims of Open Science, including making reviewer and author identities open, publishing review reports and enabling greater participation in the peer review process. PMID:28580134

Experiences of undergraduate nursing students in peer assisted learning in clinical practice: a qualitative systematic review.

PubMed

Carey, Matthew C; Kent, Bridie; Latour, Jos M

2018-05-01

The objective of this qualitative systematic review was to identify and synthesize the best available evidence on experiences of peer assisted learning (PAL) among student nurses in clinical practice so as to understand the value of PAL for this population. Peer-assisted learning considers the benefits of peers working in collaboration and supporting each other in professional roles. This approach to facilitate learning is effective within universities, but there is limited exploration within the clinical practice environment. Within the UK, 50% of student nurses' learning is undertaken within clinical practice, providing a large portion of student allocation within these areas, but is unexplored in relation to PAL. Therefore, existing evidence examining PAL in clinical practice needs further exploration for a better understanding of its value to student nurses' learning. The systematic review considered studies that included male and female nursing students aged 18-50 years that explored undergraduate nursing students' experiences of PAL within the clinical practice environment. Studies that utilized designs such as phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, action research and feminist research were considered. Other text such as opinion papers and reports were to be considered if no qualitative studies could be located. The review excluded quantitative studies, as well as those addressing PAL outside the nursing profession and students within the nursing profession but not including undergraduate student nurses. This review considered studies that included aspects related to experiences of PAL in the clinical practice setting, as seen by undergraduate nursing students and the researcher. A three-step search strategy was undertaken to find both published and unpublished studies in English from 2003 to 2017 in various databases, and included searching of reference lists within articles selected for appraisal. Each of the included studies were assessed for methodological quality independently by two reviewers, using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Form for Interpretive and Critical Research. Qualitative data was extracted using the standardized JBI qualitative data extraction tool. Qualitative research findings were synthesized using JBI methodology. From the eight included studies, 37 findings were extracted. These findings were further aggregated into seven categories, and then into three synthesized findings. These three synthesized findings are: 1) Challenges of clinical practice are mitigated by peer support; 2) Peers are role models for enhancing clinical knowledge; and 3) Support and feedback develop competence and confidence, and reduce stress and anxiety. Peer-assisted learning exists in clinical practice in both formal and informal circumstances. Friendship and community are often expressed as occurring when peers work together. Support and feedback help students develop in their clinical role and enhance clinical knowledge. Outcomes include enhancing the competency and confidence of peers, and reducing stress and anxiety. Challenges of clinical practice are mitigated through PAL.

Prescriptions for medical research. I--Management within the Medical Research Council.

PubMed Central

Gillett, R; Harrow, J

1993-01-01

In their submission to the government in advance of the white paper on science policy in the United Kingdom the Medical Research Council commends the MRC's own approach to managing directly funded research. But a series of semi-structured interviews with the directors of some of the MRC's units suggests a gap between the MRC's model of managed research and the reality. Although such units are theoretically managed from MRC head office (and units are charged an overhead for this), in practice each unit runs its own affairs. Between major reviews average contact time with the head office contact person is seven hours a year. The first paper argues that a purchaser-provider split would recognise the benefits of decentralisation and allow units to bid for research funds from several sources, the successful ones guaranteeing their survival through a rolling series of research programmes. The second paper criticises the MRC's cumbersome peer review system. Reliance on outside experts atrophies the scientific skills of head office staff and builds delays into decision making. A purchaser-provider model would allow the head office scientific staff to act like commercial research and development managers, commissioning research, and using the outcome, rather than peer review, as a criterion for continued funding. PMID:8324441

45 CFR 1388.9 - Peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... PROGRAM THE UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED PROGRAMS § 1388.9 Peer review. (a) The purpose of the peer review..., including on-site visits or inspections as necessary. (b) Applications for funding opportunities under part...

45 CFR 1388.9 - Peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... PROGRAM THE UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED PROGRAMS § 1388.9 Peer review. (a) The purpose of the peer review..., including on-site visits or inspections as necessary. (b) Applications for funding opportunities under part...

45 CFR 1388.9 - Peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... PROGRAM THE UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED PROGRAMS § 1388.9 Peer review. (a) The purpose of the peer review..., including on-site visits or inspections as necessary. (b) Applications for funding opportunities under part...

45 CFR 1388.9 - Peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... PROGRAM THE UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED PROGRAMS § 1388.9 Peer review. (a) The purpose of the peer review..., including on-site visits or inspections as necessary. (b) Applications for funding opportunities under part...

A peer review process as part of the implementation of clinical pathways in radiation oncology: Does it improve compliance?

