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.

Acquisition of a Scanning Tunneling Microscope to Enhance Research and Education in Stress-Controlled Catalysis

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-01-14

Feb-2014 ABSTRACT Number of Papers published in peer-reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer-reviewed journals: Final Report...educational impact of the STM/AFM. (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

A Multiple Use MF/HF Radio Array for Radio Research, Development, and Education

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-04-27

reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer-reviewed journals: Final Report: A Multiple Use MF/HF Radio Array for Radio Research , Development...inspiring high school and university- level student projects. (a) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals (N/A for none) Enter List of papers ...references, in the following categories: (b) Papers published in non-peer-reviewed journals (N/A for none) An MF/HF antenna array for radio and radar imaging

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.

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 ...

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…

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.

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.

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.

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/.

A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review.

PubMed

Dadkhah, Mehdi; Kahani, Mohsen; Borchardt, Glenn

2017-08-15

Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily.

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

Dielectric Sensing of Toxic and Explosive Chemicals via Impedance Spectroscopy and Plasmonic Resonance

DTIC Science & Technology

2017-05-07

oenalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN...Number of Papers published in peer-reviewed journals: Number of Papers published in non peer-reviewed journals: Final Report: Dielectric Sensing of Toxic...to the date of this printing. List the papers, including journal references, in the following categories: (b) Papers published in non -peer-reviewed

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

Clinical research data warehouse governance for distributed research networks in the USA: a systematic review of the literature.

PubMed

Holmes, John H; Elliott, Thomas E; Brown, Jeffrey S; Raebel, Marsha A; Davidson, Arthur; Nelson, Andrew F; Chung, Annie; La Chance, Pierre; Steiner, John F

2014-01-01

To review the published, peer-reviewed literature on clinical research data warehouse governance in distributed research networks (DRNs). Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and INSPEC were searched for relevant documents published through July 31, 2013 using a systematic approach. Only documents relating to DRNs in the USA were included. Documents were analyzed using a classification framework consisting of 10 facets to identify themes. 6641 documents were retrieved. After screening for duplicates and relevance, 38 were included in the final review. A peer-reviewed literature on data warehouse governance is emerging, but is still sparse. Peer-reviewed publications on UK research network governance were more prevalent, although not reviewed for this analysis. All 10 classification facets were used, with some documents falling into two or more classifications. No document addressed costs associated with governance. Even though DRNs are emerging as vehicles for research and public health surveillance, understanding of DRN data governance policies and procedures is limited. This is expected to change as more DRN projects disseminate their governance approaches as publicly available toolkits and peer-reviewed publications. While peer-reviewed, US-based DRN data warehouse governance publications have increased, DRN developers and administrators are encouraged to publish information about these programs. 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.

The mechanisms underpinning peer support: a literature review.

PubMed

Watson, Emma

2017-12-20

The employment of Peer Support Workers, who themselves have experience of significant emotional distress, can promote recovery at an individual and organisational level. While research examining the benefits of peer support within mental health services continues to grow, an understanding of how, and through what processes, these benefits are reached remains under-developed. To review the published research literature relating to the process of peer support and its underpinning mechanisms to better understand how and why it works. A scoping review of published literature identified studies relating to peer support mechanisms, processes and relationships. Studies were summarised and findings analysed. Five mechanisms were found to underpin peer support relationships (lived experience, love labour, the liminal position of the peer worker, strengths-focussed social and practical support, and the helper role). The identified mechanisms can underpin both the success and difficulties associated with peer support relationships. Further research should review a broader range of literature and clarify how these mechanisms contribute to peer support in different contexts.

Predatory Publishing, Questionable Peer Review, and Fraudulent Conferences

PubMed Central

2014-01-01

Open-access is a model for publishing scholarly, peer-reviewed journals on the Internet that relies on sources of funding other than subscription fees. Some publishers and editors have exploited the author-pays model of open-access, publishing for their own profit. Submissions are encouraged through widely distributed e-mails on behalf of a growing number of journals that may accept many or all submissions and subject them to little, if any, peer review or editorial oversight. Bogus conference invitations are distributed in a similar fashion. The results of these less than ethical practices might include loss of faculty member time and money, inappropriate article inclusions in curriculum vitae, and costs to the college or funding source. PMID:25657363

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.

Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Policies in Psychiatry and Medicine: A Comparative Study of Peer-Reviewed Journals

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Khurana, Gauri; Henderson, Schuyler; Walter, Garry; Martin, Andres

2012-01-01

Objective: The authors reviewed and characterized conflict of interest (COI) and disclosure policies published in peer-reviewed psychiatric and nonpsychiatric journals. Methods: The authors examined peer-reviewed publications in the psychiatric (N=20) and nonpsychiatric (N=20) literature. Using qualitative and quantitative approaches, they…

Three decades of disasters: a review of disaster-specific literature from 1977-2009.

PubMed

Smith, Erin; Wasiak, Jason; Sen, Ayan; Archer, Frank; Burkle, Frederick M

2009-01-01

The potential for disasters exists in all communities. To mitigate the potential catastrophes that confront humanity in the new millennium, an evidence-based approach to disaster management is required urgently. This study moves toward such an evidence-based approach by identifying peer-reviewed publications following a range of disasters and events over the past three decades. Peer-reviewed, event-specific literature was identified using a comprehensive search of the electronically indexed database, MEDLINE (1956-January 2009). An extended comprehensive search was conducted for one event to compare the event-specific literature indexed in MEDLINE to other electronic databases (EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, CENTRAL, Psych Info, Maternity and Infant Care, EBM Reviews). Following 25 individual disasters or overwhelming crises, a total of 2,098 peer-reviewed, event-specific publications were published in 789 journals (652 publications following disasters/events caused by natural hazards, 966 following human-made/technological disasters/events, and 480 following conflict/complex humanitarian events).The event with the greatest number of peer-reviewed, event-specific publications was the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks (686 publications). Prehospital and Disaster Medicine published the greatest number of peer-reviewed, event-specific publications (54), followed by Journal of Traumatic Stress (42), Military Medicine (40), and Psychiatric Services (40). The primary topics of event-specific publications were mental health, medical health, and response. When an extended, comprehensive search was conducted for one event, 75% of all peer-reviewed, event-specific publications were indexed in MEDLINE. A broad range of multi-disciplinary journals publish peer reviewed, event-specific publications. While the majority of peer-reviewed, event-specific literature is indexed in MEDLINE, comprehensive search strategies should include EMBASE to increase yield.

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.

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.

Clinical research data warehouse governance for distributed research networks in the USA: a systematic review of the literature

PubMed Central

Holmes, John H; Elliott, Thomas E; Brown, Jeffrey S; Raebel, Marsha A; Davidson, Arthur; Nelson, Andrew F; Chung, Annie; La Chance, Pierre; Steiner, John F

2014-01-01

Objective To review the published, peer-reviewed literature on clinical research data warehouse governance in distributed research networks (DRNs). Materials and methods Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and INSPEC were searched for relevant documents published through July 31, 2013 using a systematic approach. Only documents relating to DRNs in the USA were included. Documents were analyzed using a classification framework consisting of 10 facets to identify themes. Results 6641 documents were retrieved. After screening for duplicates and relevance, 38 were included in the final review. A peer-reviewed literature on data warehouse governance is emerging, but is still sparse. Peer-reviewed publications on UK research network governance were more prevalent, although not reviewed for this analysis. All 10 classification facets were used, with some documents falling into two or more classifications. No document addressed costs associated with governance. Discussion Even though DRNs are emerging as vehicles for research and public health surveillance, understanding of DRN data governance policies and procedures is limited. This is expected to change as more DRN projects disseminate their governance approaches as publicly available toolkits and peer-reviewed publications. Conclusions While peer-reviewed, US-based DRN data warehouse governance publications have increased, DRN developers and administrators are encouraged to publish information about these programs. PMID:24682495

The Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium

PubMed Central

Saper, Clifford B; Maunsell, John HR

2009-01-01

As the Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium (NPRC) ends its first year, it is worth looking back to see how the experiment has worked. In order to encourage dissemination of the details outlined in this Editorial, it will also be published in other journals in the Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium. PMID:19284614

The gender gap in peer-reviewed publications by physical therapy faculty members: a productivity puzzle.

PubMed

Kaufman, Regina R; Chevan, Julia

2011-01-01

Studies of peer-reviewed article publication by faculty in higher education show men publish more than women. Part of the difference in publishing appears to be attributable directly to gender. Gender differences in publishing productivity have not been explored in physical therapy. The purpose of this study was to explore effects of gender on peer-reviewed publication productivity in physical therapy. This was a cross-sectional study using survey methods. A survey was administered to a random sample of 881 physical therapy faculty members; 459 responses were used for analysis. Men were more likely than women to be married, have children, hold a PhD degree, be tenured or on a tenure track, and hold the position of department chair. There was a significant difference in peer-reviewed publication rates between male and female respondents. Negative binomial regression models revealed that female gender was a negative predictor of peer-reviewed publication, accounting for between 0.51 and 0.58 fewer articles per year for women than for men over the course of a career. Reasons for the gender differences are not clear. Factors such as grant funding, laboratory resources, nature of collaborative relationships, values for different elements of the teaching/research/service triad, and ability to negotiate the academic culture were not captured by our model. The gender gap in peer-reviewed publishing productivity may have implications for individuals and the profession of physical therapy and should be subject to further exploration.

Do peers matter? A review of peer and/or friends' influence on physical activity among American adolescents.

PubMed

Fitzgerald, Amanda; Fitzgerald, Noelle; Aherne, Cian

2012-08-01

This systematic review investigated the relationship between peer and/or friend variables and physical activity among adolescents by synthesising cross-sectional, longitudinal, and experimental research conducted in the US. Seven electronic databases were searched to identify related articles published within the last 10 years and the articles reviewed included adolescents between 10 and 18 years. Studies reporting a measure of physical activity for adolescents and at least one potential peer and/or friend variable were included. Research demonstrated that peers and friends have an important role to play in the physical activity behavior of adolescents. Six processes were identified through which peers and/or friends may have an influence on physical activity including: peer and/or friend support, presence of peers and friends, peer norms, friendship quality and acceptance, peer crowds, and peer victimization. The theoretical significance of these results is assessed and the development of peer-related physical activity programs for adolescents is discussed. Copyright © 2012 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers?

PubMed

D'Andrea, Rafael; O'Dwyer, James P

2017-01-01

Peer review is the gold standard for scientific communication, but its ability to guarantee the quality of published research remains difficult to verify. Recent modeling studies suggest that peer review is sensitive to reviewer misbehavior, and it has been claimed that referees who sabotage work they perceive as competition may severely undermine the quality of publications. Here we examine which aspects of suboptimal reviewing practices most strongly impact quality, and test different mitigating strategies that editors may employ to counter them. We find that the biggest hazard to the quality of published literature is not selfish rejection of high-quality manuscripts but indifferent acceptance of low-quality ones. Bypassing or blacklisting bad reviewers and consulting additional reviewers to settle disagreements can reduce but not eliminate the impact. The other editorial strategies we tested do not significantly improve quality, but pairing manuscripts to reviewers unlikely to selfishly reject them and allowing revision of rejected manuscripts minimize rejection of above-average manuscripts. In its current form, peer review offers few incentives for impartial reviewing efforts. Editors can help, but structural changes are more likely to have a stronger impact.

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 peer review gap: A longitudinal case study of gendered publishing and occupational patterns in a female-rich discipline, Western North America (1974-2016).

PubMed

Tushingham, Shannon; Fulkerson, Tiffany; Hill, Katheryn

2017-01-01

Researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that women continue to be underrepresented in publication output in the sciences. This is true even in female-rich fields such as archaeology. Since most gender-related publication studies rely on data from peer-reviewed journals, it would be instructive, though challenging, to also track publication output in non-refereed and professional or industry venues, which tend to be more accessible to those working in extra-academic settings. This comparison is important in fields such as archaeology in which the vast majority (approximately 90%) of practitioners in the USA work for private sector cultural resource management firms and federal and state agencies. To understand the dynamics of who publishes where, we compiled a new dataset tracking over 40 years of peer-reviewed versus non-peer-reviewed publications that publish articles on the archaeology of California (an American Indian cultural area including southwest Oregon, most of the state of California, and Baja Mexico) and the Great Basin culture area (spanning eight western USA states). Historic gender differences in the publishing output of authors identified as men versus those identified as women were revealed by articles published between 1974 and 2016 in two refereed journals, the Journal of California Anthropology/ Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology and California Archaeology, and in one un-refereed venue, the Society for California Archaeology Proceedings. Although multiple independent measures indicate that women are contributing and active members of the discipline, publishing records yield more variable results. Specifically, while women have historic and increasingly robust levels of participation in the non-peer-reviewed Proceedings, they remain vastly underrepresented in the two peer-reviewed journals, which are widely regarded as more prestigious and influential. We argue that this "peer review gap" is influenced by variation in the costs (largely time investment) and benefits of publication for people working in different professional roles (e.g., agency professionals, private/cultural resource management firm personnel, tenure-track faculty, adjunct faculty, etc.). We also argue that these cost and benefit variations may ultimately influence the decisions of people of all genders and backgrounds, but, because of the current structure of our discipline-including the fact that women and minorities lag in positions where costly peer-reviewed publication is a rewarded and supported activity-overwhelmingly affect these groups. We recognize that non-refereed publications such as Proceedings provide an important means of bridging the peer review gap and give voice to individuals from diverse backgrounds and perspectives.

The peer review gap: A longitudinal case study of gendered publishing and occupational patterns in a female-rich discipline, Western North America (1974–2016)

PubMed Central

Fulkerson, Tiffany; Hill, Katheryn

2017-01-01

Researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that women continue to be underrepresented in publication output in the sciences. This is true even in female-rich fields such as archaeology. Since most gender-related publication studies rely on data from peer-reviewed journals, it would be instructive, though challenging, to also track publication output in non-refereed and professional or industry venues, which tend to be more accessible to those working in extra-academic settings. This comparison is important in fields such as archaeology in which the vast majority (approximately 90%) of practitioners in the USA work for private sector cultural resource management firms and federal and state agencies. To understand the dynamics of who publishes where, we compiled a new dataset tracking over 40 years of peer-reviewed versus non-peer-reviewed publications that publish articles on the archaeology of California (an American Indian cultural area including southwest Oregon, most of the state of California, and Baja Mexico) and the Great Basin culture area (spanning eight western USA states). Historic gender differences in the publishing output of authors identified as men versus those identified as women were revealed by articles published between 1974 and 2016 in two refereed journals, the Journal of California Anthropology/ Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology and California Archaeology, and in one un-refereed venue, the Society for California Archaeology Proceedings. Although multiple independent measures indicate that women are contributing and active members of the discipline, publishing records yield more variable results. Specifically, while women have historic and increasingly robust levels of participation in the non-peer-reviewed Proceedings, they remain vastly underrepresented in the two peer-reviewed journals, which are widely regarded as more prestigious and influential. We argue that this “peer review gap” is influenced by variation in the costs (largely time investment) and benefits of publication for people working in different professional roles (e.g., agency professionals, private/cultural resource management firm personnel, tenure-track faculty, adjunct faculty, etc.). We also argue that these cost and benefit variations may ultimately influence the decisions of people of all genders and backgrounds, but, because of the current structure of our discipline—including the fact that women and minorities lag in positions where costly peer-reviewed publication is a rewarded and supported activity—overwhelmingly affect these groups. We recognize that non-refereed publications such as Proceedings provide an important means of bridging the peer review gap and give voice to individuals from diverse backgrounds and perspectives. PMID:29186153

The peer review process: a primer for JNIS readers.

PubMed

Hirsch, Joshua A; Manchikanti, Laxmaiah; Albuquerque, Felipe C; Leslie-Mazwi, Thabele M; Lev, Michael H; Linfante, Italo; Mocco, J; Rai, Ansaar T; Schaefer, Pamela W; Tarr, Robert W

2017-07-01

Peer review of scientific articles submitted for publication has been such an integral component of innovation in science and medicine that participants (be they readers, reviewers, or editors) seldom consider its complexity. Not surprisingly, much has been written about scientific peer review. The aim of this report is to share some of the elements of that discourse with readers of the Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery ( JNIS ). 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.

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.

Does Peer Review of Radiation Plans Affect Clinical Care? A Systematic Review of the Literature

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

Brunskill, Kelsey; Nguyen, Timothy K.; Boldt, R. Gabriel

Purpose: Peer review is a recommended component of quality assurance in radiation oncology; however, it is resource-intensive and its effect on patient care is not well understood. We conducted a systematic review of the published data to assess the reported clinical impact of peer review on radiation treatment plans. Methods and Materials: A systematic review of published English studies was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and abstracts published from major radiation oncology scientific meeting proceedings. For inclusion, the studies were required to report the effect of peer review on ≥1 element ofmore » treatment planning (eg, target volume or organ-at-risk delineation, dose prescription or dosimetry). Results: The initial search strategy identified 882 potentially eligible studies, with 11 meeting the inclusion criteria for full-text review and final analysis. Across a total of 11,491 patient cases, peer review programs led to modifications in a weighted mean of 10.8% of radiation treatment plans. Five studies differentiated between major and minor changes and reported weighted mean rates of change of 1.8% and 7.3%, respectively. The most common changes were related to target volume delineation (45.2% of changed plans), dose prescription or written directives (24.4%), and non-target volume delineation or normal tissue sparing (7.5%). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that peer review leads to changes in clinical care in approximately 1 of every 9 cases overall. This is similar to the reported rates of change in peer review studies from other oncology-related specialties, such as radiology and pathology.« less

Does Peer Review of Radiation Plans Affect Clinical Care? A Systematic Review of the Literature.

PubMed

Brunskill, Kelsey; Nguyen, Timothy K; Boldt, R Gabriel; Louie, Alexander V; Warner, Andrew; Marks, Lawrence B; Palma, David A

2017-01-01

Peer review is a recommended component of quality assurance in radiation oncology; however, it is resource-intensive and its effect on patient care is not well understood. We conducted a systematic review of the published data to assess the reported clinical impact of peer review on radiation treatment plans. A systematic review of published English studies was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and abstracts published from major radiation oncology scientific meeting proceedings. For inclusion, the studies were required to report the effect of peer review on ≥1 element of treatment planning (eg, target volume or organ-at-risk delineation, dose prescription or dosimetry). The initial search strategy identified 882 potentially eligible studies, with 11 meeting the inclusion criteria for full-text review and final analysis. Across a total of 11,491 patient cases, peer review programs led to modifications in a weighted mean of 10.8% of radiation treatment plans. Five studies differentiated between major and minor changes and reported weighted mean rates of change of 1.8% and 7.3%, respectively. The most common changes were related to target volume delineation (45.2% of changed plans), dose prescription or written directives (24.4%), and non-target volume delineation or normal tissue sparing (7.5%). Our findings suggest that peer review leads to changes in clinical care in approximately 1 of every 9 cases overall. This is similar to the reported rates of change in peer review studies from other oncology-related specialties, such as radiology and pathology. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

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.

The Great Fossil Fiasco: Teaching about Peer Review.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Gift, Nancy; Krasny, Marianne

2003-01-01

Describes a lesson that engages middle school students in learning about peer review. Uses the article "Archaeoraptor Fossil Trail," which was published in the November, 1999 issue of "National Geographic" as an example of a real life story of how peer review forces scientists to critically re-examine a fossil discovery. (SOE)

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.