PubMed

Gebhardt, Brian J; Heron, Dwight E; Beriwal, Sushil

Clinical pathways are patient management plans that standardize evidence-based practices to ensure high-quality and cost-effective medical care. Implementation of a pathway is a collaborative process in our network, requiring the active involvement of physicians. This approach promotes acceptance of pathway recommendations, although a peer review process is necessary to ensure compliance and to capture and approve off-pathway selections. We investigated the peer review process and factors associated with time to completion of peer review. Our cancer center implemented radiation oncology pathways for every disease site throughout a large, integrated network. Recommendations are written based upon national guidelines, published literature, and institutional experience with evidence evaluated hierarchically in order of efficacy, toxicity, and then cost. Physicians enter decisions into an online, menu-driven decision support tool that integrates with medical records. Data were collected from the support tool and included the rate of on- and off-pathway selections, peer review decisions performed by disease site directors, and time to complete peer review. A total of 6965 treatment decisions were entered in 2015, and 605 (8.7%) were made off-pathway and were subject to peer review. The median time to peer review decision was 2 days (interquartile range, 0.2-6.8). Factors associated with time to peer review decision >48 hours on univariate analysis include disease site (P < .0001) with a trend toward significance (P = .066) for radiation therapy modality. There was no difference between recurrent and non-recurrent disease (P = .267). Multivariable analysis revealed disease site was associated with time to peer review (P < .001), with lymphoma and skin/sarcoma most strongly influencing decision time >48 hours. Clinical pathways are an integral tool for standardizing evidence-based care throughout our large, integrated network, with 91.3% of all treatment decisions being made as per pathway. The peer review process was feasible, with <1% selections ultimately rejected, suggesting that awareness of peer review of treatment decisions encourages compliance with clinical pathway recommendations. Copyright © 2017 American Society for Radiation Oncology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A guide to writing a scientific paper: a focus on high school through graduate level student research.

PubMed

Hesselbach, Renee A; Petering, David H; Berg, Craig A; Tomasiewicz, Henry; Weber, Daniel

2012-12-01

This article presents a detailed guide for high school through graduate level instructors that leads students to write effective and well-organized scientific papers. Interesting research emerges from the ability to ask questions, define problems, design experiments, analyze and interpret data, and make critical connections. This process is incomplete, unless new results are communicated to others because science fundamentally requires peer review and criticism to validate or discard proposed new knowledge. Thus, a concise and clearly written research paper is a critical step in the scientific process and is important for young researchers as they are mastering how to express scientific concepts and understanding. Moreover, learning to write a research paper provides a tool to improve science literacy as indicated in the National Research Council's National Science Education Standards (1996), and A Framework for K-12 Science Education (2011), the underlying foundation for the Next Generation Science Standards currently being developed. Background information explains the importance of peer review and communicating results, along with details of each critical component, the Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. Specific steps essential to helping students write clear and coherent research papers that follow a logical format, use effective communication, and develop scientific inquiry are described.

A Guide to Writing a Scientific Paper: A Focus on High School Through Graduate Level Student Research

PubMed Central

Petering, David H.; Berg, Craig A.; Tomasiewicz, Henry; Weber, Daniel

2012-01-01

Abstract This article presents a detailed guide for high school through graduate level instructors that leads students to write effective and well-organized scientific papers. Interesting research emerges from the ability to ask questions, define problems, design experiments, analyze and interpret data, and make critical connections. This process is incomplete, unless new results are communicated to others because science fundamentally requires peer review and criticism to validate or discard proposed new knowledge. Thus, a concise and clearly written research paper is a critical step in the scientific process and is important for young researchers as they are mastering how to express scientific concepts and understanding. Moreover, learning to write a research paper provides a tool to improve science literacy as indicated in the National Research Council's National Science Education Standards (1996), and A Framework for K–12 Science Education (2011), the underlying foundation for the Next Generation Science Standards currently being developed. Background information explains the importance of peer review and communicating results, along with details of each critical component, the Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. Specific steps essential to helping students write clear and coherent research papers that follow a logical format, use effective communication, and develop scientific inquiry are described. PMID:23094692

Bioactive Encapsulation for Military Food Applications: Request for Enhanced Nano and Micro Particle Fabrication and Characterization Facilities

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-01-25

2013 21-Jul-2014 Approved for Public Release; Distribution Unlimited Final Report: Bioactive Encapsulation for Military Food Applications: Request for...reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer-reviewed journals: Final Report: Bioactive Encapsulation for Military Food Applications...Total Number: ...... Inventions (DD882) Scientific Progress Equipment was purchased. Technology Transfer 1 Bioactive Encapsulation for Military Food

Nanoscale Measurements of Magnetism & Spin Coherence in Semiconductors

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-12-17

superconductor created by magnetic defects. These energy-resolved studies are distinct from typical spin-selective measurements performed previously using...MacDonald, B. A. Bernevig, A. Yazdani. Observation of Majorana fermions in ferromagnetic atomic chains on a superconductor , Science, (10 2014): 602... superconductor , Physical Review B, (07 2013): 0. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.88.020407 TOTAL: 4 Number of Papers published in peer-reviewed journals

Development of a peer-review framework for cancer multidisciplinary meetings.

PubMed

Johnson, Claire E; Slavova-Azmanova, Neli; Saunders, Christobel

2017-05-01

There is no mechanism in place for monitoring or quality improvement of cancer multidisciplinary meetings (MDM) in Australia. To develop a peer-review process for quality improvement of MDM. This project involved three phases: (i) development of a draft peer-review framework, supporting documents and peer-review process; (ii) consultation with key stakeholders; (iii) refinement of the framework, documents and processes following a pilot study with three MDM. Feedback indicated that specific standards included in the framework needed to allow the peer reviewers to be flexible relative to the circumstances of the individual MDM. Conversely, feedback identified the need for clear, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the conduct of MDM, with accepted standards and objective measures of performance. MDM members were divided about the need to employ peer reviewers from the tumour stream of the MDM under review but agreed that closer involvement of the team under review to support the implementation of recommendations is warranted. We developed an adaptable peer-review framework and process using the current available evidence and guidance. While further research is needed to establish what constitutes best practice in MDM and which processes contribute to improved patient outcomes, the structured peer-review process we describe, when modified using the disease-relevant evidence, could be utilised more broadly as a quality improvement tool. © 2017 Royal Australasian College of Physicians.

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review

PubMed Central

Tennant, Jonathan P.; Dugan, Jonathan M.; Graziotin, Daniel; Jacques, Damien C.; Waldner, François; Mietchen, Daniel; Elkhatib, Yehia; B. Collister, Lauren; Pikas, Christina K.; Crick, Tom; Masuzzo, Paola; Caravaggi, Anthony; Berg, Devin R.; Niemeyer, Kyle E.; Ross-Hellauer, Tony; Mannheimer, Sara; Rigling, Lillian; Katz, Daniel S.; Greshake Tzovaras, Bastian; Pacheco-Mendoza, Josmel; Fatima, Nazeefa; Poblet, Marta; Isaakidis, Marios; Irawan, Dasapta Erwin; Renaut, Sébastien; Madan, Christopher R.; Matthias, Lisa; Nørgaard Kjær, Jesper; O'Donnell, Daniel Paul; Neylon, Cameron; Kearns, Sarah; Selvaraju, Manojkumar; Colomb, Julien

2017-01-01

Peer review of research articles is a core part of our scholarly communication system. In spite of its importance, the status and purpose of peer review is often contested. What is its role in our modern digital research and communications infrastructure? Does it perform to the high standards with which it is generally regarded? Studies of peer review have shown that it is prone to bias and abuse in numerous dimensions, frequently unreliable, and can fail to detect even fraudulent research. With the advent of web technologies, we are now witnessing a phase of innovation and experimentation in our approaches to peer review. These developments prompted us to examine emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer review. We examine the functionality of a range of social Web platforms, and compare these with the traits underlying a viable peer review system: quality control, quantified performance metrics as engagement incentives, and certification and reputation. Ideally, any new systems will demonstrate that they out-perform and reduce the biases of existing models as much as possible. We conclude that there is considerable scope for new peer review initiatives to be developed, each with their own potential issues and advantages. We also propose a novel hybrid platform model that could, at least partially, resolve many of the socio-technical issues associated with peer review, and potentially disrupt the entire scholarly communication system. Success for any such development relies on reaching a critical threshold of research community engagement with both the process and the platform, and therefore cannot be achieved without a significant change of incentives in research environments. PMID:29188015

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review.

PubMed

Tennant, Jonathan P; Dugan, Jonathan M; Graziotin, Daniel; Jacques, Damien C; Waldner, François; Mietchen, Daniel; Elkhatib, Yehia; B Collister, Lauren; Pikas, Christina K; Crick, Tom; Masuzzo, Paola; Caravaggi, Anthony; Berg, Devin R; Niemeyer, Kyle E; Ross-Hellauer, Tony; Mannheimer, Sara; Rigling, Lillian; Katz, Daniel S; Greshake Tzovaras, Bastian; Pacheco-Mendoza, Josmel; Fatima, Nazeefa; Poblet, Marta; Isaakidis, Marios; Irawan, Dasapta Erwin; Renaut, Sébastien; Madan, Christopher R; Matthias, Lisa; Nørgaard Kjær, Jesper; O'Donnell, Daniel Paul; Neylon, Cameron; Kearns, Sarah; Selvaraju, Manojkumar; Colomb, Julien

2017-01-01

Peer review of research articles is a core part of our scholarly communication system. In spite of its importance, the status and purpose of peer review is often contested. What is its role in our modern digital research and communications infrastructure? Does it perform to the high standards with which it is generally regarded? Studies of peer review have shown that it is prone to bias and abuse in numerous dimensions, frequently unreliable, and can fail to detect even fraudulent research. With the advent of web technologies, we are now witnessing a phase of innovation and experimentation in our approaches to peer review. These developments prompted us to examine emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer review. We examine the functionality of a range of social Web platforms, and compare these with the traits underlying a viable peer review system: quality control, quantified performance metrics as engagement incentives, and certification and reputation. Ideally, any new systems will demonstrate that they out-perform and reduce the biases of existing models as much as possible. We conclude that there is considerable scope for new peer review initiatives to be developed, each with their own potential issues and advantages. We also propose a novel hybrid platform model that could, at least partially, resolve many of the socio-technical issues associated with peer review, and potentially disrupt the entire scholarly communication system. Success for any such development relies on reaching a critical threshold of research community engagement with both the process and the platform, and therefore cannot be achieved without a significant change of incentives in research environments.

Peer Review: Promoting Efficient School District Operations

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hale, Jason S.