Impact of peer review on reports of randomised trials published in open peer review journals: retrospective before and after study

PubMed Central

Collins, Gary S; Boutron, Isabelle; Yu, Ly-Mee; Cook, Jonathan; Shanyinde, Milensu; Wharton, Rose; Shamseer, Larissa; Altman, Douglas G

2014-01-01

Objective To investigate the effectiveness of open peer review as a mechanism to improve the reporting of randomised trials published in biomedical journals. Design Retrospective before and after study. Setting BioMed Central series medical journals. Sample 93 primary reports of randomised trials published in BMC-series medical journals in 2012. Main outcome measures Changes to the reporting of methodological aspects of randomised trials in manuscripts after peer review, based on the CONSORT checklist, corresponding peer reviewer reports, the type of changes requested, and the extent to which authors adhered to these requests. Results Of the 93 trial reports, 38% (n=35) did not describe the method of random sequence generation, 54% (n=50) concealment of allocation sequence, 50% (n=46) whether the study was blinded, 34% (n=32) the sample size calculation, 35% (n=33) specification of primary and secondary outcomes, 55% (n=51) results for the primary outcome, and 90% (n=84) details of the trial protocol. The number of changes between manuscript versions was relatively small; most involved adding new information or altering existing information. Most changes requested by peer reviewers had a positive impact on the reporting of the final manuscript—for example, adding or clarifying randomisation and blinding (n=27), sample size (n=15), primary and secondary outcomes (n=16), results for primary or secondary outcomes (n=14), and toning down conclusions to reflect the results (n=27). Some changes requested by peer reviewers, however, had a negative impact, such as adding additional unplanned analyses (n=15). Conclusion Peer reviewers fail to detect important deficiencies in reporting of the methods and results of randomised trials. The number of these changes requested by peer reviewers was relatively small. Although most had a positive impact, some were inappropriate and could have a negative impact on reporting in the final publication. PMID:24986891

Researcher Perspectives on Publication and Peer Review of Data

PubMed Central

Kratz, John Ernest; Strasser, Carly

2015-01-01

Data “publication” seeks to appropriate the prestige of authorship in the peer-reviewed literature to reward researchers who create useful and well-documented datasets. The scholarly communication community has embraced data publication as an incentive to document and share data. But, numerous new and ongoing experiments in implementation have not yet resolved what a data publication should be, when data should be peer-reviewed, or how data peer review should work. While researchers have been surveyed extensively regarding data management and sharing, their perceptions and expectations of data publication are largely unknown. To bring this important yet neglected perspective into the conversation, we surveyed ∼ 250 researchers across the sciences and social sciences– asking what expectations“data publication” raises and what features would be useful to evaluate the trustworthiness, evaluate the impact, and enhance the prestige of a data publication. We found that researcher expectations of data publication center on availability, generally through an open database or repository. Few respondents expected published data to be peer-reviewed, but peer-reviewed data enjoyed much greater trust and prestige. The importance of adequate metadata was acknowledged, in that almost all respondents expected data peer review to include evaluation of the data’s documentation. Formal citation in the reference list was affirmed by most respondents as the proper way to credit dataset creators. Citation count was viewed as the most useful measure of impact, but download count was seen as nearly as valuable. These results offer practical guidance for data publishers seeking to meet researcher expectations and enhance the value of published data. PMID:25706992

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.

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

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…

Information Quality in Regulatory Decision Making: Peer Review versus Good Laboratory Practice.

PubMed

McCarty, Lynn S; Borgert, Christopher J; Mihaich, Ellen M

2012-07-01

There is an ongoing discussion on the provenance of toxicity testing data regarding how best to ensure its validity and credibility. A central argument is whether journal peer-review procedures are superior to Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) standards employed for compliance with regulatory mandates. We sought to evaluate the rationale for regulatory decision making based on peer-review procedures versus GLP standards. We examined pertinent published literature regarding how scientific data quality and validity are evaluated for peer review, GLP compliance, and development of regulations. Some contend that peer review is a coherent, consistent evaluative procedure providing quality control for experimental data generation, analysis, and reporting sufficient to reliably establish relative merit, whereas GLP is seen as merely a tracking process designed to thwart investigator corruption. This view is not supported by published analyses pointing to subjectivity and variability in peer-review processes. Although GLP is not designed to establish relative merit, it is an internationally accepted quality assurance, quality control method for documenting experimental conduct and data. Neither process is completely sufficient for establishing relative scientific soundness. However, changes occurring both in peer-review processes and in regulatory guidance resulting in clearer, more transparent communication of scientific information point to an emerging convergence in ensuring information quality. The solution to determining relative merit lies in developing a well-documented, generally accepted weight-of-evidence scheme to evaluate both peer-reviewed and GLP information used in regulatory decision making where both merit and specific relevance inform the process.

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.

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

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

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.

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

Assessing the Academic, Social, and Language Production Outcomes of English Language Learners Engaged in Peer Tutoring: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bowman-Perrott, Lisa; deMarín, Sharon; Mahadevan, Lakshmi; Etchells, Matthew

2016-01-01

Peer tutoring is an instructional strategy that allows students to help one another learn content material through the repetition of key concepts. In more than 40 years of published studies, literature reviews, and meta-analyses of peer tutoring, this quantitative synthesis of the literature is the first to examine the impact of peer tutoring on…

Barriers and Facilitators to Scientific Writing Among Applied Epidemiologists.

PubMed

Pittman, Jessica; Stahre, Mandy; Tomedi, Laura; Wurster, Jessica

Communication in the form of written and oral reports and presentations is a core competency for epidemiologists at governmental public health agencies. Many applied epidemiologists do not publish peer-reviewed articles, limiting the scientific literature of best practices in evidence-based public health. To describe the writing and publishing experiences of applied epidemiologists and identify barriers and facilitators to publishing. Telephone focus groups and an 18-question multiple-choice and short-answer Web-based assessment were fielded in 2014. Six focus groups composed of 26 applied epidemiologists and an online assessment answered by 396 applied epidemiologists. Sample selection was stratified by years of experience. Past publishing experience, current job duties as related to publishing, barriers and facilitators to writing and publishing, and desired training in writing and publishing were assessed through focus groups and the online assessment. Focus groups identified 4 themes: job expectations, barriers to publishing, organizational culture, and the understanding of public health practice among reviewers as issues related to writing and publishing. Most respondents (80%) expressed a desire to publish; however, only 59% had published in a peer-reviewed journal. An academic appointment (among doctoral educated respondents) was identified as a facilitator to publishing as was access to peer-reviewed literature. Time (68%) was identified as the greatest barrier to writing and publishing. Other major barriers included lack of encouragement or support (33%) within the public health agency and agency clearance processes (32%). Assistance with journal selection (62%), technical writing skills (60%), and manuscript formatting (57%) were listed as the most needed trainings. Public health agencies can be facilitators for epidemiologists to contribute to the scientific literature through increasing access to the peer-reviewed literature, creating a supportive environment for writing and publishing, and investing in desired and needed training. The results have implications for modifying workplace policies surrounding writing and publishing.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Behind the Spam: A "Spectral Analysis" of Predatory Publishers

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Beall, Jeffrey

2015-08-01

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 presentation examines the current state of predatory publishing and related scams such as fake impact factors and advises researchers how to navigate scholarly publishing to best avoid predatory publishers and other scholarly publishing-related perils.

Effectiveness of Peer Education Interventions for HIV Prevention, Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention and Sexual Health Promotion for Young People: A Systematic Review of European Studies

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Tolli, M. V.

2012-01-01

Peer education remains a popular strategy for health promotion and prevention, but evidence of its effectiveness is still limited. This article presents a systematic review of peer education interventions in the European Union that were published between January 1999 and May 2010. The objective of the review is to determine the effectiveness of…

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.

High-Volume Hydraulic Fracturing and Human Health Outcomes: A Scoping Review.

PubMed

Wright, Rosemary; Muma, Richard D

2018-05-01

Examine extent of peer-reviewed literature exploring human health effects of hydraulic fracturing (HVHF). A scoping review methodology was used to examine peer-reviewed studies published from 2000 through 2017 that empirically examine direct health impacts of hydraulic fracturing. Through September 2017, only 18 studies were found published in peer-reviewed journals that met our requirements for inclusion in the review. Most of these studies resulted in positive or mixed findings of health outcomes. The paucity of studies reflects the difficulty in drawing direct connections between HVHF and human health outcomes. Many health outcomes may take years to emerge, exposure often occurs in lightly populated rural areas with older, poorer, and sicker residents, and diagnosis is difficult without physician knowledge of prior exposure. Primary care providers should record thorough histories to help guide future treatment.

Do Peers Matter? A Review of Peer and/or Friends' Influence on Physical Activity among American Adolescents

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fitzgerald, Amanda; Fitzgerald, Noelle; Aherne, Cian

2012-01-01

This systematic review investigated the relationship between peer and/or friend variables and physical activity among adolescents by synthesising cross-sectional, longitudinal, and experimental research conducted in the US. Seven electronic databases were searched to identify related articles published within the last 10 years and the articles…

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.

Do Continuing Medical Education Articles Foster Shared Decision Making?

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Labrecque, Michel; Lafortune, Valerie; Lajeunesse, Judith; Lambert-Perrault, Anne-Marie; Manrique, Hermes; Blais, Johanne; Legare, France

2010-01-01

Introduction: Defined as reviews of clinical aspects of a specific health problem published in peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed medical journals, offered without charge, continuing medical education (CME) articles form a key strategy for translating knowledge into practice. This study assessed CME articles for mention of evidence-based…

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.

Complex systems approach to scientific publication and peer-review system: development of an agent-based model calibrated with empirical journal data.

PubMed

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

Scientific peer-review and publication systems incur a huge burden in terms of costs and time. Innovative alternatives have been proposed to improve the systems, but assessing their impact in experimental studies is not feasible at a systemic level. We developed an agent-based model by adopting a unified view of peer review and publication systems and calibrating it with empirical journal data in the biomedical and life sciences. We modeled researchers, research manuscripts and scientific journals as agents. Researchers were characterized by their scientific level and resources, manuscripts by their scientific value, and journals by their reputation and acceptance or rejection thresholds. These state variables were used in submodels for various processes such as production of articles, submissions to target journals, in-house and external peer review, and resubmissions. We collected data for a sample of biomedical and life sciences journals regarding acceptance rates, resubmission patterns and total number of published articles. We adjusted submodel parameters so that the agent-based model outputs fit these empirical data. We simulated 105 journals, 25,000 researchers and 410,000 manuscripts over 10 years. A mean of 33,600 articles were published per year; 19 % of submitted manuscripts remained unpublished. The mean acceptance rate was 21 % after external peer review and rejection rate 32 % after in-house review; 15 % publications resulted from the first submission, 47 % the second submission and 20 % the third submission. All decisions in the model were mainly driven by the scientific value, whereas journal targeting and persistence in resubmission defined whether a manuscript would be published or abandoned after one or many rejections. This agent-based model may help in better understanding the determinants of the scientific publication and peer-review systems. It may also help in assessing and identifying the most promising alternative systems of peer review.

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.

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-Reviewed Publication of Clinical Trials Completed for Pediatric Exclusivity

PubMed Central

Benjamin, Daniel Kelly; Smith, Philip Brian; Murphy, M. Dianne; Roberts, Rosemary; Mathis, Lisa; Avant, Debbie; Califf, Robert M; Li, Jennifer S.

2009-01-01

Context Much of pediatric drug use is “off-label” because appropriate pediatric studies have not been conducted and the drugs have not been labeled by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in children. In 1997, Congress authorized FDA to grant extensions of marketing rights known as “pediatric exclusivity” if FDA-requested pediatric trials were conducted. As a result, there have been over 100 product labeling changes. The publication status of studies completed for pediatric exclusivity has not been evaluated. Objective To quantify the dissemination of results of studies conducted for pediatric exclusivity into the peer-review literature. Design Cohort study of all trials conducted for Pediatric Exclusivity, the subsequent labeling changes, and the publication of those studies in peer-reviewed journals. We categorized each study in the exclusivity application as ”successful” or “unsuccessful” based on FDA approval of the indication sought by the sponsor. We categorized any labeling changes resulting from the studies as ”positive” or “negative” for the drug under study. We then evaluated aspects of the studies and product label changes that were associated with subsequent publication in peer-reviewed medical journals. Main Outcome Measures Publication of the trial data in peer-reviewed journals. Results Between 1998 and 2004, 253 studies were submitted to FDA for pediatric exclusivity: 50% evaluated efficacy, 20% were multi-dose pharmacokinetic, 13% were single-dose pharmacokinetic, and 17% were safety studies. Labeling changes were positive for 127/253 (50%) of studies; only 112/253 (44%) were published. Efficacy studies and those with a favorable labeling change were more likely to be published. Of 100 studies resulting in important labeling changes, only 33 were published. Conclusions The pediatric exclusivity program has been successful in encouraging drug studies in children. However, the dissemination of these results in the peer-reviewed literature is limited. The results of these trials and future studies conducted for pediatric exclusivity should be published in peer-reviewed journals. Mechanisms to more widely disperse this information warrant further evaluation. PMID:16968851

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.

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

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

Automated Assessment of the Quality of Peer Reviews Using Natural Language Processing Techniques

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ramachandran, Lakshmi; Gehringer, Edward F.; Yadav, Ravi K.

2017-01-01

A "review" is textual feedback provided by a reviewer to the author of a submitted version. Peer reviews are used in academic publishing and in education to assess student work. While reviews are important to e-commerce sites like Amazon and e-bay, which use them to assess the quality of products and services, our work focuses on…

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.

The Relationship of Previous Training and Experience of Journal Peer Reviewers to Subsequent Review Quality

PubMed Central

Callaham, Michael L; Tercier, John

2007-01-01

Background Peer review is considered crucial to the selection and publication of quality science, but very little is known about the previous experiences and training that might identify high-quality peer reviewers. The reviewer selection processes of most journals, and thus the qualifications of their reviewers, are ill defined. More objective selection of peer reviewers might improve the journal peer review process and thus the quality of published science. Methods and Findings 306 experienced reviewers (71% of all those associated with a specialty journal) completed a survey of past training and experiences postulated to improve peer review skills. Reviewers performed 2,856 reviews of 1,484 separate manuscripts during a four-year study period, all prospectively rated on a standardized quality scale by editors. Multivariable analysis revealed that most variables, including academic rank, formal training in critical appraisal or statistics, or status as principal investigator of a grant, failed to predict performance of higher-quality reviews. The only significant predictors of quality were working in a university-operated hospital versus other teaching environment and relative youth (under ten years of experience after finishing training). Being on an editorial board and doing formal grant (study section) review were each predictors for only one of our two comparisons. However, the predictive power of all variables was weak. Conclusions Our study confirms that there are no easily identifiable types of formal training or experience that predict reviewer performance. Skill in scientific peer review may be as ill defined and hard to impart as is “common sense.” Without a better understanding of those skills, it seems unlikely journals and editors will be successful in systematically improving their selection of reviewers. This inability to predict performance makes it imperative that all but the smallest journals implement routine review ratings systems to routinely monitor the quality of their reviews (and thus the quality of the science they publish). PMID:17411314

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.

REPORT OF THE MEETING TO PEER REVIEW "The Inventory of Sources of Dioxin in the United States"

EPA Science Inventory

This report summarizes the expert scientific peer review of the April 1998 external review draft of The Inventory of Sources of Dioxin in the United States, published by the Office of Research and Development (ORD) of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (USEPA, ...

"Are you gonna publish that?" Peer-reviewed publication outcomes of doctoral dissertations in psychology.

PubMed

Evans, Spencer C; Amaro, Christina M; Herbert, Robyn; Blossom, Jennifer B; Roberts, Michael C

2018-01-01

If a doctoral dissertation represents an original investigation that makes a contribution to one's field, then dissertation research could, and arguably should, be disseminated into the scientific literature. However, the extent and nature of dissertation publication remains largely unknown within psychology. The present study investigated the peer-reviewed publication outcomes of psychology dissertation research in the United States. Additionally, we examined publication lag, scientific impact, and variations across subfields. To investigate these questions, we first drew a stratified random cohort sample of 910 psychology Ph.D. dissertations from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Next, we conducted comprehensive literature searches for peer-reviewed journal articles derived from these dissertations published 0-7 years thereafter. Published dissertation articles were coded for their bibliographic details, citation rates, and journal impact metrics. Results showed that only one-quarter (25.6% [95% CI: 23.0, 28.4]) of dissertations were ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals, with significant variations across subfields (range: 10.1 to 59.4%). Rates of dissertation publication were lower in professional/applied subfields (e.g., clinical, counseling) compared to research/academic subfields (e.g., experimental, cognitive). When dissertations were published, however, they often appeared in influential journals (e.g., Thomson Reuters Impact Factor M = 2.84 [2.45, 3.23], 5-year Impact Factor M = 3.49 [3.07, 3.90]) and were cited numerous times (Web of Science citations per year M = 3.65 [2.88, 4.42]). Publication typically occurred within 2-3 years after the dissertation year. Overall, these results indicate that the large majority of Ph.D. dissertation research in psychology does not get disseminated into the peer-reviewed literature. The non-publication of dissertation research appears to be a systemic problem affecting both research and training in psychology. Efforts to improve the quality and "publishability" of doctoral dissertation research could benefit psychological science on multiple fronts.

Systematic review of peer education intervention programmes among individuals with type 2 diabetes.

PubMed

Gatlin, Tricia K; Serafica, Reimund; Johnson, Michael

2017-12-01

To systematically review published randomised controlled trials of peer education interventions among adults with type 2 diabetes. Systematic reviews have shown mixed results for peer support interventions to improve diabetes self-management. Given the effectiveness of diabetes education by healthcare professionals, peer education interventions may be a useful alternative approach. This review addressed that gap. Systematic review. A systematic search of published randomised controlled trials between 2006-2016 was conducted using the keywords diabetes, type 2 diabetes, randomised controlled trials, self-management, peer education and peer support. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Jadad scale. Seven studies were included in the final review, and the Jadad scores ranged from 8-10 of a possible 13 points. There was no consistent design, setting, or outcome measurement among the studies. There were two types of peer education interventions compared to traditional diabetes education: face-to-face or a combination of face-to-face and telephone/texting. The most common clinical outcome measure was HbA1c. Two of six studies showed statistically significant improvement in HbA1c between intervention and control groups. An increase in diabetes knowledge was also statistically significant in two of five studies. Peer education could be successful in improving clinical outcomes. No evidence was found indicating that healthcare provider education was superior in regard to clinical knowledge or behavioural or psychological outcome measures than peer education. HbA1c was statistically significantly lower in some peer education groups compared to control groups. There is evidence that peer education can be useful in achieving positive clinical outcomes such as decreasing HbA1c levels and increasing diabetes knowledge. A certified diabetes educator or a trained healthcare professional should not be overlooked though when using peer educators. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

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.

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

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

Current rates of publication for podium and poster presentations at the american society for surgery of the hand annual meetings.

PubMed

Abzug, Joshua M; Osterman, Meredith; Rivlin, Michael; Paryavi, Ebrahim; Osterman, A Lee

2014-09-01

Research projects are presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH). It is unknown how many achieve publication in peer-reviewed journals. We sought to determine current rates of publication of podium and poster presentations. All ASSH podium and poster presentations from 2000 to 2005 were reviewed, and an Internet-based search using PubMed and Google was conducted to determine whether the presented studies had been published. Times to publication and journal names were recorded. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Fisher's exact test was conducted to compare current trends with previous trends. Of 1127 podium and poster presentations reviewed, 46% were published in peer-reviewed journals. Forty-seven percent of published presentations (242 presentations) were in Journal of Hand Surgery, and 11% (59 presentations) were in Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. Forty-five percent of presentations were published within 2 years and 66% within 3 years. The publication rate for podium presentations was significantly higher than that previously reported for Journal of Hand Surgery, at 54% compared with 44% (P=0.004). Currently, fewer than half of the studies presented at Annual Meetings of the ASSH achieve publication in peer-reviewed journals. Presentations are most likely to be published within 3 years, and almost half are published in Journal of Hand Surgery.