2010-01-01

Many professions recognize the benefits of peer reviews to assess processes and operations because peers can more easily identify one another's inefficiencies and provide some kind of intervention. Generally, the goal of the peer review process is to verify whether the work satisfies the standards set by the industry. A number of states have begun…

Using Calibrated Peer Review to Teach Basic Research Skills

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bracke, Marianne S.; Graveel, John G.

2014-01-01

Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) is an online tool being used in the class Introduction to Agriculture and Purdue University (AGR 10100) to integrate a writing and research component (http://cpr.molsci.ucla.edu/Home.aspx). Calibrated Peer Review combines the ability to create writing intensive assignments with an introduction to the peer-review…

Acknowledging Students' Collaborations through Peer Review: A Footnoting Practice

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Poe, Shelli M.; Gravett, Emily O.

2016-01-01

Student-to-student peer review or peer feedback is commonly used in student-centered or active-learning classrooms. In this article, we describe a footnoting exercise that we implemented in two of our undergraduate courses as one way to encourage students to acknowledge collaborations and contributions made during peer-review processes. This…

Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping.

PubMed

Siler, Kyle; Lee, Kirby; Bero, Lisa

2015-01-13

Peer review is the main institution responsible for the evaluation and gestation of scientific research. Although peer review is widely seen as vital to scientific evaluation, anecdotal evidence abounds of gatekeeping mistakes in leading journals, such as rejecting seminal contributions or accepting mediocre submissions. Systematic evidence regarding the effectiveness--or lack thereof--of scientific gatekeeping is scant, largely because access to rejected manuscripts from journals is rarely available. Using a dataset of 1,008 manuscripts submitted to three elite medical journals, we show differences in citation outcomes for articles that received different appraisals from editors and peer reviewers. Among rejected articles, desk-rejected manuscripts, deemed as unworthy of peer review by editors, received fewer citations than those sent for peer review. Among both rejected and accepted articles, manuscripts with lower scores from peer reviewers received relatively fewer citations when they were eventually published. However, hindsight reveals numerous questionable gatekeeping decisions. Of the 808 eventually published articles in our dataset, our three focal journals rejected many highly cited manuscripts, including the 14 most popular; roughly the top 2 percent. Of those 14 articles, 12 were desk-rejected. This finding raises concerns regarding whether peer review is ill--suited to recognize and gestate the most impactful ideas and research. Despite this finding, results show that in our case studies, on the whole, there was value added in peer review. Editors and peer reviewers generally--but not always-made good decisions regarding the identification and promotion of quality in scientific manuscripts.

SEMINAR PUBLICATION: NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOWS (SSOS)

EPA Science Inventory

This seminar publication presents selected peer-reviewed papers from the conference. Thousands of municipalities across the nation are serviced by separate sanitary sewer systems. A chronic problem that faces many of these systems is the occurrence of SSOs, caused mainly by the i...

An interview with Alfredo Falcone and Lisa Salvatore: RECOURSE and trifluridine/tipiracil in metastatic colorectal cancer.

PubMed

Falcone, Alfredo; Salvatore, Lisa

2016-09-01

Professor Alfredo Falcone and Dr Lisa Salvatore speak to Roshaine Gunawardana, Managing Commissioning Editor: Professor Alfredo Falcone is the Director of the Department of Oncology and the Specialization School at the University Hospital of Pisa, Italy. He trained in Pisa and Genoa, Italy, and has held major positions in Italian oncology since 2000. He currently has more than 300 publications, including papers in peer-reviewed international and national journals, book chapters, and more than 600 abstracts of presentations to international and national conferences. The majority of his papers regard clinical and translational research, with a particular focus on metastatic colorectal cancer. Dr Lisa Salvatore is a medical oncologist in the Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery at the University of Pisa. She has been an author on about 40 publications in major peer-reviewed publications and has made numerous presentations in national and international conferences. Her main interest is focused on clinical and translational research in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Evidence-based Peer Review for Radiation Therapy - Updated Review of the Literature with a Focus on Tumour Subsite and Treatment Modality.

PubMed

Huo, M; Gorayski, P; Poulsen, M; Thompson, K; Pinkham, M B

2017-10-01

Technological advances in radiation therapy permit steep dose gradients from the target to spare normal tissue, but increase the risk of geographic miss. Suboptimal target delineation adversely affects clinical outcomes. Prospective peer review is a method for quality assurance of oncologists' radiotherapy plans. Published surveys suggest it is widely implemented. However, it may not be feasible to review every case before commencement of radiation therapy in all departments. The rate of plan changes following peer review of cases without a specific subsite or modality is typically around 10%. Stereotactic body radiation therapy, head and neck, gynaecological, gastrointestinal, haematological and lung cases are associated with higher rates of change of around 25%. These cases could thus be prioritised for peer review. Other factors may limit peer review efficacy including organisational culture, time constraints and the physical environment in which sessions are held. Recommendations for peer review endorsed by the American Society for Radiation Oncology were made available in 2013, but a number of relevant studies have been published since. Here we review and update the literature, and provide an updated suggestion for the implementation of peer review to serve as an adjunct to published guidelines. This may help practitioners evaluate their current processes and maximise the utility and effectiveness of peer review sessions. Copyright © 2017 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Coached Peer Review: Developing the Next Generation of Authors.

PubMed

Sidalak, Daniel; Purdy, Eve; Luckett-Gatopoulos, S; Murray, Heather; Thoma, Brent; Chan, Teresa M

2017-02-01

Publishing in academic journals is challenging for learners. Those who pass the initial stages of internal review by an editor often find the anonymous peer review process harsh. Academic blogs offer alternate avenues for publishing medical education material. Many blogs, however, lack a peer review process, which some consumers argue compromises the quality of materials published. CanadiEM (formerly BoringEM) is an academic educational emergency medicine blog dedicated to publishing high-quality materials produced by learners (i.e., residents and medical students). The editorial team has designed and implemented a collaborative "coached peer review" process that comprises an open exchange among the learner-author, editors, and reviewers. The goal of this process is to facilitate the publication of high-quality academic materials by learner-authors while providing focused feedback to help them develop academic writing skills. The authors of this Innovation Report surveyed (February-June 2015) their blog's learner-authors and external expert "staff" reviewers who had participated in coached peer review for their reactions to the process. The survey results revealed that participants viewed the process positively compared with both traditional journal peer review and academic blog publication processes. Participants found the process friendly, easy, efficient, and transparent. Learner-authors also reported increased confidence in their published material. These outcomes met the goals of coached peer review. CanadiEM aims to inspire continued participation in, exposure to, and high-quality production of academic writing by promoting the adoption of coached peer review for online educational resources produced by learners.

Improving your journal article using feedback from peer review.

PubMed

Price, Bob

2014-09-30

While preparation of a journal article for submission may often include informal review by colleagues, an article is not accepted for publication until it has been formally peer reviewed. Peer review is the process whereby journal editors ask expert reviewers to examine the work submitted and prepare a report on its suitability for publication. Two or more revisions of the article may be required following peer review, with the author reworking the article in the light of feedback received on each occasion. This can be challenging for some authors, but used well, it offers a chance to improve the work to the required standard of the journal, and help the author present a more precise and coherent account of the arguments. The extent to which the author responds to the critical commentary of peer reviewers is important, because this may determine whether or not the article is published. This article explores the aims of peer reviewers and recommends ways in which authors can respond to the feedback provided.

Meeting the challenge of assessing clinical competence of occupational therapists within a program management environment.

PubMed

Salvatori, Penny; Simonavicius, Nijole; Moore, Joan; Rimmer, Georgina; Patterson, Michele

2008-02-01

Program management models have raised concerns among occupational therapists about professional standards related to clinical competence, performance review procedures, and quality improvement initiatives. This paper describes how a chart-stimulated recall (CSR) peer-review process and interview tool was revised, implemented, and evaluated as a pilot project to assess the clinical competence of occupational therapy staff at a large urban health centre in southern Ontario. Fourteen pairs (n=28) of occupational therapists representing various practice areas participated in this project. Half served as peer assessors and half as interviewees. Peer assessors conducted an independent chart review followed by a one-hour personal interview with a peer partner to discuss clinical management issues related to the client cases. Each interviewer rated his or her partner's clinical competence in eight areas of performance using a 7-point Likert scale. Results indicated that the CSR tool could discriminate among occupational therapists in terms of overall levels of clinical competence and also identify specific areas of concern that could be targeted for professional development. Feedback from participants was positive. The CSR tool was found to be useful for assessing clinical competence of occupational therapists in this large health centre as a quality improvement initiative within that discipline group. Further research is needed to establish the reliability and validity of the CSR tool.

Peer Collaboration: Improving Teaching through Comprehensive Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Smith, Shelley L.

2014-01-01

This article includes a brief rationale and review of the literature on peer review of teaching (PRT). Based on that literature review, it offers a proposal for an optimal formative review process that results in a teaching portfolio that would reflect a faculty member's efforts and successes in a critically reflective PRT process, and contributes…

42 CFR 52h.9 - What matters must be reviewed for unsolicited contract proposals?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... SERVICES GRANTS SCIENTIFIC PEER REVIEW OF RESEARCH GRANT APPLICATIONS AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT... covered by this part unless the proposal has been reviewed by a peer review group in accordance with the... proposal. (b) Except to the extent otherwise provided by law, peer review group recommendations are...

7 CFR 3400.10 - Establishment and operation of peer review groups.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE SPECIAL RESEARCH GRANTS PROGRAM Scientific Peer Review of Research Grant Applications § 3400.10 Establishment and operation of peer review groups. Subject to § 3400.5, the...

28 CFR 34.104 - Use of peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... the peer review process. (c) Ratings will be in the form of numerical scores assigned by individual... results of peer review for a noncompetitive new or continuation project will be in the form of numerical...

28 CFR 34.104 - Use of peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... the peer review process. (c) Ratings will be in the form of numerical scores assigned by individual... results of peer review for a noncompetitive new or continuation project will be in the form of numerical...

28 CFR 34.104 - Use of peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

... the peer review process. (c) Ratings will be in the form of numerical scores assigned by individual... results of peer review for a noncompetitive new or continuation project will be in the form of numerical...