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.

Some opinions on the review process of research papers destined for publication.

PubMed

Roohi, Ehsan; Mahian, Omid

2015-06-01

The current paper discusses the peer review process in journals that publish research papers purveying new science and understandings (scientific journals). Different aspects of peer review including the selection of reviewers, the review process and the decision policy of editor are discussed in details. Here, the pros and cons of different conventional methods of review processes are mentioned. Finally, a suggestion is presented for the review process of scientific papers.

Artificial intelligence in peer review: How can evolutionary computation support journal editors?

PubMed

Mrowinski, Maciej J; Fronczak, Piotr; Fronczak, Agata; Ausloos, Marcel; Nedic, Olgica

2017-01-01

With the volume of manuscripts submitted for publication growing every year, the deficiencies of peer review (e.g. long review times) are becoming more apparent. Editorial strategies, sets of guidelines designed to speed up the process and reduce editors' workloads, are treated as trade secrets by publishing houses and are not shared publicly. To improve the effectiveness of their strategies, editors in small publishing groups are faced with undertaking an iterative trial-and-error approach. We show that Cartesian Genetic Programming, a nature-inspired evolutionary algorithm, can dramatically improve editorial strategies. The artificially evolved strategy reduced the duration of the peer review process by 30%, without increasing the pool of reviewers (in comparison to a typical human-developed strategy). Evolutionary computation has typically been used in technological processes or biological ecosystems. Our results demonstrate that genetic programs can improve real-world social systems that are usually much harder to understand and control than physical systems.

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.

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…

76 FR 68518 - Request for Information: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications Resulting From...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-11-04

... there models or new ideas for public-private partnerships that take advantage of existing publisher... OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY Request for Information: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications Resulting From Federally Funded Research ACTION: Notice of Request for Information...

76 FR 80418 - Request for Information: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications Resulting From...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-23

... there models or new ideas for public-private partnerships that take advantage of existing publisher... OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY Request for Information: Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications Resulting From Federally Funded Research ACTION: Notice of Request for Information...

Analysis of Trends from DoD Level Peer Reviewed Contracts

DTIC Science & Technology

2014-06-01

Kluwer Academic Publishers. Layton , E . (2007). The Defense Acquisition University: Training professionals for the acquisition workforce 1992–2003...3  E .  RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...................................................................4  F.  ORGANIZATION OF REPORT...16  D.  PROCEDURES, GUIDANCE, AND INFORMATION 201.170 CONDUCTING PEER REVIEWS ..............................................................16  E

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

What's with all this peer-review stuff anyway?

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

Warner, J. S.

2010-01-01

The Journal of Physical Security was ostensibly started to deal with a perceived lack of peer-reviewed journals related to the field of physical security. In fact, concerns have been expressed that the field of physical security is scarcely a field at all. A typical, well-developed field might include the following: multiple peer-reviewed journals devoted to the subject, rigor and critical thinking, metrics, fundamental principles, models and theories, effective standards and guidelines, R and D conferences, professional societies, certifications, its own academic department (or at least numerous academic experts), widespread granting of degrees in the field from 4-year research universities, mechanismsmore » for easily spotting 'snake oil' products and services, and the practice of professionals organizing to police themselves, provide quality control, and determine best practices. Physical Security seems to come up short in a number of these areas. Many of these attributes are difficult to quantify. This paper seeks to focus on one area that is quantifiable: the number of peer-reviewed journals dedicated to the field of Physical Security. In addition, I want to examine the number of overall periodicals (peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed) dedicated to physical security, as well as the number of papers published each year about physical security. These are potentially useful analyses because one can often infer how healthy or active a given field is by its publishing activity. For example, there are 2,754 periodicals dedicated to the (very healthy and active) field of physics. This paper concentrates on trade journal versus peer-reviewed journals. Trade journals typically focus on practice-related topics. A paper appropriate for a trade journal is usually based more on practical experience than rigorous studies or research. Models, theories, or rigorous experimental research results will usually not be included. A trade journal typically targets a specific market in an industry or trade. Such journals are often considered to be news magazines and may contain industry specific advertisements and/or job ads. A peer-reviewed journal, a.k.a 'referred journal', in contrast, contains peer-reviewed papers. A peer-reviewed paper is one that has been vetted by the peer review process. In this process, the paper is typically sent to independent experts for review and consideration. A peer-reviewed paper might cover experimental results, and/or a rigorous study, analyses, research efforts, theory, models, or one of many other scholarly endeavors.« less

"Are you gonna publish that?" Peer-reviewed publication outcomes of doctoral dissertations in psychology

PubMed Central

Amaro, Christina M.; Herbert, Robyn; Blossom, Jennifer B.; Roberts, Michael C.

2018-01-01

If a doctoral dissertation represents an original investigation that makes a contribution to one’s field, then dissertation research could, and arguably should, be disseminated into the scientific literature. However, the extent and nature of dissertation publication remains largely unknown within psychology. The present study investigated the peer-reviewed publication outcomes of psychology dissertation research in the United States. Additionally, we examined publication lag, scientific impact, and variations across subfields. To investigate these questions, we first drew a stratified random cohort sample of 910 psychology Ph.D. dissertations from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. Next, we conducted comprehensive literature searches for peer-reviewed journal articles derived from these dissertations published 0–7 years thereafter. Published dissertation articles were coded for their bibliographic details, citation rates, and journal impact metrics. Results showed that only one-quarter (25.6% [95% CI: 23.0, 28.4]) of dissertations were ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals, with significant variations across subfields (range: 10.1 to 59.4%). Rates of dissertation publication were lower in professional/applied subfields (e.g., clinical, counseling) compared to research/academic subfields (e.g., experimental, cognitive). When dissertations were published, however, they often appeared in influential journals (e.g., Thomson Reuters Impact Factor M = 2.84 [2.45, 3.23], 5-year Impact Factor M = 3.49 [3.07, 3.90]) and were cited numerous times (Web of Science citations per year M = 3.65 [2.88, 4.42]). Publication typically occurred within 2–3 years after the dissertation year. Overall, these results indicate that the large majority of Ph.D. dissertation research in psychology does not get disseminated into the peer-reviewed literature. The non-publication of dissertation research appears to be a systemic problem affecting both research and training in psychology. Efforts to improve the quality and “publishability” of doctoral dissertation research could benefit psychological science on multiple fronts. PMID:29444130

"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.

Peer Feedback in Second Language Writing (2005-2014)

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Yu, Shulin; Lee, Icy

2016-01-01

This article reviews research on peer feedback in second language (L2) writing published in the last decade (i.e. 2005-2014). We analyse first the theoretical underpinnings that have informed both peer feedback research and the pedagogical use of peer feedback in L2 writing instruction. We also provide a critical interpretation of existing peer…

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

Systematic review of the effectiveness of training programs in writing for scholarly publication, journal editing, and manuscript peer review (protocol).

PubMed

Galipeau, James; Moher, David; Skidmore, Becky; Campbell, Craig; Hendry, Paul; Cameron, D William; Hébert, Paul C; Palepu, Anita

2013-06-17

An estimated $100 billion is lost to 'waste' in biomedical research globally, annually, much of which comes from the poor quality of published research. One area of waste involves bias in reporting research, which compromises the usability of published reports. In response, there has been an upsurge in interest and research in the scientific process of writing, editing, peer reviewing, and publishing (that is, journalology) of biomedical research. One reason for bias in reporting and the problem of unusable reports could be due to authors lacking knowledge or engaging in questionable practices while designing, conducting, or reporting their research. Another might be that the peer review process for journal publication has serious flaws, including possibly being ineffective, and having poorly trained and poorly motivated reviewers. Similarly, many journal editors have limited knowledge related to publication ethics. This can ultimately have a negative impact on the healthcare system. There have been repeated calls for better, more numerous training opportunities in writing for publication, peer review, and publishing. However, little research has taken stock of journalology training opportunities or evaluations of their effectiveness. We will conduct a systematic review to synthesize studies that evaluate the effectiveness of training programs in journalology. A comprehensive three-phase search approach will be employed to identify evaluations of training opportunities, involving: 1) forward-searching using the Scopus citation database, 2) a search of the MEDLINE In-Process and Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, and PsycINFO databases, as well as the databases of the Cochrane Library, and 3) a grey literature search. This project aims to provide evidence to help guide the journalological training of authors, peer reviewers, and editors. While there is ample evidence that many members of these groups are not getting the necessary training needed to excel at their respective journalology-related tasks, little is known about the characteristics of existing training opportunities, including their effectiveness. The proposed systematic review will provide evidence regarding the effectiveness of training, therefore giving potential trainees, course designers, and decision-makers evidence to help inform their choices and policies regarding the merits of specific training opportunities or types of training.

Peer review in medical journals: Beyond quality of reports towards transparency and public scrutiny of the process.

PubMed

Vercellini, Paolo; Buggio, Laura; Viganò, Paola; Somigliana, Edgardo

2016-06-01

Published medical research influences health care providers and policy makers, guides patient management, and is based on the peer review process. Peer review should prevent publication of unreliable data and improve study reporting, but there is little evidence that these aims are fully achieved. In the blinded systems, authors and readers do not know the reviewers' identity. Moreover, the reviewers' reports are not made available to readers. Anonymous peer review poses an ethical imbalance toward authors, who are judged by masked referees, and to the medical community and society at large, in case patients suffer the consequences of acceptance of flawed manuscripts or erroneous rejection of important findings. Some general medical journals have adopted an open process, require reviewers to sign their reports, and links online pre-publication histories to accepted articles. This system increases editors' and reviewers' accountability and allows public scrutiny, consenting readers understand on which basis were decisions taken and by whom. Moreover, this gives credit to reviewers for their apparently thankless job, as online availability of signed and scored reports may contribute to researchers' academic curricula. However, the transition from the blind to the open system could pose problems to journals. Reviewers may be more difficult to find, and publishers or medical societies could resist changes that may affect editorial costs and journals' revenues. Nonetheless, also considering the risk of competing interests in the medical field, general and major specialty journals could consider testing the effects of open review on manuscripts regarding studies that may influence clinical practice. Copyright © 2016 European Federation of Internal Medicine. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Academic Primer Series: Key Papers About Peer Review.

PubMed

Yarris, Lalena M; Gottlieb, Michael; Scott, Kevin; Sampson, Christopher; Rose, Emily; Chan, Teresa M; Ilgen, Jonathan

2017-06-01

Peer review, a cornerstone of academia, promotes rigor and relevance in scientific publishing. As educators are encouraged to adopt a more scholarly approach to medical education, peer review is becoming increasingly important. Junior educators both receive the reviews of their peers, and are also asked to participate as reviewers themselves. As such, it is imperative for junior clinician educators to be well-versed in the art of peer reviewing their colleagues' work. In this article, our goal was to identify and summarize key papers that may be helpful for faculty members interested in learning more about the peer-review process and how to improve their reviewing skills. The online discussions of the 2016-17 Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Faculty Incubator program included a robust discussion about peer review, which highlighted a number of papers on that topic. We sought to augment this list with further suggestions by guest experts and by an open call on Twitter for other important papers. Via this process, we created a list of 24 total papers on the topic of peer review. After gathering these papers, our authorship group engaged in a consensus-building process incorporating Delphi methods to identify the papers that best described peer review, and also highlighted important tips for new reviewers. We found and reviewed 24 papers. In our results section, we present our authorship group's top five most highly rated papers on the topic of peer review. We also summarize these papers with respect to their relevance to junior faculty members and to faculty developers. We present five key papers on peer review that can be used for faculty development for novice writers and reviewers. These papers represent a mix of foundational and explanatory papers that may provide some basis from which junior faculty members might build upon as they both undergo the peer-review process and act as reviewers in turn.

Academic Primer Series: Key Papers About Peer Review

PubMed Central

Yarris, Lalena M.; Gottlieb, Michael; Scott, Kevin; Sampson, Christopher; Rose, Emily; Chan, Teresa M.; Ilgen, Jonathan

2017-01-01

Introduction Peer review, a cornerstone of academia, promotes rigor and relevance in scientific publishing. As educators are encouraged to adopt a more scholarly approach to medical education, peer review is becoming increasingly important. Junior educators both receive the reviews of their peers, and are also asked to participate as reviewers themselves. As such, it is imperative for junior clinician educators to be well-versed in the art of peer reviewing their colleagues’ work. In this article, our goal was to identify and summarize key papers that may be helpful for faculty members interested in learning more about the peer-review process and how to improve their reviewing skills. Methods The online discussions of the 2016–17 Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) Faculty Incubator program included a robust discussion about peer review, which highlighted a number of papers on that topic. We sought to augment this list with further suggestions by guest experts and by an open call on Twitter for other important papers. Via this process, we created a list of 24 total papers on the topic of peer review. After gathering these papers, our authorship group engaged in a consensus-building process incorporating Delphi methods to identify the papers that best described peer review, and also highlighted important tips for new reviewers. Results We found and reviewed 24 papers. In our results section, we present our authorship group’s top five most highly rated papers on the topic of peer review. We also summarize these papers with respect to their relevance to junior faculty members and to faculty developers. Conclusion We present five key papers on peer review that can be used for faculty development for novice writers and reviewers. These papers represent a mix of foundational and explanatory papers that may provide some basis from which junior faculty members might build upon as they both undergo the peer-review process and act as reviewers in turn. PMID:28611894

Teaching Beginning College Students with Adapted Published Research Reports

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Klemm, William R.

2013-01-01

This study used peer-reviewed published research reports to teach a seminar on learning and memory to first-semester college students. Complete reports (not summaries, reviews, or news reports) were re-written by this author to be more "student friendly" to college freshmen. These adapted published research reports (APRRs) retained…

Readers' evaluation of effect of peer review and editing on quality of articles in the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde.

PubMed

Pierie, J P; Walvoort, H C; Overbeke, A J

1996-11-30

Academic biomedical journals use peer review and editing to help to select and improve the quality of articles. We have investigated whether articles accepted by the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde, the Dutch Journal of Medicine, were improved after peer review and editing (post-acceptance scientific and copy editing). 400 readers of the journal (100 each of medical students, recent medical graduates, general practitioners, and specialists) were invited to participate in a questionnaire survey. The first 25 from each group who agreed to participate were included. We posted a pack containing a set of identically appearing typescripts (ie, blinding) of the submitted, accepted, and published versions of 50 articles that had been published in Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. Each evaluator received two of the sets of versions, and each set was evaluated by one person from each group. The package also included two questionnaires: the first was used to compare the submitted with the accepted version (25 questions), the second compared the accepted with the published version (17 questions). The questions were answered on five-point scales, and were about the quality of the articles or were general/overall scores. We analysed the data as scores of 3-5 (ie, improvement) versus 1-2. After peer review, the quality in 14 of 23 questions (61%) was significantly improved (p = 0.03 or smaller). In particular, the overall score and general medical value were significantly improved (p = 0.00001 for each). Editing led to significant improvement in 11 of 16 questions (69%, p = 0.017 or smaller), and especially in style and readability (p = 0.001 and p = 0.004). Generally, we found no differences between the scores of the four categories of evaluators. 72% of the evaluators correctly identified which version was which. Evaluations by readers of the Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd indicated significant improvement of published articles after both peer review and editing. We think that peer review and editing are worthwhile tasks. We also think that possible biases would have had a negligible effect on our results (including the fact that we selected the first 25 evaluators who responded, that some evaluators may have read the published version, and that one questionnaire may have looked more scientific than the other, more editorial one).

Recent Findings on Peer Group Influences on Adolescent Smoking

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Simons-Morton, Bruce G.; Farhat, Tilda

2010-01-01

This review addresses peer group influences on adolescent smoking with a particular focus on recently published longitudinal studies that have investigated the topic. Specifically, we examine the theoretical explanations for how social influence works with respect to adolescent smoking; discuss the association between peer and adolescent smoking;…

CES4Health.info: A Web-Based Mechanism for Disseminating Peer-Reviewed Products of Community-Engaged Scholarship--Reflections on Year One

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Jordan, Catherine; Gelmon, Sherril; Ryan, Katharine; Seifer, Sarena D.

2012-01-01

CES4Health.info was launched in November 2009 as an online mechanism for peer reviewing and disseminating products of community-engaged scholarship in forms other than journal articles. One year after its launch, the authors conducted an online survey of CES4Health.info contributing authors, reviewers, and users of published products. Early…

To Name or Not to Name: The Effect of Changing Author Gender on Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Borsuk, Robyn M.; Aarssen, Lonnie W.; Budden, Amber E.; Koricheva, Julia; Leimu, Roosa; Tregenza, Tom; Lortie, Christopher J.

2009-01-01

The peer review model is one of the most important tools used in science to assess the relative merit of research. We manipulated a published article to reflect one of the following four author designations: female, male, initial, and no name provided. This article was then reviewed by referees of both genders at various stages of scientific…

Old boy network?

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Friebele, Elaine

Ideally, peer review is an objective process. In reality, scientists who are male or have a connection to the reviewer receive higher peer review scores than their counterparts with equal qualifications. These findings were published in the May 22 issue of Nature, by Swedish researchers Christine Wennerås and Agnes Wold, who obtained access to peer-reviewers'scores for postdoctoral fellowship applications to the Swedish Medical Research Council in 1995. Using six independent, objective criteria of “scientific productivity,”Wennerås and Wold, of the University of Goteborg, Sweden, found that women systematically scored significantly lower in the peer review process than men for the same level of scientific productivity. Applicants who were associated with reviewers also scored consistently better than those who were not. Scores were not significantly affected by the education, nationality, field of research, or postdoctoral experience of the applicant.

Rate and factors influencing the conversion of abstracts presented at the argentinian congress of hypertension meetings to indexed full peer-reviewed publications.

PubMed

Barochiner, J; Martínez, R; Choi, M; Espeche, W; Micali, R G; Tomat, A

2018-03-01

Publication rates vary significantly among different scientific meetings, with many abstracts never being published as peer-reviewed articles. This issue has never been investigated in the Hypertension field in Argentina. Our purpose was to determine the proportion of abstracts presented at the Argentinian Congress of Hypertension meetings that were published as full articles in peer-reviewed indexed journals, the time lag to publication and the factors associated with successful publication. we conducted a PubMed search to identify peer-reviewed publications of abstracts presented at the Argentinian Congress of Hypertension meetings between 2006 and 2015, assessing publication rate along with the time lag to publication. We also extracted information about several abstract characteristics and, for those that got published, we recorded the date of publication and journal name with its impact factor and H index. Predictors of publication were analyzed using a multivariable model. a total of 619 abstracts were presented between 2006 and 2015. The rate of conversion to full-text peer-reviewed articles by June 2017 was 28.1% (95%CI 24.7-31.8%), with a median time to publication of 15.7 months (IQR 8-30.9). On multivariable analysis, the independent predictors of publication were basic science category (OR 5 [95%CI 2.3-10.8], p<0.001), oral presentation (OR 2.8 [95%CI 1.6-4.9], p<0.001) and being an award winner for the presentation (OR 3 [95%CI 1.3-6.8], p=0.01). conversion rate to full peer-reviewed articles of abstracts presented at the Argentinian Congress of Hypertension meetings is far from ideal, with potential areas where efforts should be concentrated to improve dissemination of knowledge. Copyright © 2018 SEH-LELHA. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

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.

Single-Case Experimental Designs: A Systematic Review of Published Research and Current Standards

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Smith, Justin D.

2012-01-01

This article systematically reviews the research design and methodological characteristics of single-case experimental design (SCED) research published in peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2010. SCEDs provide researchers with a flexible and viable alternative to group designs with large sample sizes. However, methodological challenges have…

Artificial intelligence in peer review: How can evolutionary computation support journal editors?