28 CFR 34.104 - Use of peer review.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

... the peer review process. (c) Ratings will be in the form of numerical scores assigned by individual... results of peer review for a noncompetitive new or continuation project will be in the form of numerical...

Bioelectrocatalyzed Nitrogen Fixation under Standard Conditions

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-11-07

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12. DISTRIBUTION AVAILIBILITY STATEMENT 6. AUTHORS 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAMES AND ADDRESSES 15. SUBJECT TERMS b. ABSTRACT...PAGE 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) ARO 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 19a. NAME OF...chemical manufacturing for fuel, propellants and fertilizer . (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals (N/A for none) Enter List of papers submitted

Stochastic Semidefinite Programming: Applications and Algorithms

DTIC Science & Technology

2012-03-03

doi: 2011/09/07 13:38:21 13 TOTAL: 1 Number of Papers published in non peer-reviewed journals: Baha M. Alzalg and K. A. Ariyawansa, Stochastic...symmetric programming over integers. International Conference on Scientific Computing, Las Vegas, Nevada, July 18--21, 2011. Baha M. Alzalg. On recent...Proceeding publications (other than abstracts): PaperReceived Baha M. Alzalg, K. A. Ariyawansa. Stochastic mixed integer second-order cone programming

Advances in threat assessment and their application to forest and rangeland management—Volume 1 and Volume 2.

Treesearch

John M. Pye; H. Michael Rauscher; Yasmeen Sands; Danny C. Lee; Jerome S. Beatty

2010-01-01

In July 2006, more than 170 researchers and managers from the United States, Canada, and Mexico convened in Boulder, Colorado, to discuss the state of the science in environmental threat assessment. This two-volume general technical report compiles peer-reviewed papers that were among those presented during the 3-day conference. Papers are organized by four broad...

Eyes wide open: reader and author responsibility in understanding the limits of peer review.

PubMed

Benson, P J

2015-10-01

'Medical science can only flourish in a free society and dies under totalitarian repression.' (1) Peer review post-publication is relatively easy to define: when the world decides the importance of publication. Peer review pre-publication is what the scientific community frequently means when using the term 'peer review'. But what it is it? Few will agree on an exact definition; generally speaking, it refers to an independent, third party scrutiny of a manuscript by scientific experts (called peers) who advise on its suitability for publication. Peer review is expensive; although reviewers are unpaid, the cost in time is enormous and it is slow. There is often little agreement among reviewers about whether an article should be published and peer review can be a lottery. Often referred to as a quality assurance process, there are many examples of when peer review failed. Many will be aware of Woo-Suk Hwang's shocking stem cell research misconduct at Seoul National University. (2) Science famously published two breakthrough articles that were found subsequently to be completely fabricated and this happened in spite of peer review. Science is not unique in making this error. However, love it or hate it, peer review, for the present time at least, is here to stay. In this article, Philippa Benson, Managing Editor of Science Advances (the first open access journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science), discusses the merits of peer review. Dr Benson has extensive experience in the publishing world and was Executive Director of PJB Consulting, a not-for-profit organisation supporting clients on issues related to converting to full electronic publishing workflows as well as challenges working with international authors and publishers. Her clients included the Public Library of Science journals, the American Society for Nutrition and the de Beaumont Foundation. She recently co-authored a book, What Editors Want: An Author's Guide to Scientific Journal Publishing (University of Chicago Press), which helps readers understand and navigate the publishing process in high impact science and technical journals. Her master's and doctorate degrees are from Carnegie Mellon University. JYOTI SHAH Commissioning Editor References 1. Eaton KK . Editorial: when is a peer review journal not a peer review journal? J Nutr Environ Med 1997 ; 7 : 139 - 144 . 2. van der Heyden MA , van de Ven T , Opthof T . Fraud and misconduct in science: the stem cell seduction . Neth Heart J 2009 ; 17 : 25 - 29 .

Mentorship, productivity, and promotion among academic hospitalists.

PubMed

Reid, Mark B; Misky, Gregory J; Harrison, Rebecca A; Sharpe, Brad; Auerbach, Andrew; Glasheen, Jeffrey J

2012-01-01

United States academic hospitals have rapidly adopted the hospitalist model of care. Academic hospitalists have taken on much of the clinical and teaching responsibilities at many institutions, yet little is known about their academic productivity and promotion. We sought to discover the attitudes and attributes of academic hospitalists regarding mentorship, productivity, and promotion. We performed a web-based email survey of academic hospitalists consisting of 61 questions. Four hundred and twenty academic hospitalists. Demographic details, scholarly production, presence of mentorship and attitudes towards mentor, academic rank Two hundred and sixty-six (63%) of hospitalists responded. The majority were under 41 (80%) and had been working as hospitalists for <5 years (62%). Only 42% of academic hospitalists had a mentor. Forty-four percent of hospitalists had not presented a poster or abstract at national meeting; 51% had not been first author on a peer-reviewed publication. Factors positively associated with publication of a peer-reviewed first author paper included: 1) male gender, AOR = 2.38 (95% CI 1.30, 4.33), 2) >20% "protected" time, AOR = 1.92 (95% CI 1.00, 3.69), and 3) a better-than-average understanding of the criteria for promotion, AOR = 3.66 (95% CI 1.76, 7.62). A lack of mentorship was negatively associated with producing any peer-reviewed first author publications AOR = 0.43 (95% CI 0.23, 0.81); any non-peer reviewed publications AOR = 0.45 (95% CI 0.24, 0.83), and leading a teaching session at a national meeting AOR = 0.41 (95% CI 0.19, 0.88). Most hospitalists promoted to the level of associate professor had been first author on four to six peer-reviewed publications. Most academic hospitalists had not presented a poster at a national meeting, authored an academic publication, or presented grand rounds at their institution. Many academic hospitalists lacked mentorship and this was associated with a failure to produce scholarly activity. Mentorship may improve academic productivity among hospitalists.