PubMed Central

Fronczak, Piotr; Fronczak, Agata; Ausloos, Marcel; Nedic, Olgica

2017-01-01

With the volume of manuscripts submitted for publication growing every year, the deficiencies of peer review (e.g. long review times) are becoming more apparent. Editorial strategies, sets of guidelines designed to speed up the process and reduce editors’ workloads, are treated as trade secrets by publishing houses and are not shared publicly. To improve the effectiveness of their strategies, editors in small publishing groups are faced with undertaking an iterative trial-and-error approach. We show that Cartesian Genetic Programming, a nature-inspired evolutionary algorithm, can dramatically improve editorial strategies. The artificially evolved strategy reduced the duration of the peer review process by 30%, without increasing the pool of reviewers (in comparison to a typical human-developed strategy). Evolutionary computation has typically been used in technological processes or biological ecosystems. Our results demonstrate that genetic programs can improve real-world social systems that are usually much harder to understand and control than physical systems. PMID:28931033

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.

RETRACTED: Diagnosis of cervical cancer cell taken from scanning electron and atomic force microscope images of the same patients using discrete wavelet entropy energy and Jensen Shannon, Hellinger, Triangle Measure classifier

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Aytac Korkmaz, Sevcan

2016-05-01

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors. After a thorough investigation, the Publisher has concluded that the Editor was misled into accepting this article based upon the positive advice of at least one suggested reviewer report. The report was submitted from an email account provided by the author, that was later determined not to be the email of the supposed expert reviewer. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process.

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.

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.

Rewarding peer reviewers: maintaining the integrity of science communication.

PubMed

Gasparyan, Armen Yuri; Gerasimov, Alexey N; Voronov, Alexander A; Kitas, George D

2015-04-01

This article overviews currently available options for rewarding peer reviewers. Rewards and incentives may help maintain the quality and integrity of scholarly publications. Publishers around the world implemented a variety of financial and nonfinancial mechanisms for incentivizing their best reviewers. None of these is proved effective on its own. A strategy of combined rewards and credits for the reviewers1 creative contributions seems a workable solution. Opening access to reviews and assigning publication credits to the best reviews is one of the latest achievements of digitization. Reviews, posted on academic networking platforms, such as Publons, add to the transparency of the whole system of peer review. Reviewer credits, properly counted and displayed on individual digital profiles, help distinguish the best contributors, invite them to review and offer responsible editorial posts.

Rewarding Peer Reviewers: Maintaining the Integrity of Science Communication

PubMed Central

2015-01-01

This article overviews currently available options for rewarding peer reviewers. Rewards and incentives may help maintain the quality and integrity of scholarly publications. Publishers around the world implemented a variety of financial and nonfinancial mechanisms for incentivizing their best reviewers. None of these is proved effective on its own. A strategy of combined rewards and credits for the reviewers1 creative contributions seems a workable solution. Opening access to reviews and assigning publication credits to the best reviews is one of the latest achievements of digitization. Reviews, posted on academic networking platforms, such as Publons, add to the transparency of the whole system of peer review. Reviewer credits, properly counted and displayed on individual digital profiles, help distinguish the best contributors, invite them to review and offer responsible editorial posts. PMID:25829801

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…

Aprotinin; friend or foe? A review of recent medical literature.

PubMed

Royston, D; van Haaften, N; De Vooght, P

2007-01-01

Recent articles published in peer review journals have questioned the safety of using aprotinin in patients having heart surgery. Also, evidence has been published to suggest an increase in renal events in patients given aprotinin when compared to those where tranexamic acid was used. The present review will focus principally on the first of these articles in relation to previously published data and experience.

Documenting the Conversation: A Systematic Review of Library Discovery Layers

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bossaller, Jenny S.; Sandy, Heather Moulaison

2017-01-01

This article describes the results of a systematic review of peer-reviewed, published research articles about "discovery layers," user-friendly interfaces or systems that provide single-search box access to library content. Focusing on articles in LISTA published 2009-2013, a set of 80 articles was coded for community of users, journal…

The Validity of Peer Review in a General Medicine Journal

PubMed Central

Jackson, Jeffrey L.; Srinivasan, Malathi; Rea, Joanna; Fletcher, Kathlyn E.; Kravitz, Richard L.

2011-01-01

All the opinions in this article are those of the authors and should not be construed to reflect, in any way, those of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Background Our study purpose was to assess the predictive validity of reviewer quality ratings and editorial decisions in a general medicine journal. Methods Submissions to the Journal of General Internal Medicine (JGIM) between July 2004 and June 2005 were included. We abstracted JGIM peer review quality ratings, verified the publication status of all articles and calculated an impact factor for published articles (Rw) by dividing the 3-year citation rate by the average for this group of papers; an Rw>1 indicates a greater than average impact. Results Of 507 submissions, 128 (25%) were published in JGIM, 331 rejected (128 with review) and 48 were either not resubmitted after revision was requested or were withdrawn by the author. Of 331 rejections, 243 were published elsewhere. Articles published in JGIM had a higher citation rate than those published elsewhere (Rw: 1.6 vs. 1.1, p = 0.002). Reviewer quality ratings of article quality had good internal consistency and reviewer recommendations markedly influenced publication decisions. There was no quality rating cutpoint that accurately distinguished high from low impact articles. There was a stepwise increase in Rw for articles rejected without review, rejected after review or accepted by JGIM (Rw 0.60 vs. 0.87 vs. 1.56, p<0.0005). However, there was low agreement between reviewers for quality ratings and publication recommendations. The editorial publication decision accurately discriminated high and low impact articles in 68% of submissions. We found evidence of better accuracy with a greater number of reviewers. Conclusions The peer review process largely succeeds in selecting high impact articles and dispatching lower impact ones, but the process is far from perfect. While the inter-rater reliability between individual reviewers is low, the accuracy of sorting is improved with a greater number of reviewers. PMID:21799867

Protecting the pipeline of science: openness, scientific methods and the lessons from ticagrelor and the PLATO trial.

PubMed

Coats, Andrew J Stewart; Nijjer, Sukhjinder S; Francis, Darrel P

2014-10-20

Ticagrelor, a potent antiplatelet, has been shown to be beneficial in patients with acute coronary syndromes in a randomised controlled trial published in a highly ranked peer reviewed journal. Accordingly it has entered guidelines and has been approved for clinical use by authorities. However, there remains a controversy regarding aspects of the PLATO trial, which are not immediately apparent from the peer-reviewed publications. A number of publications have sought to highlight potential discrepancies, using data available in publicly published documents from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) leading to disagreement regarding the value of open science and data sharing. We reflect upon potential sources of bias present in even rigorously performed randomised controlled trials, on whether peer review can establish the presence of bias and the need to constantly challenge and question even accepted data. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

How is the instrumental color of meat measured?

PubMed

Tapp, W N; Yancey, J W S; Apple, J K

2011-09-01

Peer-reviewed journal articles (n=1068) were used to gather instrumental color measurement information in meat science research. The majority of articles, published in 10 peer-reviewed journals, originated from European countries (44.8%) and North America (38.5%). The predominant species was pork (44.2%), and most researchers used Minolta (60.0%) over Hunter (31.6%) colorimeters. Much of the research was done using illuminant D65 (32.3%); nevertheless, almost half (48.9%) of the articles did not report the illuminant. Moreover, a majority of the articles did not report aperture size (73.6%) or the number of readings per sample (52.4%). Many factors influence meat color, and a considerable proportion of the peer-reviewed, published research articles failed to include information necessary to replicate and/or interpret instrumental color results; therefore, a standardized set of minimum reportable parameters for meat color evaluation should be identified. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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.

Peer review and competition in the Art Exhibition Game.

PubMed

Balietti, Stefano; Goldstone, Robert L; Helbing, Dirk

2016-07-26

To investigate the effect of competitive incentives under peer review, we designed a novel experimental setup called the Art Exhibition Game. We present experimental evidence of how competition introduces both positive and negative effects when creative artifacts are evaluated and selected by peer review. Competition proved to be a double-edged sword: on the one hand, it fosters innovation and product diversity, but on the other hand, it also leads to more unfair reviews and to a lower level of agreement between reviewers. Moreover, an external validation of the quality of peer reviews during the laboratory experiment, based on 23,627 online evaluations on Amazon Mechanical Turk, shows that competition does not significantly increase the level of creativity. Furthermore, the higher rejection rate under competitive conditions does not improve the average quality of published contributions, because more high-quality work is also rejected. Overall, our results could explain why many ground-breaking studies in science end up in lower-tier journals. Differences and similarities between the Art Exhibition Game and scholarly peer review are discussed and the implications for the design of new incentive systems for scientists are explained.

Open access to scientific articles: a review of benefits and challenges.

PubMed

Björk, Bo-Christer

2017-03-01

The Internet has fundamentally changed the publishing of scholarly peer reviewed journals, and the way readers find and access articles. Digital access is nowadays the norm, in particular for researchers. The Internet has enabled a totally new business model, Open Access (OA), in which an article is openly available in full text for anyone with Internet access. This article reviews the different options to achieve this, whether by journals changing their revenue structures from subscription to publishing charges, or authors utilizing a number of options for posting OA versions of article manuscripts in repositories. It also discusses the regrettable emergence of "predatory" publishers, who spam academics, and make money by promising them rapid publication with only the semblance of peer review. The situation is further discussed from the viewpoints of different stakeholders, including academics as authors and readers, practicing physicians and the general public.

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…

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

"Press Start": The Value of an Online Student-Led, Peer-Reviewed Game Studies Journal

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Barr, Matthew

2017-01-01

In this article, an online student journal is described, and the ways in which student participants value the journal are discussed. "Press Start" is a peer-reviewed international journal of game studies, which aims to publish the best student work related to the academic study of video games. Content analysis of qualitative survey data…

Academic Effects of Peer-Mediated Interventions with English Language Learners: A Research Synthesis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Pyle, Daniel; Pyle, Nicole; Lignugaris/Kraft, Benjamin; Duran, Lillian; Akers, Jessica

2017-01-01

The purpose of this article is to synthesize the extant research on peer-mediated interventions (PMIs) with English language learners (ELLs) in kindergarten through Grade 12. Fourteen studies that were published in peer-reviewed journals from 1983 to 2013 were examined in terms of study characteristics, the effects on academic outcomes, study…

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

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.

RETRACTED: Growth of boron-doped diamond nanoclusters using the HFCVD technique

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Azadfar, P.; Ghoranneviss, M.; Elahi, S. M.; Farhadyar, N.; Salar Elahi, A.

2015-04-01

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). This article has been retracted at the request of the Principal Editor. After a thorough investigation, the Editor has concluded that the review process for this article was compromised. The acceptance was based on information from one reviewer report that was submitted from an email account provided to the journal as a suggested reviewer during the submission of the article. Although purportedly a real reviewer account, the Editor has concluded that this was not of an appropriate, independent reviewer. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewer whose identity was assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process.

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.

The Fate of Abstracts Presented at the 2013 and 2014 Annual Meetings of the Romanian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology.

PubMed

Trifan, Anca; Chihaia, Catalin-Alexandru; Tanase, Oana; Lungu, Cristina-Maria; Stanciu, Carol

2016-12-01

Oral and poster presentations at annual national meetings of the Romanian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (RSGH) provide a forum for education, communication and discussion of new research. However, for the wide-spread dissemination of the new research work, each presentation should be subsequently published as a full-text article in peer-reviewed, indexed journals. to evaluate the publication rate of full-text articles in peer-reviewed journals after being first presented as abstracts at two consecutive RSGH annual meetings. A retrospective review of all abstracts presented at the annual meetings in 2013 and 2014 was performed. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched using abstract titles, first author's name and affiliation, and key words from the title to identify whether an abstract resulted in a peer-reviewed publication. Abstracts published in full-text were subsequently assessed for study type, study center, topics, publication year, journals and their impact factors (IFs). We chose the 2013 and 2014 meetings to ensure a minimum two-year follow-up period since the last meeting for the publication as full-length articles. A total of 562 abstracts were presented (275 in 2013, 287 in 2014). There were 150 oral presentations (93 in 2013, 57 in 2014) and 412 poster presentations (182 in 2013, 230 in 2014). Fifty seven of them (10.1%) were published as full-text articles, among them 26 (17.3%) after oral presentations and 31 (7.5%) after poster presentations (P=0.001). University affiliation and original research work were most likely to be published. The average IFs of the journals which published the articles were 2.42 in 2013 and 1.87 in 2014. The publication rate for the annual RSGH meetings abstracts as full-text articles in peer-reviewed journals is very low compared to the analyses performed in gastroenterology or other medical specialities from other countries. It is not clear yet what are the factors responsible for the failure of publication.

The Validity of Online Patient Ratings of Physicians: Analysis of Physician Peer Reviews and Patient Ratings.

PubMed

McGrath, Robert J; Priestley, Jennifer Lewis; Zhou, Yiyun; Culligan, Patrick J

2018-04-09

Information from ratings sites are increasingly informing patient decisions related to health care and the selection of physicians. The current study sought to determine the validity of online patient ratings of physicians through comparison with physician peer review. We extracted 223,715 reviews of 41,104 physicians from 10 of the largest cities in the United States, including 1142 physicians listed as "America's Top Doctors" through physician peer review. Differences in mean online patient ratings were tested for physicians who were listed and those who were not. Overall, no differences were found between the online patient ratings based upon physician peer review status. However, statistical differences were found for four specialties (family medicine, allergists, internal medicine, and pediatrics), with online patient ratings significantly higher for those physicians listed as a peer-reviewed "Top Doctor" versus those who were not. The results of this large-scale study indicate that while online patient ratings are consistent with physician peer review for four nonsurgical, primarily in-office specializations, patient ratings were not consistent with physician peer review for specializations like anesthesiology. This result indicates that the validity of patient ratings varies by medical specialization. ©Robert J McGrath, Jennifer Lewis Priestley, Yiyun Zhou, Patrick J Culligan. Originally published in the Interactive Journal of Medical Research (http://www.i-jmr.org/), 09.04.2018.

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 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.

RETRACTED: Novel drug delivery carrier from alginate-carrageenan and glycerol as plasticizer

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Darmokoesoemo, Handoko; Pudjiastuti, Pratiwi; Rahmatullah, Bagus; Kusuma, Heri Septya

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of at least three illegitimate reviewer reports. The reports were submitted from email accounts which were provided to the journal as suggested reviewers during the submission of the article. Although purportedly real reviewer accounts, the Editors have concluded that these were not of appropriate, independent reviewers. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process.

RETRACTED: Development of electrode carbon paste/molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) with methacrylic acid as monomer to analyze glucose by potentiometry

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Khasanah, Miratul; Darmokoesoemo, Handoko; Kustyarini, Lendhy; Kadmi, Yassine; Elmsellem, Hicham; Kusuma, Heri Septya

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of two illegitimate reviewer reports. The reports were submitted from email accounts which were provided to the journal as suggested reviewers during the submission of the article. Although purportedly real reviewer accounts, the Editors have concluded that these were not of appropriate, independent reviewers. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process.

RETRACTED: Development of electrode carbon paste modified by molecularly imprinted polymer as sensor for analysis of creatinine by potentiometric

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Khasanah, Miratul; Darmokoesoemo, Handoko; Sari, Nunung Mareta; Kadmi, Yassine; Elmsellem, Hicham; Kusuma, Heri Septya

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of two illegitimate reviewer reports. The reports were submitted from email accounts which were provided to the journal as suggested reviewers during the submission of the article. Although purportedly real reviewer accounts, the Editors have concluded that these were not of appropriate, independent reviewers. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process.

RETRACTED: Development of carbon paste electrodes modified by molecularly imprinted polymer as potentiometry sensor of uric acid

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Khasanah, Miratul; Darmokoesoemo, Handoko; Widayanti, Nesti; Kadmi, Yassine; Elmsellem, Hicham; Kusuma, Heri Septya

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of two illegitimate reviewer reports. The reports were submitted from email accounts which were provided to the journal as suggested reviewers during the submission of the article. Although purportedly real reviewer accounts, the Editors have concluded that these were not of appropriate, independent reviewers. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process.

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Canadian Post-Secondary Mathematics: 2000-2010

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Chan, Bernard S.; Wahl, Lindi M.

2013-01-01

Published accounts of pedagogical experience and pedagogical research are critical resources to post-secondary mathematics instructors, and yet the quantity and scope of this literature is rarely summarized or reviewed. In this contribution, we analyze recent peer-reviewed journal publications regarding post-secondary mathematics, published by…

Trends in scientific publishing: Dark clouds loom large.

PubMed

Vinny, Pulikottil Wilson; Vishnu, Venugopalan Y; Lal, Vivek

2016-04-15

The world wide web has brought about a paradigm shift in the way medical research is published and accessed. The ease with which a new journal can be started/hosted by publishing start-ups is unprecedented. The tremendous capabilities of the world wide web and the open access revolution when combined with a highly profitable business have attracted unscrupulous fraudulent operators to the publishing industry. The intent of these fraudulent publishers is solely driven by profit with utter disregard to scientific content, peer reviews and ethics. This phenomenon has been referred to as "predatory publishing". The "international" tag of such journals often betrays their true origins. The gold open access model of publishing, where the author pays the publisher, when coupled with a non-existent peer review threatens to blur the distinction between science and pseudoscience. The average researcher needs to be made more aware of this clear and present danger to the scientific community. Prevention is better than cure. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Postsecondary Peer Cooperative Learning Programs: Annotated Bibliography 2016

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Arendale, David R., Comp.

2016-01-01

Purpose: This 2016 annotated bibliography reviews seven postsecondary peer cooperative learning programs that have been implemented nationally to increase student achievement. Methodology: An extensive literature search was conducted of published journal articles, newspaper accounts, book chapters, books, ERIC documents, thesis and dissertations,…

Postsecondary Peer Cooperative Learning Programs: Annotated Bibliography 2017

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Arendale, David R., Comp.

2017-01-01

This 2017 annotated bibliography reviews seven postsecondary peer cooperative learning programs that have been implemented nationally to increase student achievement. An extensive literature search was conducted of published journal articles, newspaper accounts, book chapters, books, ERIC documents, thesis and dissertations, online documents, and…

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.

Friends or Foes? A Review of Peer Influence on Self-Care and Glycemic Control in Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes

PubMed Central

Helgeson, Vicki S.

2012-01-01

Objective We reviewed studies published from 1990 to 2010 examining the relation of peer influence to diabetes outcomes for adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Methods We searched PsychInfo and MedLine databases and personal archives for studies meeting our criteria. 24 articles were included in the final review. Results Qualitative studies revealed that teens believe peers have an impact on diabetes behaviors, but quantitative findings are inconclusive. We found more evidence that social conflict was harmful than social support was helpful. Associations were more likely in studies that measured specific support and specific self-care variables. Studies addressing how individual differences interact with social context had promising findings. Conclusions The literature linking peer relations to diabetes outcomes is mixed. Future research should consider moderator variables, expand the conceptualization of peer relationships, and consider interactions between person and social context. PMID:22460759

A scoping review of 10 years of published literature on community-based rehabilitation.

PubMed

Cleaver, Shaun; Nixon, Stephanie

2014-01-01

To identify the characteristics of peer-reviewed literature on community-based rehabilitation (CBR) in low- and middle-income countries published in English from 2003 to 2012. This scoping review involved a systematic search of electronic databases using specific keyword/subject heading combinations. Journal articles were included if they were published in English, used "CBR" as related to rehabilitation with persons with disabilities and not limited to high-income countries (HICs). Data were charted according to both pre-determined and emergent categories. A subset of articles was charted by two reviewers to ensure reliability of variables. A total of 114 articles were included. Fifty-two articles presented empirical research and 49 were published in one of two journals. The articles represented CBR activity in 26 specific countries, although only two of these were in Europe and only one was in the Americas. Authors were predominantly affiliated at universities and in HICs. This scoping review identified and characterized a large pool of literature on CBR, facilitating its incorporation into research and practice. Future research should examine the engagement of persons with disabilities in creating CBR literature, and analysis of literature in languages other than English. Implications for Rehabilitation Community-based rehabilitation (CBR) has been promoted as a rehabilitation strategy of choice in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), but it has been critiqued for lack of an evidence base. A large number (114) of peer-reviewed articles were published on CBR between 2003 and 2012. Just under half of these articles (45%) presented empirical research, indicating that the evidence base for CBR is growing but will benefit from continued, rigorous inquiry. Furthermore, researchers from LMICs appear to be largely under-represented in published CBR research, flagging the need to support LMIC partners to share their CBR research in peer-reviewed journals.