Pre-university Chemistry Students in a Mimicked Scholarly Peer Review

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

van Rens, Lisette; Hermarij, Philip; Pilot, Albert; Beishuizen, Jos; Hofman, Herman; Wal, Marjolein

2014-10-01

Peer review is a significant component in scientific research. Introducing peer review into inquiry processes may be regarded as an aim to develop student understanding regarding quality in inquiries. This study examines student understanding in inquiry peer reviews among pre-university chemistry students, aged 16-17, when they enact a design of a mimicked scholarly peer review. This design is based on a model of a human activity system. Twenty-five different schools in Brazil, Germany, Poland and The Netherlands participated. The students (n = 880) conducted in small groups (n = 428) open inquiries on fermentation. All groups prepared an inquiry report for peer review. These reports were published on a website. Groups were randomly paired in an internet symposium, where they posted review comments to their peers. These responses were qualitatively analyzed on small groups' level of understanding regarding seven categories: inquiry question, hypothesis, management of control variables, accurate measurement, presenting results, reliability of results, discussion and conclusion. The mimicked scholarly review prompted a collective practice. Student understanding was significantly well on presenting results, discussion and conclusion, and significantly less on inquiry question and reliability of results. An enacted design, based on a model of a human activity system, created student understanding of quality in inquiries as well as an insight in a peer-reviewing practice. To what extent this model can be applied in a broader context of design research in science education needs further study.

Peer review of health research funding proposals: A systematic map and systematic review of innovations for effectiveness and efficiency.

PubMed

Shepherd, Jonathan; Frampton, Geoff K; Pickett, Karen; Wyatt, Jeremy C

2018-01-01

To investigate methods and processes for timely, efficient and good quality peer review of research funding proposals in health. A two-stage evidence synthesis: (1) a systematic map to describe the key characteristics of the evidence base, followed by (2) a systematic review of the studies stakeholders prioritised as relevant from the map on the effectiveness and efficiency of peer review 'innovations'. Standard processes included literature searching, duplicate inclusion criteria screening, study keyword coding, data extraction, critical appraisal and study synthesis. A total of 83 studies from 15 countries were included in the systematic map. The evidence base is diverse, investigating many aspects of the systems for, and processes of, peer review. The systematic review included eight studies from Australia, Canada, and the USA, evaluating a broad range of peer review innovations. These studies showed that simplifying the process by shortening proposal forms, using smaller reviewer panels, or expediting processes can speed up the review process and reduce costs, but this might come at the expense of peer review quality, a key aspect that has not been assessed. Virtual peer review using videoconferencing or teleconferencing appears promising for reducing costs by avoiding the need for reviewers to travel, but again any consequences for quality have not been adequately assessed. There is increasing international research activity into the peer review of health research funding. The studies reviewed had methodological limitations and variable generalisability to research funders. Given these limitations it is not currently possible to recommend immediate implementation of these innovations. However, many appear promising based on existing evidence, and could be adapted as necessary by funders and evaluated. Where feasible, experimental evaluation, including randomised controlled trials, should be conducted, evaluating impact on effectiveness, efficiency and quality.

The Effectiveness of Peer Review of Teaching When Performed between Early-Career Academics

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Woodman, Richard J.; Parappilly, Maria B.

2015-01-01

The success of peer review of teaching (PRT) in shaping teaching practice during an academic's formative years may depend on the peers' teaching experience and the frequency of evaluation. Two Australian early-career University lecturers with no previous experience of peer review performed a single PRT on one another following a one week academic…

Multi-Stage Open Peer Review: Scientific Evaluation Integrating the Strengths of Traditional Peer Review with the Virtues of Transparency and Self-Regulation