The Journal of Earth System Science Education: Peer Review for Digital Earth and Digital Library Content

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Johnson, D.; Ruzek, M.; Weatherley, J.

2001-05-01

The Journal of Earth System Science Education is a new interdisciplinary electronic journal aiming to foster the study of the Earth as a system and promote the development and exchange of interdisciplinary learning resources for formal and informal education. JESSE will serve educators and students by publishing and providing ready electronic access to Earth system and global change science learning resources for the classroom and will provide authors and creators with professional recognition through publication in a peer reviewed journal. JESSE resources foster a world perspective by emphasizing interdisciplinary studies and bridging disciplines in the context of the Earth system. The Journal will publish a wide ranging variety of electronic content, with minimal constraints on format, targeting undergraduate educators and students as the principal readership, expanding to a middle and high school audience as the journal matures. JESSE aims for rapid review and turn-around of resources to be published, with a goal of 12 weeks from submission to publication for resources requiring few changes. Initial publication will be on a quarterly basis until a flow of resource submissions is established to warrant continuous electronic publication. JESSE employs an open peer review process in which authors and reviewers discuss directly the acceptability of a resource for publication using a software tool called the Digital Document Discourse Environment. Reviewer comments and attribution will be available with the resource upon acceptance for publication. JESSE will also implement a moderated peer commentary capability where readers can comment on the use of a resource or make suggestions. In the development phase, JESSE will also conduct a parallel anonymous review of content to validate and ensure credibility of the open review approach. Copyright of materials submitted remains with the author, granting JESSE the non-exclusive right to maintain a copy of the resource published on the JESSE web server, ensuring long term access to the resource as reviewed. JESSE is collaborating with the Digital Library for Earth System Education (DLESE) as a federated partner. Initial release is planned for Summer, 2001.

Top reviewers for the Journal of Nuclear Materials 2016

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Was, Gary

2017-01-01

The Journal of Nuclear Materials achieves its scientific excellence through several familiar editorial activities. Manuscripts are submitted by authors describing their research methods and results, a constructive refereeing process is generously provided by peer reviewers, and the many steps and decisions of the editorial process are carried out by the Editors with assistance from the Advisory Editorial Board. With the exception of peer reviewers, the names of the people within these groups are published in the pages of the Journal. Thereby they receive recognition in the community for their work. However, all of us Journal constituents owe a large debt of gratitude to reviewers. They dedicate time, energy and remarkable depth of expertise to evaluate submitted manuscripts. As a result of their work most manuscripts are substantively improved. We also recognize the fact that many times the underlying research itself is advanced by the recommendations of our reviewers. Because the Journal maintains a strict policy of anonymous peer review, we do not make known the names of reviewers in association with particular manuscripts. Within this constraint the Editors and Publisher wish to find ways to recognize our reviewers. We recently instituted a top reviewer honor for a single individual, awarded at the NuMat conference (http://www.nuclearmaterialsconference.com)

The preprint debate: What are the issues?

PubMed

da Silva, Jaime A Teixeira

2018-04-01

The debate surrounding preprints is increasing. Preprint proponents claim that preprints are a way to shore up trust in academic publishing, that they provide an additional 'quality' screen prior to traditional peer review, that they can assist with the replication crisis plaguing science in part by making negative or contradictory results public, and that they speed up the publishing process because fundamental results can be presented early, serving as timely reports for the purposes of tenure or grant funding. Preprint skeptics and critics claim that preprints may represent a risk and a danger to quality-based academic publishing because they are documents that have not been carefully and thoroughly vetted prior to their release into the public domain. Thus, academics who cite invalid, poorly vetted, or false facts could cause harm, not unlike the unscholarly 'predatory' open access movement. Feedback on work from lesser-known groups, or on less glamorous topics, may be null or worse than from traditional peer review, annulling an initial key objective of preprints. Although there is no widespread empirical evidence or data yet regarding some of these issues, academics should be aware of the ideological, financial, and political tug-of-war taking place before deciding if they wish to publish their important findings as a preprint prior or simultaneous to submitting to a regular journal for peer review.

The Mortality Peer Review Panel: a report on the deaths on operations of UK Service personnel 2002-2013.

PubMed

Russell, Robert; Hunt, N; Delaney, R

2014-06-01

Review of adverse outcomes is an essential element of healthcare governance. For each operational death, the post-mortem is attended by a member of Academic Department of Military Emergency Medicine and the case is assessed by a Mortality Peer Review Panel comprised of Defence Professors and other clinical and technical experts. A search was conducted of the Joint Theatre Trauma Registry (JTTR) for all UK military death reviews held from January 2002 to November 2013 and the judgement made by the Mortality Peer Review panel. Cases are awarded a 'salvageability' rating between S1 (salvageable) and S4 (not salvageable). Cases graded S1-3 are then assessed further for tactical, clinical or equipment factors that affected the outcome. There were 621 deaths recorded on the JTTR and 517 (83.3%) were due to hostile action. The Killed in Action to Died of Wounds ratio is 6.28 : 1. Explosive mechanisms of injury were responsible for 55.65% of combat deaths and penetrating mechanisms 28.71%. An average of 10.56 injuries was recorded per casualty and the mean number of body regions affected was 3.34. The Peer Review Panel decided that 91.1% cases were not salvageable (S4); this figure is 93.5% if the deaths due to hostile action are considered separately. The severity of modern military trauma is overwhelming in nature and, along with trauma scoring systems, clinical peer review is an essential part of healthcare governance. The process also helps inform and direct research within clinical and force protection fields. 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.

Peer review and competition in the Art Exhibition Game

PubMed Central

Goldstone, Robert L.; Helbing, Dirk

2016-01-01

To investigate the effect of competitive incentives under peer review, we designed a novel experimental setup called the Art Exhibition Game. We present experimental evidence of how competition introduces both positive and negative effects when creative artifacts are evaluated and selected by peer review. Competition proved to be a double-edged sword: on the one hand, it fosters innovation and product diversity, but on the other hand, it also leads to more unfair reviews and to a lower level of agreement between reviewers. Moreover, an external validation of the quality of peer reviews during the laboratory experiment, based on 23,627 online evaluations on Amazon Mechanical Turk, shows that competition does not significantly increase the level of creativity. Furthermore, the higher rejection rate under competitive conditions does not improve the average quality of published contributions, because more high-quality work is also rejected. Overall, our results could explain why many ground-breaking studies in science end up in lower-tier journals. Differences and similarities between the Art Exhibition Game and scholarly peer review are discussed and the implications for the design of new incentive systems for scientists are explained. PMID:27402744

Preprinting Microbiology

PubMed Central

2017-01-01

ABSTRACT The field of microbiology has experienced significant growth due to transformative advances in technology and the influx of scientists driven by a curiosity to understand how microbes sustain myriad biochemical processes that maintain Earth. With this explosion in scientific output, a significant bottleneck has been the ability to rapidly disseminate new knowledge to peers and the public. Preprints have emerged as a tool that a growing number of microbiologists are using to overcome this bottleneck. Posting preprints can help to transparently recruit a more diverse pool of reviewers prior to submitting to a journal for formal peer review. Although the use of preprints is still limited in the biological sciences, early indications are that preprints are a robust tool that can complement and enhance peer-reviewed publications. As publishing moves to embrace advances in Internet technology, there are many opportunities for preprints and peer-reviewed journals to coexist in the same ecosystem. PMID:28536284

Preprinting Microbiology.

PubMed

Schloss, Patrick D

2017-05-23

The field of microbiology has experienced significant growth due to transformative advances in technology and the influx of scientists driven by a curiosity to understand how microbes sustain myriad biochemical processes that maintain Earth. With this explosion in scientific output, a significant bottleneck has been the ability to rapidly disseminate new knowledge to peers and the public. Preprints have emerged as a tool that a growing number of microbiologists are using to overcome this bottleneck. Posting preprints can help to transparently recruit a more diverse pool of reviewers prior to submitting to a journal for formal peer review. Although the use of preprints is still limited in the biological sciences, early indications are that preprints are a robust tool that can complement and enhance peer-reviewed publications. As publishing moves to embrace advances in Internet technology, there are many opportunities for preprints and peer-reviewed journals to coexist in the same ecosystem. Copyright © 2017 Schloss.

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.

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

Research misconduct identified by the US Food and Drug Administration: out of sight, out of mind, out of the peer-reviewed literature.

PubMed

Seife, Charles

2015-04-01

Every year, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspects several hundred clinical sites performing biomedical research on human participants and occasionally finds evidence of substantial departures from good clinical practice and research misconduct. However, the FDA has no systematic method of communicating these findings to the scientific community, leaving open the possibility that research misconduct detected by a government agency goes unremarked in the peer-reviewed literature. To identify published clinical trials in which an FDA inspection found significant evidence of objectionable conditions or practices, to describe violations, and to determine whether the violations are mentioned in the peer-reviewed literature. Cross-sectional analysis of publicly available documents, dated from January 1, 1998, to September 30, 2013, describing FDA inspections of clinical trial sites in which significant evidence of objectionable conditions or practices was found. For each inspection document that could be linked to a specific published clinical trial, the main measure was a yes/no determination of whether there was mention in the peer-reviewed literature of problems the FDA had identified. Fifty-seven published clinical trials were identified for which an FDA inspection of a trial site had found significant evidence of 1 or more of the following problems: falsification or submission of false information, 22 trials (39%); problems with adverse events reporting, 14 trials (25%); protocol violations, 42 trials (74%); inadequate or inaccurate recordkeeping, 35 trials (61%); failure to protect the safety of patients and/or issues with oversight or informed consent, 30 trials (53%); and violations not otherwise categorized, 20 trials (35%). Only 3 of the 78 publications (4%) that resulted from trials in which the FDA found significant violations mentioned the objectionable conditions or practices found during the inspection. No corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other comments acknowledging the key issues identified by the inspection were subsequently published. When the FDA finds significant departures from good clinical practice, those findings are seldom reflected in the peer-reviewed literature, even when there is evidence of data fabrication or other forms of research misconduct.

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.

IRIS Toxicological Review and Summary Documents for Chloroethane (Peer Review Plan)

EPA Science Inventory

Toxicological data in the published literature on Chloroethane (CE) will be assimilated, reviewed, and integated into a Toxicological Review of CE (assessment document), which seeks to characterize the key cancer, and non cancer health effect hazards from environmental exposures...

Peer-reviewed publication output from South African dental schools 1990-2005.

PubMed

Cleaton-Jones, P

2008-03-01

A study published in 1996 suggested that a limit had been reached for peer-reviewed publication output from South African dental schools. This study was to examine recent trends in publication output from five South African dental schools to compare with the earlier study. A PubMed on-line search coupled with a manual search was done for peer-reviewed publications appearing in 1995-2005 from the five dental schools. The literature search identified 610 listings--595 actual publications six of which were listed for two dental schools. Overall there was a slight reduction in number of articles as well as an increase in articles published in South African journals. Within the schools there was also a decline in output. Disciplines producing the publications varied within the schools with dental materials being the most common, There was little difference in the quality of articles indicated by mean CJM scores between the schools. This study shows that research output has declined beyond the limit speculated in 1996.

A study of innovative features in scholarly open access journals.

PubMed

Björk, Bo-Christer

2011-12-16

The emergence of the Internet has triggered tremendous changes in the publication of scientific peer-reviewed journals. Today, journals are usually available in parallel electronic versions, but the way the peer-review process works, the look of articles and journals, and the rigid and slow publication schedules have remained largely unchanged, at least for the vast majority of subscription-based journals. Those publishing firms and scholarly publishers who have chosen the more radical option of open access (OA), in which the content of journals is freely accessible to anybody with Internet connectivity, have had a much bigger degree of freedom to experiment with innovations. The objective was to study how open access journals have experimented with innovations concerning ways of organizing the peer review, the format of journals and articles, new interactive and media formats, and novel publishing revenue models. The features of 24 open access journals were studied. The journals were chosen in a nonrandom manner from the approximately 7000 existing OA journals based on available information about interesting journals and include both representative cases and highly innovative outlier cases. Most early OA journals in the 1990s were founded by individual scholars and used a business model based on voluntary work close in spirit to open-source development of software. In the next wave, many long-established journals, in particular society journals and journals from regions such as Latin America, made their articles OA when they started publishing parallel electronic versions. From about 2002 on, newly founded professional OA publishing firms using article-processing charges to fund their operations have emerged. Over the years, there have been several experiments with new forms of peer review, media enhancements, and the inclusion of structured data sets with articles. In recent years, the growth of OA publishing has also been facilitated by the availability of open-source software for journal publishing. The case studies illustrate how a new technology and a business model enabled by new technology can be harnessed to find new innovative ways for the organization and content of scholarly publishing. Several recent launches of OA journals by major subscription publishers demonstrate that OA is rapidly gaining acceptance as a sustainable alternative to subscription-based scholarly publishing.

A Study of Innovative Features in Scholarly Open Access Journals

PubMed Central

2011-01-01

Background The emergence of the Internet has triggered tremendous changes in the publication of scientific peer-reviewed journals. Today, journals are usually available in parallel electronic versions, but the way the peer-review process works, the look of articles and journals, and the rigid and slow publication schedules have remained largely unchanged, at least for the vast majority of subscription-based journals. Those publishing firms and scholarly publishers who have chosen the more radical option of open access (OA), in which the content of journals is freely accessible to anybody with Internet connectivity, have had a much bigger degree of freedom to experiment with innovations. Objective The objective was to study how open access journals have experimented with innovations concerning ways of organizing the peer review, the format of journals and articles, new interactive and media formats, and novel publishing revenue models. Methods The features of 24 open access journals were studied. The journals were chosen in a nonrandom manner from the approximately 7000 existing OA journals based on available information about interesting journals and include both representative cases and highly innovative outlier cases. Results Most early OA journals in the 1990s were founded by individual scholars and used a business model based on voluntary work close in spirit to open-source development of software. In the next wave, many long-established journals, in particular society journals and journals from regions such as Latin America, made their articles OA when they started publishing parallel electronic versions. From about 2002 on, newly founded professional OA publishing firms using article-processing charges to fund their operations have emerged. Over the years, there have been several experiments with new forms of peer review, media enhancements, and the inclusion of structured data sets with articles. In recent years, the growth of OA publishing has also been facilitated by the availability of open-source software for journal publishing. Conclusions The case studies illustrate how a new technology and a business model enabled by new technology can be harnessed to find new innovative ways for the organization and content of scholarly publishing. Several recent launches of OA journals by major subscription publishers demonstrate that OA is rapidly gaining acceptance as a sustainable alternative to subscription-based scholarly publishing. PMID:22173122

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.

A scoping review protocol on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals.

PubMed

Glonti, Ketevan; Cauchi, Daniel; Cobo, Erik; Boutron, Isabelle; Moher, David; Hren, Darko

2017-10-22

The primary functions of peer reviewers are poorly defined. Thus far no body of literature has systematically identified the roles and tasks of peer reviewers of biomedical journals. A clear establishment of these can lead to improvements in the peer review process. The purpose of this scoping review is to determine what is known on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers. We will use the methodological framework first proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and subsequently adapted by Levac et al and the Joanna Briggs Institute. The scoping review will include all study designs, as well as editorials, commentaries and grey literature. The following eight electronic databases will be searched (from inception to May 2017): Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Educational Resources Information Center, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science. Two reviewers will use inclusion and exclusion criteria based on the 'Population-Concept-Context' framework to independently screen titles and abstracts of articles considered for inclusion. Full-text screening of relevant eligible articles will also be carried out by two reviewers. The search strategy for grey literature will include searching in websites of existing networks, biomedical journal publishers and organisations that offer resources for peer reviewers. In addition we will review journal guidelines to peer reviewers on how to perform the manuscript review. Journals will be selected using the 2016 journal impact factor. We will identify and assess the top five, middle five and lowest-ranking five journals across all medical specialties. This scoping review will undertake a secondary analysis of data already collected and does not require ethical approval. The results will be disseminated through journals and conferences targeting stakeholders involved in peer review in biomedical research. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Preparing and Publishing a Scientific Manuscript

PubMed Central

Jirge, Padma R.

2017-01-01

Publishing original research in a peer-reviewed and indexed journal is an important milestone for a scientist or a clinician. It is an important parameter to assess academic achievements. However, technical and language barriers may prevent many enthusiasts from ever publishing. This review highlights the important preparatory steps for creating a good manuscript and the most widely used IMRaD (Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion) method for writing a good manuscript. It also provides a brief overview of the submission and review process of a manuscript for publishing in a biomedical journal. PMID:28479749

Peer-reviewed articles on inclusive research: Do co-researchers with intellectual disabilities have a voice?

PubMed

Strnadová, Iva; Walmsley, Jan

2018-01-01

Inclusive research is increasingly common in intellectual disabilities research, but ways in which voice of co-researchers with intellectual disabilities is presented remain underexplored in the literature. The authors conducted a literature review and analysis of peer-reviewed journal articles reporting on inclusive research. The aim was to explore the ways the voices of co-researchers with intellectual disabilities are represented in published peer-reviewed journal articles. The findings indicate that there are a wide range of ways in which inclusive research projects are reported in peer-reviewed journals. However, the experiences, views and opinions of co-researchers are often either absent or very selectively reported. The article concludes that although inclusive research has proliferated in the 21st century, more attention needs to be paid to the ways in which the voices of co-researchers with intellectual disabilities are heard in formal academic contexts. Guidelines for future practice are offered. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Views on the peer review system of biomedical journals: an online survey of academics from high-ranking universities

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Background Peer review is the major method used by biomedical journals for making the decision of publishing an article. This cross-sectional survey assesses views concerning the review system of biomedical journals among academics globally. Methods A total of 28,009 biomedical academics from high-ranking universities listed by the 2009 Times Higher Education Quacquarelli Symonds (THE-QS) World University Rankings were contacted by email between March 2010 and August 2010. 1,340 completed an online survey which focused on their academic background, negative experiences and views on biomedical journal peer review and the results were compared among basic scientists, clinicians and clinician scientists. Results Fewer than half of the respondents agreed that the peer review systems of biomedical journals were fair (48.4%), scientific (47.5%), or transparent (25.1%). Nevertheless, 58.2% of the respondents agreed that authors should remain anonymous and 64.4% agreed that reviewers should not be disclosed. Most, (67.7%) agreed to the establishment of an appeal system. The proportion of native English-speaking respondents who agreed that the “peer review system is fair” was significantly higher than for non-native respondents (p = 0.02). Similarly, the proportion of clinicians stating that the “peer review system is fair” was significantly higher than that for basic scientists and clinician-scientists (p = 0.004). For females, (β = −0.1, p = 0.03), the frequency of encountering personal attacks in reviewers’ comments (β = −0.1, p = 0.002) and the frequency of imposition of unnecessary references by reviewers (β = −0.06, p = 0.04) were independently and inversely associated with agreement that “the peer review system is fair”. Conclusion Academics are divided on the issue of whether the biomedical journal peer review system is fair, scientific and transparent. A majority of academics agreed with the double-blind peer review and to the establishment of an appeal system. Female academics, experience of personal attacks and imposition of unnecessary references by reviewers were related to disagreement about fairness of the peer review system of biomedical journals. PMID:23758823

[The management of errors and scientific fraud by biomedical journals: They cannot replace Institutions].

PubMed

Maisonneuve, Hervé

2012-09-01

Research integrity is not negotiable, but we regularly observe research misconduct, and journals are victims or guilty. Journals do not have the objective to assess research integrity: that's the Institutions' roles. Journals discover research misconduct when articles are reviewed (an editor or a reviewer detect signals), or after the article's publication when a reader or a whistleblower call the journal. The editors and reviewers' research misconduct are less described and not publicized in the medias. The peer-review system is criticised. If authors were fair-play, and reviews well done, the journals should not publish articles containing false data. The opponents to the peer-review system propose no alternatives to replace it. The anonymous peer reviews are questioned: it has never been proved that quality of anonymous reading was better than quality of open reading. The Open Access facilitated the creation of many journals. Some journals are excellent and got an impact factor; most journals have a poor quality and don't follow the publications ethics standards. When errors and fraud are identified, journals can publish 3 statements: erratum for errors, expression of concern for errors or fraud when evidence is not established, and retraction when evidence is obvious. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Peer-based health interventions for people with serious mental illness: A systematic literature review.

PubMed

Cabassa, Leopoldo J; Camacho, David; Vélez-Grau, Carolina M; Stefancic, Ana

2017-01-01

Health interventions delivered by peer specialists or co-facilitated by peer specialists and health professionals can help improve the physical health of people with serious mental illness (SMI). Yet, the quality of the studies examining these health interventions and their impact on health outcomes remains unclear. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review of peer-based health interventions for people with SMI. We rated the methodological quality of studies, summarized intervention strategies and health outcomes, and evaluated the inclusion of racial and ethnic minorities in these studies. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines to conduct our systematic literature review. Electronic bibliographic databases and manual searches were used to locate articles that were published in English in peer-reviewed journals between 1990 and 2015, described peer-based health interventions for people with SMI, and evaluated the impact of the interventions on physical health outcomes. Two independent reviewers used a standardized instrument to rate studies' methodological quality, abstracted study characteristics, and evaluated the effects of the interventions on different health outcomes. Eighteen articles were reviewed. Findings indicated that the strength of the evidence generated from these studies is limited due to several methodological limitations. Mixed and limited intervention effects were reported for most health outcomes. The most promising interventions were self-management and peer-navigator interventions. Efforts to strengthen the evidence of peer-based interventions require a research agenda that focuses on establishing the efficacy and effectiveness of these interventions across different populations and settings. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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).

Performance results for a workstation-integrated radiology peer review quality assurance program.

PubMed

O'Keeffe, Margaret M; Davis, Todd M; Siminoski, Kerry

2016-06-01

To assess review completion rates, RADPEER score distribution, and sources of disagreement when using a workstation-integrated radiology peer review program, and to evaluate radiologist perceptions of the program. Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Large private outpatient radiology practice. Radiologists (n = 66) with a mean of 16.0 (standard deviation, 9.2) years of experience. Prior studies and reports of cases being actively reported were randomly selected for peer review using the RADPEER scoring system (a 4-point scale, with a score of 1 indicating agreement and scores of 2-4 indicating increasing levels of disagreement). Assigned peer review completion rates, review scores, sources of disagreement and radiologist survey responses. Of 31 293 assigned cases, 29 044 (92.8%; 95% CI 92.5-93.1%) were reviewed. Discrepant scores (score = 2, 3 or 4) were given in 0.69% (95% CI 0.60-0.79%) of cases and clinically significant discrepancy (score = 3 or 4) was assigned in 0.42% (95% CI 0.35-0.50%). The most common cause of disagreement was missed diagnosis (75.2%; 95% CI 66.8-82.1%). By anonymous survey, 94% of radiologists felt that peer review was worthwhile, 90% reported that the scores they received were appropriate and 78% felt that the received feedback was valuable. Workstation-based peer review can increase completion rates and levels of radiologist acceptance while producing RADPEER scores similar to those previously reported. This approach may be one way to increase radiologist engagement in peer review quality assurance. © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care; all rights reserved.

The ontology life cycle: Integrated tools for editing, publishing, peer review, and evolution of ontologies

PubMed Central

Noy, Natalya; Tudorache, Tania; Nyulas, Csongor; Musen, Mark

2010-01-01

Ontologies have become a critical component of many applications in biomedical informatics. However, the landscape of the ontology tools today is largely fragmented, with independent tools for ontology editing, publishing, and peer review: users develop an ontology in an ontology editor, such as Protégé; and publish it on a Web server or in an ontology library, such as BioPortal, in order to share it with the community; they use the tools provided by the library or mailing lists and bug trackers to collect feedback from users. In this paper, we present a set of tools that bring the ontology editing and publishing closer together, in an integrated platform for the entire ontology lifecycle. This integration streamlines the workflow for collaborative development and increases integration between the ontologies themselves through the reuse of terms. PMID:21347039

Publish or perish: authorship and peer review

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Publish or perish is defined in Wikipedia as the pressure to publish work constantly to further or sustain one’s career in academia. This is an apt description given that refereed scientific publications are the currency of science and the primary means for broad dissemination of knowledge. Professi...

45 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

45 CFR 2543.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

45 CFR 2543.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

45 CFR 2543.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

45 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

45 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

45 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

45 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

45 CFR 2543.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

45 CFR 2543.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

RETRACTED: Determination of confinement efficiency in tokamaks based on current independent flux loops technique

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Salar Elahi, A.; Ghoranneviss, M.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of at least one illegitimate reviewer report. The report was submitted from an email account which was provided to the journal as a suggested reviewer during the submission of the article. Although purportedly a real reviewer account, the Editors have concluded that this was not of an appropriate, independent reviewer. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process.

RETRACTED: Growth and characterization of carbon nanotubes and zinc oxide nanocomposite with the PECVD technique

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Salar Elahi, A.; Ghoranneviss, M.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of at least one illegitimate reviewer report. The report was submitted from an email account which was provided to the journal as a suggested reviewer during the submission of the article. Although purportedly a real reviewer account, the Editors have concluded that this was not of an appropriate, independent reviewer. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process.

A randomized trial of peer review: the UK National Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Resources and Outcomes Project: three-year evaluation.

PubMed

Roberts, Christopher M; Stone, Robert A; Buckingham, Rhona J; Pursey, Nancy A; Lowe, Derek; Potter, Jonathan M

2012-06-01

Peer review has been widely used within the National Health Service to facilitate health quality improvement but evaluation has been limited particularly over the longer-term. Change within the National Health Service (NHS) can take a prolonged period--1-2 years--to occur. We report here a 3-year evaluation of the largest randomized trial of peer review ever conducted in the UK. To evaluate whether targeted mutual peer review of respiratory units brings about improvements in services for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) over 3 years. 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 COPD care. Follow-up at 36 months demonstrated limited significant quantitative differences in the quality of services offered in the two groups but a strong trend in favour of intervention sites. Qualitative data suggested many benefits of peer review in most but not all intervention units and some control teams. The data identify factors that promote and obstruct change. The findings demonstrate significant change in service provision over 3 years in both control and intervention sites with great variability in both groups. The combined quantitative and qualitative findings indicate that targeted mutual peer review is associated with improved quality of care, improvements in service delivery and with changes within departments that promote and are precursors to quality improvement. The generic findings of this study have potential implications for the application of peer review throughout the NHS. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Radiologist Peer Review by Group Consensus.

PubMed

Harvey, H Benjamin; Alkasab, Tarik K; Prabhakar, Anand M; Halpern, Elkan F; Rosenthal, Daniel I; Pandharipande, Pari V; Gazelle, G Scott

2016-06-01

The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of the consensus-oriented group review (COGR) method of radiologist peer review within a large subspecialty imaging department. This study was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant. Radiologist interpretations of CT, MRI, and ultrasound examinations at a large academic radiology department were subject to peer review using the COGR method from October 2011 through September 2013. Discordance rates and sources of discordance were evaluated on the basis of modality and division, with group differences compared using a χ(2) test. Potential associations between peer review outcomes and the time after the initiation of peer review or the number of radiologists participating in peer review were tested by linear regression analysis and the t test, respectively. A total of 11,222 studies reported by 83 radiologists were peer reviewed using COGR during the two-year study period. The average radiologist participated in 112 peer review conferences and had 3.3% of his or her available CT, MRI and ultrasound studies peer reviewed. The rate of discordance was 2.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.4%-3.0%), with significant differences in discordance rates on the basis of division and modality. Discordance rates were highest for MR (3.4%; 95% CI, 2.8%-4.1%), followed by ultrasound (2.7%; 95% CI, 2.0%-3.4%) and CT (2.4%; 95% CI, 2.0%-2.8%). Missed findings were the most common overall cause for discordance (43.8%; 95% CI, 38.2%-49.4%), followed by interpretive errors (23.5%; 95% CI, 18.8%-28.3%), dictation errors (19.0%; 95% CI, 14.6%-23.4%), and recommendation (10.8%; 95% CI, 7.3%-14.3%). Discordant cases, compared with concordant cases, were associated with a significantly greater number of radiologists participating in the peer review process (5.9 vs 4.7 participating radiologists, P < .001) and were significantly more likely to lead to an addendum (62.9% vs 2.7%, P < .0001). COGR permits departments to collect highly contextualized peer review data to better elucidate sources of error in diagnostic imaging reports, while reviewing a sufficient case volume to comply with external standards for ongoing performance review. Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

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.

Anthrax Vaccine as a Component of the Strategic National Stockpile: A Dilemma for Homeland Security

DTIC Science & Technology

2009-12-01

reviews . Finally, a gap analysis aids in explaining continued reliance on the old vaccine technology. To conclude... review of the writings on anthrax vaccine summarizes published sources and synthesizes a pattern, or shift, in the literature around the 1998 time...IOM, 2002, p. 208). A 2000 IOM report also determined, “there is a paucity of published peer- reviewed literature on the

Quality Control and Peer Review of Data Sets: Mapping Data Archiving Processes to Data Publication Requirements

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Mayernik, M. S.; Daniels, M.; Eaker, C.; Strand, G.; Williams, S. F.; Worley, S. J.

2012-12-01

Data sets exist within scientific research and knowledge networks as both technical and non-technical entities. Establishing the quality of data sets is a multi-faceted task that encompasses many automated and manual processes. Data sets have always been essential for science research, but now need to be more visible as first-class scholarly objects at national, international, and local levels. Many initiatives are establishing procedures to publish and curate data sets, as well as to promote professional rewards for researchers that collect, create, manage, and preserve data sets. Traditionally, research quality has been assessed by peer review of textual publications, e.g. journal articles, conference proceedings, and books. Citation indices then provide standard measures of productivity used to reward individuals for their peer-reviewed work. Whether a similar peer review process is appropriate for assessing and ensuring the quality of data sets remains as an open question. How does the traditional process of peer review apply to data sets? This presentation will describe current work being done at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in the context of the Peer REview for Publication & Accreditation of Research Data in the Earth sciences (PREPARDE) project. PREPARDE is assessing practices and processes for data peer review, with the goal of developing recommendations. NCAR data management teams perform various kinds of quality assessment and review of data sets prior to making them publicly available. The poster will investigate how notions of peer review relate to the types of data review already in place at NCAR. We highlight the data set characteristics and management/archiving processes that challenge the traditional peer review processes by using a number of questions as probes, including: Who is qualified to review data sets? What formal and informal documentation is necessary to allow someone outside of a research team to review a data set? What data set review can be done pre-publication, and what must be done post-publication? What components of the data sets review processes can be automated, and what components will always require human expertise and evaluation?

Effectiveness of peer education interventions for HIV prevention, adolescent pregnancy prevention and sexual health promotion for young people: a systematic review of European studies.

PubMed

Tolli, M V

2012-10-01

Peer education remains a popular strategy for health promotion and prevention, but evidence of its effectiveness is still limited. This article presents a systematic review of peer education interventions in the European Union that were published between January 1999 and May 2010. The objective of the review is to determine the effectiveness of peer education programs for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention, adolescent pregnancy prevention and promotion of sexual health among young people. Standardized methods of searching and data extraction were utilized and five studies were identified. Although a few statistically significant and non-significant changes were observed in the studies, it is concluded that, overall, when compared to standard practice or no intervention, there is no clear evidence of the effectiveness of peer education concerning HIV prevention, adolescent pregnancy prevention and sexual health promotion for young people in the member countries of the European Union. Further research is needed to determine factors that contribute to program effectiveness.

Synthesis of current knowledge on post-fire seeding for soil stabilization and invasive species control

USGS Publications Warehouse

Beyers, Jan L.; Pyke, David A.; Wirth, Troy

2015-01-01

The General Accounting Office has identified a need for better information on the effectiveness of post-fire emergency stabilization and rehabilitation methods used by the U.S. Forest Service and Department of Interior (DOI) agencies. Since reviews were published on treatment effectiveness in the early 2000s, treatment choices have changed and increased monitoring has been done. Greater use of native species has added substantially to burned area emergency response (BAER) treatment costs, for example, but quantitative data on this treatment were scarce in earlier reviews. We synthesized current information on the effectiveness of post-fire seeding for both soil stabilization and for prevention of the spread of invasive species in rangelands. We reviewed published literature (peer-reviewed and “gray”) and agency monitoring reports, as well as compiled and analyzed quantitative data in agency files. Products of this review include a web-accessible database of monitoring reports and published information, a scientific journal paper summarizing findings of scientific studies, an annotated bibliography of peer-reviewed papers, a summary report published as a General Technical Report that will be available online (in progress), and presentations to scientific meetings and BAER/ESR team training sessions and workshops. By combining results from studies done by Forest Service and DOI agency personnel with research studies published since the initial reviews, we presented a comprehensive synthesis of seeding effectiveness knowledge that complements the review of other hillslope treatments published by other researchers. This information will help federal land managers make more cost-effective decisions on post-fire stabilization and rehabilitation treatments.

A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology.

PubMed

Galipeau, James; Moher, David; Campbell, Craig; Hendry, Paul; Cameron, D William; Palepu, Anita; Hébert, Paul C

2015-03-01

To investigate whether training in writing for scholarly publication, journal editing, or manuscript peer review effectively improves educational outcomes related to the quality of health research reporting. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library for comparative studies of formalized, a priori-developed training programs in writing for scholarly publication, journal editing, or manuscript peer review. Comparators included the following: (1) before and after administration of a training program, (2) between two or more training programs, or (3) between a training program and any other (or no) intervention(s). Outcomes included any measure of effectiveness of training. Eighteen reports of 17 studies were included. Twelve studies focused on writing for publication, five on peer review, and none fit our criteria for journal editing. Included studies were generally small and inconclusive regarding the effects of training of authors, peer reviewers, and editors on educational outcomes related to improving the quality of health research. Studies were also of questionable validity and susceptible to misinterpretation because of their risk of bias. This review highlights the gaps in our knowledge of how to enhance and ensure the scientific quality of research output for authors, peer reviewers, and journal editors. Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

A critical evaluation of the volume, relevance and quality of evidence submitted by the tobacco industry to oppose standardised packaging of tobacco products.

PubMed

Hatchard, Jenny L; Fooks, Gary J; Evans-Reeves, Karen A; Ulucanlar, Selda; Gilmore, Anna B

2014-02-12

To examine the volume, relevance and quality of transnational tobacco corporations' (TTCs) evidence that standardised packaging of tobacco products 'won't work', following the UK government's decision to 'wait and see' until further evidence is available. Content analysis. We analysed the evidence cited in submissions by the UK's four largest TTCs to the UK Department of Health consultation on standardised packaging in 2012. The volume, relevance (subject matter) and quality (as measured by independence from industry and peer-review) of evidence cited by TTCs was compared with evidence from a systematic review of standardised packaging . Fisher's exact test was used to assess differences in the quality of TTC and systematic review evidence. 100% of the data were second-coded to validate the findings: 94.7% intercoder reliability; all differences were resolved. 77/143 pieces of TTC-cited evidence were used to promote their claim that standardised packaging 'won't work'. Of these, just 17/77 addressed standardised packaging: 14 were industry connected and none were published in peer-reviewed journals. Comparison of TTC and systematic review evidence on standardised packaging showed that the industry evidence was of significantly lower quality in terms of tobacco industry connections and peer-review (p<0.0001). The most relevant TTC evidence (on standardised packaging or packaging generally, n=26) was of significantly lower quality (p<0.0001) than the least relevant (on other topics, n=51). Across the dataset, TTC-connected evidence was significantly less likely to be published in a peer-reviewed journal (p=0.0045). With few exceptions, evidence cited by TTCs to promote their claim that standardised packaging 'won't work' lacks either policy relevance or key indicators of quality. Policymakers could use these three criteria-subject matter, independence and peer-review status-to critically assess evidence submitted to them by corporate interests via Better Regulation processes.

A critical evaluation of the volume, relevance and quality of evidence submitted by the tobacco industry to oppose standardised packaging of tobacco products

PubMed Central

Hatchard, Jenny L; Fooks, Gary J; Evans-Reeves, Karen A; Ulucanlar, Selda; Gilmore, Anna B

2014-01-01

Objectives To examine the volume, relevance and quality of transnational tobacco corporations’ (TTCs) evidence that standardised packaging of tobacco products ‘won't work’, following the UK government's decision to ‘wait and see’ until further evidence is available. Design Content analysis. Setting We analysed the evidence cited in submissions by the UK's four largest TTCs to the UK Department of Health consultation on standardised packaging in 2012. Outcome measures The volume, relevance (subject matter) and quality (as measured by independence from industry and peer-review) of evidence cited by TTCs was compared with evidence from a systematic review of standardised packaging . Fisher's exact test was used to assess differences in the quality of TTC and systematic review evidence. 100% of the data were second-coded to validate the findings: 94.7% intercoder reliability; all differences were resolved. Results 77/143 pieces of TTC-cited evidence were used to promote their claim that standardised packaging ‘won't work’. Of these, just 17/77 addressed standardised packaging: 14 were industry connected and none were published in peer-reviewed journals. Comparison of TTC and systematic review evidence on standardised packaging showed that the industry evidence was of significantly lower quality in terms of tobacco industry connections and peer-review (p<0.0001). The most relevant TTC evidence (on standardised packaging or packaging generally, n=26) was of significantly lower quality (p<0.0001) than the least relevant (on other topics, n=51). Across the dataset, TTC-connected evidence was significantly less likely to be published in a peer-reviewed journal (p=0.0045). Conclusions With few exceptions, evidence cited by TTCs to promote their claim that standardised packaging ‘won't work’ lacks either policy relevance or key indicators of quality. Policymakers could use these three criteria—subject matter, independence and peer-review status—to critically assess evidence submitted to them by corporate interests via Better Regulation processes. PMID:24523419

Qualitative Research and Community-Based Participatory Research: Considerations for Effective Dissemination in the Peer-Reviewed Literature.

PubMed

Grieb, Suzanne Dolwick; Eder, Milton Mickey; Smith, Katherine C; Calhoun, Karen; Tandon, Darius

2015-01-01

Qualitative research is appearing with increasing frequency in the public health and medical literature. Qualitative research in combination with a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach can be powerful. However little guidance is available on how to present qualitative research within a CBPR framework for peer-review publications. This article provides a brief overview of how qualitative research can advance CBPR partnerships and outlines practical guidelines for writing for publication about qualitative research within a CBPR framework to (1) guide partners with little experience publishing in peer-reviewed journals and/or (2) facilitate effective preparation of manuscripts grounded in qualitative research for peer-reviewed journals. We provide information regarding the specific benefits of qualitative inquiry in CBPR, tips for organizing the manuscript, questions to consider in preparing the manuscript, common mistakes in the presentation of qualitative research, and examples of peer-reviewed manuscripts presenting qualitative research conducted within a CBPR framework. Qualitative research approaches have tremendous potential to integrate community and researcher perspectives to inform community health research findings. Effective dissemination of CBPR informed qualitative research findings is crucial to advancing health disparities research.