PubMed Central

Pöschl, Ulrich

2012-01-01

The traditional forms of scientific publishing and peer review do not live up to all demands of efficient communication and quality assurance in today’s highly diverse and rapidly evolving world of science. They need to be advanced and complemented by interactive and transparent forms of review, publication, and discussion that are open to the scientific community and to the public. The advantages of open access, public peer review, and interactive discussion can be efficiently and flexibly combined with the strengths of traditional scientific peer review. Since 2001 the benefits and viability of this approach are clearly demonstrated by the highly successful interactive open access journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP, www.atmos-chem-phys.net) and a growing number of sister journals launched and operated by the European Geosciences Union (EGU, www.egu.eu) and the open access publisher Copernicus (www.copernicus.org). The interactive open access journals are practicing an integrative multi-stage process of publication and peer review combined with interactive public discussion, which effectively resolves the dilemma between rapid scientific exchange and thorough quality assurance. Key features and achievements of this approach are: top quality and impact, efficient self-regulation and low rejection rates, high attractivity and rapid growth, low costs, and financial sustainability. In fact, ACP and the EGU interactive open access sister journals are by most if not all standards more successful than comparable scientific journals with traditional or alternative forms of peer review (editorial statistics, publication statistics, citation statistics, economic costs, and sustainability). The high efficiency and predictive validity of multi-stage open peer review have been confirmed in a series of dedicated studies by evaluation experts from the social sciences, and the same or similar concepts have recently also been adopted in other disciplines, including the life sciences and economics. Multi-stage open peer review can be flexibly adjusted to the needs and peculiarities of different scientific communities. Due to the flexibility and compatibility with traditional structures of scientific publishing and peer review, the multi-stage open peer review concept enables efficient evolution in scientific communication and quality assurance. It has the potential for swift replacement of hidden peer review as the standard of scientific quality assurance, and it provides a basis for open evaluation in science. PMID:22783183

Towards an effective data peer review

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Düsterhus, André; Hense, Andreas

2014-05-01

Peer review is an established procedure to ensure the quality of scientific publications and is currently used as a prerequisite for acceptance of papers in the scientific community. In the past years the publication of raw data and its metadata got increased attention, which led to the idea of bringing it to the same standards the journals for traditional publications have. One missing element to achieve this is a comparable peer review scheme. This contribution introduces the idea of a quality evaluation process, which is designed to analyse the technical quality as well as the content of a dataset. It bases on quality tests, which results are evaluated with the help of the knowledge of an expert. The results of the tests and the expert knowledge are evaluated probabilistically and are statistically combined. As a result the quality of a dataset is estimated with a single value only. This approach allows the reviewer to quickly identify the potential weaknesses of a dataset and generate a transparent and comprehensible report. To demonstrate the scheme, an application on a large meteorological dataset will be shown. Furthermore, potentials and risks of such a scheme will be introduced and practical implications for its possible introduction to data centres investigated. Especially, the effects of reducing the estimate of quality of a dataset to a single number will be critically discussed.

Content and communication: How can peer review provide helpful feedback about the writing?

PubMed Central

Shashok, Karen

2008-01-01

Background Peer review is assumed to improve the quality of research reports as tools for scientific communication, yet strong evidence that this outcome is obtained consistently has been elusive. Failure to distinguish between aspects of discipline-specific content and aspects of the writing or use of language may account for some deficiencies in current peer review processes. Discussion The process and outcomes of peer review may be analyzed along two dimensions: 1) identifying scientific or technical content that is useful to other researchers (i.e., its "screening" function), and 2) improving research articles as tools for communication (i.e., its "improving" function). However, editors and reviewers do not always distinguish clearly between content criteria and writing criteria. When peer reviewers confuse content and writing, their feedback can be misunderstood by authors, who may modify texts in ways that do not make the readers' job easier. When researchers in peer review confuse the two dimensions, this can lead to content validity problems that foil attempts to define informative variables and outcome measures, and thus prevent clear trends from emerging. Research on writing, revising and editing suggests some reasons why peer review is not always as effective as it might be in improving what is written. Summary Peer review could be improved if stakeholders were more aware of variations in gatekeepers' (reviewers' and editors') ability to provide feedback about the content or the writing. Gatekeepers, academic literacy researchers, and wordface professionals (author's editors, medical writers and translators) could work together to discover the types of feedback authors find most useful. I offer suggestions to help editologists design better studies of peer review which could make the process an even stronger tool for manuscript improvement than it is now. PMID:18237378

Content and communication: how can peer review provide helpful feedback about the writing?

PubMed

Shashok, Karen

2008-01-31

Peer review is assumed to improve the quality of research reports as tools for scientific communication, yet strong evidence that this outcome is obtained consistently has been elusive. Failure to distinguish between aspects of discipline-specific content and aspects of the writing or use of language may account for some deficiencies in current peer review processes. The process and outcomes of peer review may be analyzed along two dimensions: 1) identifying scientific or technical content that is useful to other researchers (i.e., its "screening" function), and 2) improving research articles as tools for communication (i.e., its "improving" function). However, editors and reviewers do not always distinguish clearly between content criteria and writing criteria. When peer reviewers confuse content and writing, their feedback can be misunderstood by authors, who may modify texts in ways that do not make the readers' job easier. When researchers in peer review confuse the two dimensions, this can lead to content validity problems that foil attempts to define informative variables and outcome measures, and thus prevent clear trends from emerging. Research on writing, revising and editing suggests some reasons why peer review is not always as effective as it might be in improving what is written. Peer review could be improved if stakeholders were more aware of variations in gatekeepers' (reviewers' and editors') ability to provide feedback about the content or the writing. Gatekeepers, academic literacy researchers, and wordface professionals (author's editors, medical writers and translators) could work together to discover the types of feedback authors find most useful. I offer suggestions to help editologists design better studies of peer review which could make the process an even stronger tool for manuscript improvement than it is now.