24 CFR 84.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed...) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an award that were used...

24 CFR 84.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed...) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an award that were used...

24 CFR 84.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed...) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an award that were used...

24 CFR 84.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed...) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an award that were used...

24 CFR 84.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed...) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an award that were used...

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.

Conflicts of interest in medical science: peer usage, peer review and 'CoI consultancy'.

PubMed

Charlton, Bruce G

2004-01-01

In recent years, the perception has grown that conflicts of interest are having a detrimental effect on medical science as it influences health policy and clinical practice, leading medical journals to enforce self-declaration of potential biases in the attempt to counteract or compensate for the problem. Conflict of interest (CoI) declarations have traditionally been considered inappropriate in pure science since its evaluation systems themselves constitute a mechanism for eliminating the effect of individual biases. Pure science is primarily evaluated by 'peer usage', in which scientific information is 'replicated' by being incorporated in the work of other scientists, and tested by further observation of the natural world. Over the long-term, the process works because significant biases impair the quality of science, and bad science tends to be neglected or refuted. However, scientific evaluation operates slowly over years and decades, and only a small proportion of published work is ever actually evaluated. But most of modern medical science no longer conforms to the model of pure science, and may instead be conceptualized as a system of 'applied' science having different aims and evaluation processes. The aim of applied medical science is to solve pre-specified problems, and to provide scientific information ready for implementation immediately following publication. The primary evaluation process of applied science is peer review, not peer usage. Peer review is much more rapid (with a timescale of weeks or months) and cheaper than peer usage and (consequently) has a much wider application: peer review is a prospective validation while peer usage is retrospective. Since applied science consists of incremental advances on existing knowledge achieved using established techniques, its results can usually be reliably evaluated by peer review. However, despite its considerable convenience, peer review has significant limitations related to its reliance on opinion. One major limitation of peer review has proved to be its inability to deal with conflicts of interest, especially in a 'big science' context when prestigious scientists may have similar biases, and conflicts of interest are widely shared among peer reviewers. When applied medical science has been later checked against the slower but more valid processes of peer usage, it seems that reliance on peer review may allow damaging distortions to become 'locked-in' to clinical practice and health policy for considerable periods. Scientific progress is generally underpinned by increasing specialization. Medical journals should specialize in the communication of scientific information, and they have neither the resources nor the motivation to investigate and measure conflicts of interest. Effectively dealing with the problem of conflicts of interest in applied medical science firstly requires a more explicit demarcation between the communications media of pure medical science and applied medical science. Greater specialization of these activities would then allow distinctive aims and evaluation systems to evolve with the expectation of improved performance in both pure and applied systems. In future, applied medical science should operate with an assumption of bias, with the onus of proof on applied medical scientists to facilitate the 'data transparency' necessary to validate their research. Journals of applied medical science will probably require more rigorous processes of peer review than at present, since their publications are intended to be ready for implementation. But since peer review does not adequately filter-out conflicts of interest in applied medical science, there is a need for the evolution of specialist post-publication institutional mechanisms. The suggested solution is to encourage the establishment of independent 'CoI consultancy' services, whose role would be to evaluate conflicts of interest and other biases in published applied medical science prior to their implementation. Such services would be paid-for by the groups who intend to implement applied medical research.

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.

An analysis of abstracts presented to the College on Problems of Drug Dependence meeting and subsequent publication in peer review journals

PubMed Central

Valderrama-Zurián, Juan Carlos; Bolaños-Pizarro, Máxima; Bueno-Cañigral, Francisco Jesús; Álvarez, F Javier; Ontalba-Ruipérez, José Antonio; Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael

2009-01-01

Background Subsequent publication rate of abstracts presented at meetings is seen as an indicator of the interest and quality of the meeting. We have analyzed characteristics and rate publication in peer-reviewed journals derived from oral communications and posters presented at the 1999 College on Problems of Drug Dependence (CPDD) meeting. Methods All 689 abstracts presented at the 1999 CPDD meeting were reviewed. In order to find the existence of publications derived from abstracts presented at that meeting, a set of bibliographical searches in the database Medline was developed in July 2006. Information was gathered concerning the abstracts, articles and journals in which they were published. Results 254 out of 689 abstracts (36.9%) gave rise to at least one publication. The oral communications had a greater likelihood of being published than did the posters (OR = 2.53, 95% CI 1.80-3.55). The average time lapse to publication of an article was 672.97 days. The number of authors per work in the subsequent publications was 4.55. The articles were published in a total of 84 journals, of which eight were indexed with the subject term Substance-Related Disorders. Psychopharmacology (37 articles, 14.5%) was the journal that published the greatest number of articles subsequent to the abstracts presented at the 1999 CPDD meeting. Conclusion One out of every three abstracts presented to the 1999 CPDD meeting were later published in peer-reviewed journals indexed in Medline. The subsequent publication of the abstracts presented in the CPDD meetings should be actively encouraged, as this maximizes the dissemination of the scientific research and therefore the investment. PMID:19889211

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 survey of authors publishing in four megajournals.

PubMed

Solomon, David J

2014-01-01

Aim. To determine the characteristics of megajournal authors, the nature of the manuscripts they are submitting to these journals, factors influencing their decision to publish in a megajournal, sources of funding for article processing charges (APCs) or other fees and their likelihood of submitting to a megajournal in the future. Methods. Web-based survey of 2,128 authors who recently published in BMJ Open, PeerJ, PLOS ONE or SAGE Open. Results. The response rate ranged from 26% for BMJ Open to 47% for SAGE Open. The authors were international, largely academics who had recently published in both subscription and Open Access (OA) journals. Across journals about 25% of the articles were preliminary findings and just under half were resubmissions of manuscripts rejected by other journals. Editors from other BMJ journals and perhaps to a lesser extent SAGE and PLOS journals appear to be encouraging authors to submit manuscripts that were rejected by the editor's journals to a megajournal published by the same publisher. Quality of the journal and speed of the review process were important factors across all four journals. Impact factor was important for PLOS ONE authors but less so for BMJ Open authors, which also has an impact factor. The review criteria and the fact the journal was OA were other significant factors particularly important for PeerJ authors. The reputation of the publisher was an important factor for SAGE Open and BMJ Open. About half of PLOS ONE and around a third of BMJ Open and PeerJ authors used grant funding for publishing charges while only about 10% of SAGE Open used grant funding for publication charges. Around 60% of SAGE Open and 32% of PeerJ authors self-funded their publication fees however the fees are modest for these journals. The majority of authors from all 4 journals were pleased with their experience and indicated they were likely to submit to the same or similar journal in the future. Conclusions. Megajournals are drawing an international group of authors who tend to be experienced academics. They are choosing to publish in megajournals for a variety of reasons but most seem to value the quality of the journal and the speed of the review/publication process. Having a broad scope was not a key factor for most authors though being OA was important for PeerJ and SAGE Open authors. Most authors appeared pleased with the experience and indicated they are likely to submit future manuscripts to the same or similar megajournal which seems to suggest these journals will continue to grow in popularity.

Directly Improving the Quality of Radiation Treatment Through Peer Review: A Cross-sectional Analysis of Cancer Centers Across a Provincial Cancer Program.

PubMed

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

2017-07-01

To describe the outcomes of peer review across all 14 cancer centers in Ontario. We identified all peer-reviewed, curative treatment plans delivered in Ontario within a 3-month study period from 2013 to 2014 using a provincial cancer treatment database and collected additional data on the peer-review outcomes. Considerable variation was found in the proportion of peer-reviewed plans across the centers (average 70.2%, range 40.8%-99.2%). During the study period, 5561 curative plans underwent peer review. Of those, 184 plans (3.3%) had changes recommended. Of the 184 plans, the changes were major (defined as requiring repeat planning or having a major effect on planning or clinical outcomes, or both) in 40.2% and minor in 47.8%. For the remaining 12.0%, data were missing. The proportions of recommended changes varied among disease sites (0.0%-7.0%). The disease sites with the most recommended changes to treatment plans after peer review and with the greatest potential for benefit were the esophagus (7.0%), uterus (6.7%), upper limb (6.3%), cervix and lower limb (both 6.0%), head and neck and bilateral lung (both 5.9%), right supraclavicular lymph nodes (5.7%), rectum (5.3%), and spine (5.0%). Although the heart is an organ at risk in left-sided breast treatment plans, the proportions of recommended changes did not significantly differ between the left breast treatment plans (3.0%, 95% confidence interval 2.0%-4.5%) and right breast treatment plans (2.4%, 95% confidence interval 1.5%-3.8%). The recommended changes were more frequently made when peer review occurred before radiation therapy (3.8%) than during treatment (1.4%-2.8%; P=.0048). The proportion of plans with recommended changes was not significantly associated with patient volume (P=.23), peer-review performance (P=.36), or center academic status (P=.75). Peer review of treatment plans directly affects the quality of care by identifying important clinical and planning changes. Provincial strategies are underway to optimize its conduct in radiation oncology. Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Exploration and practice of methods and processes of evidence-based rapid review on peer review of WHO EML application.

PubMed

Li, Youping; Yu, Jiajie; Du, Liang; Sun, Xin; Kwong, Joey S W; Wu, Bin; Hu, Zhiqiang; Lu, Jing; Xu, Ting; Zhang, Lingli

2015-11-01

After 38 years of development, the procedure of selection and evaluation of the World Health Organization Essential Medicine List (WHO EML) is increasingly scientific and formal. However, peer review for the applications of World Health Organization Essential Medicine List is always required in a short period. It is necessary to build up a set of methods and processes for rapid review. We identified the process of evidenced-based rapid review on WHO EML application for peer reviews according to 11 items which were required during reporting of the peer review results of the proposals. The most important items for the rapid review of World Health Organization Essential Medicine List peer reviewers are (1) to confirm the requirements and identify the purposes; (2) to establish the research questions and translate the questions into the 'Participants, Interventions, Comparators, Outcomes, Study design' (PICOS) format; (3) to search and screen available evidence, for which high-level evidence is preferred, such as systematic reviews or meta-analyses, health technology assessment, clinical guidelines; (4) to extract data, where we extract primary information based on the purposes; (5) to synthesize data by qualitative methods, assess the quality of evidence, and compare the results; (6) to provide the answers to the applications, quality of evidences and strength of recommendations. Our study established a set of methods and processes for the rapid review of World Health Organization Essential Medicine List peer review, and our findings were used to guide the reviewers to fulfill the 19(th) World Health Organization Essential Medicine List peer review. The methods and processes were feasible and met the necessary requirements in terms of time and quality. Continuous improvement and evaluation in practice are warranted. © 2015 Chinese Cochrane Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.

A Systematic Review of Published Respondent-Driven Sampling Surveys Collecting Behavioral and Biologic Data.

PubMed

Johnston, Lisa G; Hakim, Avi J; Dittrich, Samantha; Burnett, Janet; Kim, Evelyn; White, Richard G

2016-08-01

Reporting key details of respondent-driven sampling (RDS) survey implementation and analysis is essential for assessing the quality of RDS surveys. RDS is both a recruitment and analytic method and, as such, it is important to adequately describe both aspects in publications. We extracted data from peer-reviewed literature published through September, 2013 that reported collected biological specimens using RDS. We identified 151 eligible peer-reviewed articles describing 222 surveys conducted in seven regions throughout the world. Most published surveys reported basic implementation information such as survey city, country, year, population sampled, interview method, and final sample size. However, many surveys did not report essential methodological and analytical information for assessing RDS survey quality, including number of recruitment sites, seeds at start and end, maximum number of waves, and whether data were adjusted for network size. Understanding the quality of data collection and analysis in RDS is useful for effectively planning public health service delivery and funding priorities.

The Androgen Excess and PCOS Society criteria for the polycystic ovary syndrome: the complete task force report.

PubMed

Azziz, Ricardo; Carmina, Enrico; Dewailly, Didier; Diamanti-Kandarakis, Evanthia; Escobar-Morreale, Héctor F; Futterweit, Walter; Janssen, Onno E; Legro, Richard S; Norman, Robert J; Taylor, Ann E; Witchel, Selma F

2009-02-01

To review all available data and recommend a definition for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) based on published peer-reviewed data, whether already in use or not, to guide clinical diagnosis and future research. Literature review and expert consensus. Professional society. None. None. A systematic review of the published peer-reviewed medical literature, by querying MEDLINE databases, to identify studies evaluating the epidemiology or phenotypic aspects of PCOS. The Task Force drafted the initial report, following a consensus process via electronic communication, which was then reviewed and critiqued by the Androgen Excess and PCOS (AE-PCOS) Society AE-PCOS Board of Directors. No section was finalized until all members were satisfied with the contents, and minority opinions noted. Statements were not included that were not supported by peer-reviewed evidence. Based on the available data, it is the view of the AE-PCOS Society Task Force that PCOS should be defined by the presence of hyperandrogenism (clinical and/or biochemical), ovarian dysfunction (oligo-anovulation and/or polycystic ovaries), and the exclusion of related disorders. However, a minority considered the possibility that there may be forms of PCOS without overt evidence of hyperandrogenism, but recognized that more data are required before validating this supposition. Finally, the Task Force recognized and fully expects that the definition of this syndrome will evolve over time to incorporate new research findings.

A re-appraisal of publication rates of scientific papers presented at the Otorhinolaryngology Research Society meetings.

PubMed

Lau, A S; Krishnan, M; Williams, S P; Mamais, C; Sweed, A; Bhat, J; Somashekar, S; Leong, S C

2016-12-01

To review the rate of publication of papers in peer-reviewed journals after oral presentations at the Otorhinolaryngology Research Society meetings between 1996 and 2013 and to compare trends with the previous review (1979-1995). Literature review. Merseyside ENT Research Collaborative. The abstracts of presentations at Otorhinolaryngology Research Society meetings are published in Clinical Otolaryngology. A structured search of PubMed was undertaken to identify published Otorhinolaryngology Research Society presentations. Publication rates. A total of 460 abstracts were identified. The interobserver reliability among reviewers was 98%. Of the total, 259 (56.3%) abstracts were published in peer-reviewed journals. The average time from Otorhinolaryngology Research Society presentation to publication was 27.7 months (median 23), which was not significantly different from the previous review. Publication by subspeciality was as follows: head and neck (45.6%), otology (30.5%), rhinology (22%) and others (1.9%). Most published Otorhinolaryngology Research Society presentations were published in Clinical Otolaryngology (22.4%), followed by the Journal of Laryngology and Otology (8.1%) and the Laryngoscope (7.3%). Clinical research was the most common category of abstracts being presented at Otorhinolaryngology Research Society meetings, followed by laboratory-based research. Over half (56.5%) of laboratory research presented were head and neck themed, while otology and rhinology predominated clinical research presentations. Over half (52.1%) of Otorhinolaryngology Research Society abstracts originated from units in the North of England. Bristol presented the most abstracts (30.1%), followed by Newcastle (25.1%). The publication rate of Otorhinolaryngology Research Society presentations remains high and many are subsequently published in high-impact factor otolaryngology journals. More Otorhinolaryngology Research Society presentations are now published in American and European journals. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Citation Classics in the Burn Literature During the Past 55 Years

DTIC Science & Technology

2014-04-01

Association. 1559-047X/2014 DOI: 10.1097/BCR.0b013e31828cb25e The objective of this study was to identify the 100 most cited, peer-reviewed burn -related...the goal of this study was to identify and analyze the 100 most cited burn -related articles published in the peer-reviewed biomedical literature...Figure 1) illustrates the substantial increase in burn -related articles cited during the study period. The year of publication ranged from 1955 to

Analysis of Atmospheric Aerosol Data Sets and Application of Radiative Transfer Models to Compute Aerosol Effects

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Schmid, Beat; Bergstrom, Robert W.; Redemann, Jens

2002-01-01

This report is the final report for "Analysis of Atmospheric Aerosol Data Sets and Application of Radiative Transfer Models to Compute Aerosol Effects". It is a bibliographic compilation of 29 peer-reviewed publications (published, in press or submitted) produced under this Cooperative Agreement and 30 first-authored conference presentations. The tasks outlined in the various proposals are listed below with a brief comment as to the research performed. Copies of title/abstract pages of peer-reviewed publications are attached.

Fake Peer Reviews, the Latest Form of Scientific Fraud, Fool Journals

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fischman, Josh

2012-01-01

This article reports on how some scientists impersonate outside reviewers for journals and give high marks to their own manuscripts. Scientists appear to have figured out a new way to avoid any bad prepublication reviews that dissuade journals from publishing their articles: Write positive reviews themselves, under other people's names. In…

A Scoping Review: Conceptualizations and Pedagogical Models of Learning in Nursing Simulation

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Poikela, Paula; Teräs, Marianne

2015-01-01

Simulations have been implemented globally in nursing education for years with diverse conceptual foundations. The aim of this scoping review is to examine the literature regarding the conceptualizations of learning and pedagogical models in nursing simulations. A scoping review of peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2013 was…

RETRACTED: Application of RF magnetron sputtering for growth of AZO on glass substrate

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ghorannevis, Z.; Akbarnejad, E.; Salar Elahi, A.; Ghoranneviss, M.

2016-08-01

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). This article has been retracted at the request of the Principal Editor. After a thorough investigation, the Editor has concluded that the review process for this article was compromised. The acceptance was based on information from at least one reviewer report that was submitted from an email account provided to the journal as a suggested reviewer during the submission of the article. Although purportedly a real reviewer account, the Editor has concluded that this was not of an appropriate, independent reviewer. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process. In addition, the author names Z. Ghorannevis and E. Akbarnejad were added to the article at revision - the corresponding author was not able to explain the reason.

RETRACTED: A new perspective on structural, materials, and simulation of flow and cavitation around the propeller with energy saving system

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Fathololumi, S.; Hassanabad, M. Ghodsi

2016-12-01

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). This article has been retracted at the request of the Principal Editor. After a thorough investigation, the Editor has concluded that the review process for this article was compromised. The acceptance was based on information from two reviewer reports that were submitted from email accounts provided to the journal as suggested reviewers during the submission of the article. Although purportedly real reviewer accounts, the Editor has concluded that these were not of appropriate, independent reviewers. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process. Further, no reason has been provided for the removal of three authors and addition of the authors S. Fathololumi and M. Ghodsi Hassanabad upon revision of the article.

Publish or Practice? An Examination of Librarians' Contributions to Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Finlay, S. Craig; Ni, Chaoqun; Tsou, Andrew; Sugimoto, Cassidy R.

2013-01-01

This article examines authorship of LIS literature in the context of practitioner and non-practitioner production of published research. For this study, 4,827 peer-reviewed articles from twenty LIS journals published between 1956 and 2011 were examined to determine the percentage of articles written by practitioners. The study identified a…

Writing and Publishing Qualitative Studies in Early Childhood Education

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Saracho, Olivia N.

2017-01-01

When a study is published in a respected professional journal, it not only verifies that the research has been completed but also that it has been subjected to anonymous peer review. Published results from studies in early childhood education contribute to the field's knowledge and provide direction to guide future early childhood education…

East Asian International Students and Psychological Well-Being: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Li, Jiaqi; Wang, Yanlin; Xiao, Feiya

2014-01-01

The present article reports a systematic review of the studies related to psychological well-being among East Asian international students. A total of 18 quantitative studies published in peer-reviewed journals from 2000 to 2011 were reviewed. Our review revealed three major results: (1) a majority of researchers (n = 13, 72.2%) tend to choose…

Ebooks and the Retailization of Research: Peer to Peer Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fister, Barbara

2010-01-01

Most recently, Amazon crowed that it is selling more ebooks than hardcovers. Interestingly, the most recent figures from the Association of American Publishers indicate that new adult hardcover sales in both April and May rose by more than 40 percent over the same months last year, a rebound from last year's shopping paralysis brought on by the…

School Experiences of Siblings of Children with Chronic Illness: A Systematic Literature Review.

PubMed

Gan, Lucy L; Lum, Alistair; Wakefield, Claire E; Nandakumar, Beeshman; Fardell, Joanna E

Siblings of children with chronic illness have unique experiences that can affect their school functioning, such that they may miss ongoing periods of school, experience difficulties with schoolwork or experience changes in their peer and teacher interactions. This review provides an overview of these siblings' school experiences. Six databases (Medline, PsychINFO, CINAHL, ERIC, Embase and The Cochrane Library) were systematically searched for studies examining the school experiences and peer relationships of siblings of children with chronic illness, as well as school-based interventions for these siblings. Studies were included if they were published in or after 2000 and were published in English. We identified 2137 articles upon initial search. From these, we identified 28 eligible studies examining the school experiences of >1470 siblings of children with chronic illness. Three key themes were identified throughout the reviewed articles. The literature described 1) the psychological impact on siblings at school; 2) decreases in school attendance and academic functioning, and; 3) changes or perceived differences in peer and teacher interactions. Siblings value teacher and peer support, and this support may contribute to better sibling school functioning. Many siblings are socially resilient, yet overlooked, members of the family who may present with psychological, academic and peer related difficulties at school following diagnosis of a brother or sister with chronic illness. Future research is needed to further delineate the sibling school experience to better facilitate the development of targeted sibling support interventions within the school environment. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

Effectiveness of community-based peer-led diabetes self-management programmes (COMP-DSMP) for improving clinical outcomes and quality of life of adults with diabetes in primary care settings in low and middle-income countries (LMIC): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PubMed

Werfalli, Mahmoud; Raubenheimer, Peter; Engel, Mark; Peer, Nasheeta; Kalula, Sebastiana; Kengne, Andre P; Levitt, Naomi S

2015-07-15

Globally, an estimated 380 million people live with diabetes today--80% in low-income and middle-income countries. The Middle East, Western Pacific, Sub-Saharan Africa and South-East Asia remain the most affected regions where economic development has transformed lifestyles, people live longer and there is an increase in the adult population. Although peer support has been used in different conditions with varied results, yet there is limited evidence to date supporting its effectiveness, particularly for individuals with diabetes. In this review, we will focus on community-based peer-led diabetes self-management programmes (COMP-DSMP) and examine the implementation strategies and diabetes-related health outcomes associated with them in LMIC primary healthcare settings. In accordance with reporting equity-focused systematic reviews PRISMA-P (preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols 2015 checklist) guidelines, a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised controlled trials (CCTs) that involve contact with an individual or group of peers (paid or voluntary). Electronic searches will be performed in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PubMed, SCOUPS, CINAHL and PsycINFO Database for the period January up to July 2000 along with manual searches in the reference lists of relevant papers. The analyses will be performed based on baseline data from RCTs, CCTs and preintervention and postintervention means or proportions will be reported for both intervention and control groups, and the absolute change from baseline will be calculated, together with 95% CIs. For dichotomous outcomes, the relative risk of the outcome will be presented compared to the control group. The risk difference will be calculated, which is the absolute difference in the proportions in each treatment group. Ethics is not required for this study, given that this is a protocol for a systematic review, which utilises published data. The findings of this study will be widely disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. PROSPERO (2014:CRD42014007531). 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.

Report on the Peer Review Workshop on Revisions to the Exposure Factors Handbook

EPA Science Inventory

This report highlights issues and conclusions from a workshop convened to gather information from expert reviewers on EPA's Exposure Factors Handbook (the Handbook) (External Review Draft, EPA/600/P-95/002A) published in June 1995. This information will be used by EPA in further ...

Diversity, Severe Disability, and Family: A Systematic Review of the Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Shurr, Jordan; Hollingshead, Aleksandra

2017-01-01

Understanding family challenges and perspectives are critical to effective programming and services for individuals with severe disabilities. Equally central, yet often overlooked, is the relationship between family challenges and diversity. This systematic review examined a set of peer reviewed literature published between 2002-2015 at the…

A Systematic Review of Factors Utilized in Preconception Health Behavior Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Delissaint, Dieula; McKyer, E. Lisako J.

2011-01-01

This systematic review critically synthesizes the literature focusing on factors related to preconception health behaviors (PCHBs) among childbearing age women in the United States, developed countries, and developing countries. Ovid Medline and CINAHL databases were searched for peer-reviewed articles published between 1998 and 2008 relating to…

Technology and Health Information Technology in Colorectal Surgery: Electronic Literature Support

PubMed Central

Magruder, J. Trent; Efron, Jonathan E.

2013-01-01

The advent of the Internet has revolutionized the management of reporting and accessing research and data. The authors review the current resources available to surgeons through websites, accumulated published data repositories, and libraries. The change in how we publish and present peer-reviewed data over the last 20 years is also discussed as well as the future of health information technology. PMID:24436645

Factors influencing successful peer-reviewed publication of original research presentations from the American Society of Pediatric Otolaryngology (ASPO).

PubMed

MacKinney, Erin C; Chun, Robert H; Cassidy, Laura D; Link, T Roxanne; Sulman, Cecille G; Kerschner, Joseph E

2015-03-01

To analyze factors associated with progression of an original scientific presentation at the American Society of Pediatric Otolaryngology (ASPO) Annual Meeting to publication in a peer-reviewed journal. A dataset of presenters was created to enable prospective follow-up to assess early impressions regarding publication success with longer-term publication outcomes. Prior to the Annual ASPO meeting in 2013, a survey consisting of 10 questions was e-mailed to all 59 presenters. Questions were designed to assess presenter expectations on publication, barriers to publishing, and experience in presenting, publishing and clinical practice. A second survey was sent 12 months later to those respondents of the first survey who were amenable to follow-up. Overall, 46 of 59 (78%) presenters responded to the initial survey prior to their ASPO 2013 presentation. Of these, 34 agreed to participate in a longer-term follow-up of their presentation to publication experience. Of these 34, there were 17 who participated in the follow-up survey 1 year later. Just under half of the original respondents were residents (46%). All presenters (100%) planned to re-submit a revised manuscript if initially rejected. However, 35% of follow-up respondents did not make initial submission to a peer-reviewed journal. Results of a descriptive analysis suggest that more experienced researchers expect their submitted manuscript to be accepted for publication within a shorter time frame than those that have published fewer papers. Time was ranked as the greatest barrier to publication (60%) of those surveyed both in the initial prospective survey and for those who did not publish a paper in the follow-up survey (83%). This study suggests a strong desire and expectation of publishing ASPO presentations. Despite this expectation, past research and this data set suggest this expectation often does not materialize. "Time constraints" were the most commonly identified barrier to publication. To enhance dissemination of new findings from ASPO meetings, institutions and individuals should examine methods that facilitate and incentivize publication of findings in peer-reviewed publications. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

The Four Ps of Publishing: Demystifying Publishing in Peer-Reviewed Journals for Social Work Doctoral Students

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bender, Kimberly; Windsor, Liliane Cambraia

2010-01-01

Since the 1990s, the field of social work has placed substantial value on social work research. As a result, publishing has become an important aspect of contributing to the social work field. While encouragement for faculty to publish may vary across settings, publication has not traditionally been expected of doctoral students. The purpose of…

What do we know about preventing school violence? A systematic review of systematic reviews.

PubMed

Lester, Soraya; Lawrence, Cayleigh; Ward, Catherine L

2017-03-01

Many children across the world are exposed to school violence, which undermines their right to education and adversely affects their development. Studies of interventions for school violence suggest that it can be prevented. However, this evidence base is challenging to navigate. We completed a systematic review of interventions to reduce four types of school violence: (a) peer violence; (b) corporal punishment; (c) student-on-teacher violence and (d) teacher-on-student violence. Reviewers independently searched databases and journals. Included studies were published between 2005 and 2015; in English; considered school-based interventions for children and measured violence as an outcome. Many systematic reviews were found, thus we completed a systematic review of systematic reviews. Only systematic reviews on interventions for intimate partner violence (IPV) and peer aggression were found. These reviews were generally of moderate quality. Research on both types of violence was largely completed in North America. Only a handful of programmes demonstrate promise in preventing IPV. Cognitive behavioral, social-emotional and peer mentoring/mediation programmes showed promise in reducing the levels of perpetration of peer aggression. Further research needs to determine the long-term effects of interventions, potential moderators and mediators of program effects, program effects across different contexts and key intervention components.

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

Discrepancies and rates of publication in orthopaedic sports medicine abstracts.

PubMed

Kleweno, Conor P; Bryant, Whitney K; Jacir, Albert M; Levine, William N; Ahmad, Christopher S

2008-10-01

Presentations of clinically relevant data at AOSSM national meetings are presented yearly and may influence clinical decision making. The incidence of presentations that do not subsequently get published is high, and the numbers of major and minor inconsistencies, once published, are also high. Systematic review. A database was created of all abstracts presented at AOSSM meetings from 1999 to 2001 from official program books. To assess whether each abstract had been followed by publication in a peer-reviewed journal, a PubMed search was conducted to include a 5-year follow-up for each conference. Minor inconsistencies included differences in title, authors, presentation of all outcomes, and authors' interpretation of data. Major inconsistencies included discrepancies in study objective and/or hypothesis, study design, primary and secondary outcome measures, sample size, statistical analysis, results, and standard deviations/confidence intervals. Overall, 98 of the 165 abstracts presented at AOSSM national meetings from 1999 to 2001 were published in a peer-reviewed journal within 5 years, a publication rate of 59.4%. The median time to publication for all articles was 21 (range, 1-60) months. The majority of articles (61) were published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine (62.2%). The median number of major and minor inconsistencies from abstract to publication was 1 (range, 0-5) and 1 (range, 0-4), respectively. Sixty-two of the 98 published abstracts (63%) had at least 1 major inconsistency, while 79 (81%) had at least 1 minor inconsistency. In 5 manuscripts (5%), the authors' interpretation of the data had changed, and in 2 (2%), the change essentially invalidated the abstract. A large number of scientific presentations do not get published in a peer-reviewed journal. In addition, those published have a significant number of changes that, in a small percentage of cases, alter the validity of the original presentation. Orthopaedic surgeons and other attendees as well as nonattendees who reference conference abstracts need to exercise good judgment when considering the implications of oral presentations of unpublished materials. When reviewing meeting presentation abstracts, readers should remember that the material being presented is often not in its definitive or ultimate form.

Status and Evolution of the Journal of Astronomy & Earth Science Education's First Year

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Slater, Timothy F.

2016-01-01

The Journal of Astronomy & Earth Science Education (JAESE.org) is a recently created, peer-reviewed journal designed to serve the discipline-based astronomy, planetary, and geo-sciences education research community. JAESE's first issue was published on December 31, 2014 and has published two volumes and three issues since that time, encompassing 15 peer-reviewed articles. By far, the median article topic has been focused on planetarium education research, while there has only been one article on solid Earth geosciences education research. Although there is not yet an even distribution of topics across the field, there is a relatively even distribution among author demographics. Authors include a range of both junior and senior members of the field. There have been slightly female authors than male authors. Submissions are distributed to two or three reviewers with authors' names redacted from the manuscript. The average time to complete the first round of peer-review reviewers is 6.2-weeks. There have been too few manuscripts to reliably publish a "percentage acceptance rate." Finally, the majority of recently completed astronomy education research doctoral dissertations have been published in JAESE. Taken together, JAESE's guiding Editorial Advisory Board judges this to be a successful first year. In a purposeful effort to make JAESE authors' scholarly works as widely accessible as possible, JAESE adopted an open-access business model. JAESE articles are available to read free-of-charge over the Internet, delivered as PDFs. To date, the most common way articles are downloaded by readers is through Google Scholar. Instead of charging readers and libraries recurring subscription fees, JAESE charges authors a nominal submission fee and a small open-access fee, averaging about $500 USD. These charges are similar to the traditional page charges typically charged to authors or their institutions by scientific journals, making JAESE an attractive publishing venue for many scholars to make their work as widely read as possible.

Open-Access Physical Activity Programs for Older Adults: A Pragmatic and Systematic Review.

PubMed

Balis, Laura E; Strayer, Thomas; Ramalingam, NithyaPriya; Wilson, Meghan; Harden, Samantha M

2018-01-10

Open-access, community-based programs are recommended to assist older adults in meeting physical activity guidelines, but the characteristics, impact, and scalability of these programs is less understood. The Land-Grant University Cooperative Extension System, an organization providing education through county-based educators, functions as a delivery system for these programs. A systematic review was conducted to determine characteristics of effective older adult physical activity programs and the extent to which programs delivered in Extension employ these characteristics. A systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted from August 2016 to February 2017. The review was limited to open-access (available to all), community-based physical activity interventions for older adults (≥65 years of age). The peer-reviewed literature search was conducted in PubMed and EBSCOhost; the grey literature search for Extension interventions was conducted through Extension websites, Land-Grant Impacts, and the Journal of Extension. Sixteen peer-reviewed studies and 17 grey literature sources met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Peer-reviewed and Extension programs were similar in their limited use of behavioral theories and group-based strategies. Compared to Extension programs, those in the peer-reviewed literature were more likely to use a combination of physical activity components and be delivered by trained professionals. The results indicate notable differences between peer-reviewed literature and Extension programs and present an opportunity for Extension programs to more effectively use evidence-based program characteristics, including behavioral theories and group dynamics, a combination of physical activity components, and educator/agent-trained delivery agents. © The Author(s) 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

RETRACTED: New results on structure of low beta confinement Polywell cusps simulated by comsol multiphysics

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Mahdavipour, B.; Salar Elahi, A.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of at least two illegitimate reviewer reports. The reports were submitted from email accounts which were provided to the journal as suggested reviewers during the submission of the article. Although purportedly real reviewer accounts, the Editors have concluded that these were not of appropriate, independent reviewers. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process. Further, the corresponding author was not able to explain the reason for adding the author name B. Mahdavipour to the revised article.

RETRACTED: Structural properties of resonant electric and magnetic fields correlation with X-ray generation and MHD activity in tokamak

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Salar Elahi, A.; Ghoranneviss, M.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of at least two illegitimate reviewer reports. The reports were submitted from email accounts which were provided to the journal as suggested reviewers during the submission of the article. Although purportedly real reviewer accounts, the Editors have concluded that these were not of appropriate, independent reviewers. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process. No reason has been provided for the addition of the author name A. Salar Elahi to the authorship of the revised article.

RETRACTED: Results on plasma temperature measurement using an image processing technique

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Mahdavipour, B.; Hatami, A.; Salar Elahi, A.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of at least one illegitimate reviewer report. The report was submitted from an email account which was provided to the journal as a suggested reviewer during the submission of the article. Although purportedly a real reviewer account, the Editors have concluded that this was not of an appropriate, independent reviewer. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process. In addition, the corresponding author was not able to explain the reason for adding the author names B. Mahdavipour and A. Hatami to the article upon revision.

RETRACTED: A new perspective on remote Saddle Sine and Cosine coils technique for determination of tokamak plasma equilibrium status

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Salar Elahi, A.; Ghoranneviss, M.

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of at least one illegitimate reviewer report. The report was submitted from an email account which was provided to the journal as a suggested reviewer during the submission of the article. Although purportedly a real reviewer account, the Editors have concluded that this was not of an appropriate, independent reviewer. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process. Further, the corresponding author was not able to explain the reason for adding the author M. Ghoranneviss to the revised article.

Retraction: Calculation and modeling of the energy released in result of water freezing process (WFP)

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Ghodsi Hassanabad, M.; Mehrbadi, A. Dehghani

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal). After a thorough investigation, the Editors have concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of at least one illegitimate reviewer report. The report was submitted from an email account which was provided to the journal as a suggested reviewer during the submission of the article. Although purportedly a real reviewer account, the Editors have concluded that this was not of an appropriate, independent reviewer. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the reviewers whose identities were assumed and to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process. Further, no reason has been provided for the addition of the author names M. Ghodsi Hassanabad and A. Dehghani Mehrbadi to the authorship of the revised article.

A meta-analysis of the effects of feeding yeast culture produced by anaerobic fermentation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae on milk production of lactating dairy cows.

PubMed

Poppy, G D; Rabiee, A R; Lean, I J; Sanchez, W K; Dorton, K L; Morley, P S

2012-10-01

The purpose of this study was to use meta-analytic methods to estimate the effect of a commercially available yeast culture product on milk production and other production measures in lactating dairy cows using a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Sixty-one research publications (published journal articles, published abstracts, and technical reports) were identified through a review of literature provided by the manufacturer and a search of published literature using 6 search engines. Thirty-six separate studies with 69 comparisons met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The fixed-effect meta-analysis showed substantial heterogeneity for milk yield, energy-corrected milk, 3.5% fat-corrected milk, milk fat yield, and milk protein yield. Sub-group analysis of the data showed much less heterogeneity in peer-reviewed studies versus non-peer-reviewed abstracts and technical reports, and tended to show higher, but not significantly different, treatment effects. A random-effects meta-analysis showed estimated raw mean differences between treated and untreated cattle reported in peer-reviewed publications of 1.18 kg/d [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55 to 1.81], 1.61 kg/d (95% CI: 0.92 to 2.29), and 1.65 kg/d (95% CI: 0.97 to 2.34) for milk yield, 3.5% fat-corrected milk, and energy-corrected milk, respectively. Milk fat yield and milk protein yield for peer-reviewed studies showed an increase in the raw mean difference of 0.06 kg/d (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.10) and 0.03 kg/d (95% CI: 0.00 to 0.05), respectively. Estimated raw mean dry matter intake of the peer-reviewed studies during early lactation (<70 d in milk) and not-early lactation were 0.62 kg/d (95% CI: 0.21 to 1.02) and a decrease of 0.78 kg/d (95% CI: -1.36 to -0.21), respectively. These findings provide strong evidence that this commercially available yeast culture product provides significant improvement in several important milk production outcomes as evaluated in production settings typical for commercial dairies in North America. Utilizing meta-analytic methods to study the complete breadth of information relating to a specific treatment by studying multiple overcomes of all eligible studies can reduce the uncertainty often seen in small individual studies designed without sufficient power to detect differences in treatments. Copyright © 2012 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Journal policy on ethics in scientific publication.

PubMed

Callaham, Michael L

2003-01-01

Medical journals aspire to select, through peer review, the highest quality science, and their reputations depend on the trust of readers, authors, researchers, reviewers, and patients. Almost every aspect of this process involves important ethical principles and decisions, which are seldom explicitly stated and even less often shared with the readership. A comprehensive policy on publication ethics is summarized in this article. A few of the topics addressed are study design; research subject consent; definitions and responsibilities of authorship; declaration of paid writers; types of potential conflicts of interest; management of conflicts of interest on the part of authors, journal reviewers, and members of the editorial board; blinding and confidentiality of peer review; assessment of peer review quality; public identification of degree of peer review of various portions of the journal; criteria for manuscript decisions; management of author appeals; definitions of prior publication; plagiarism; criteria for advertising and relationship between advertising and editorial matter; allegations of misconduct and journal policies for responding to them; and the relationship of the journal to the sponsoring society. Our goal in publishing these policies is to make the guiding ethical principles of this journal accessible to all of our readers and contributors.

40 CFR 30.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

14 CFR 1260.136 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research...

14 CFR 1260.136 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research...

40 CFR 30.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

14 CFR 1260.136 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research...

40 CFR 30.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

14 CFR 1260.136 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research...

40 CFR 30.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

40 CFR 30.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an...

Hot off the Press

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hines, Stefani; Tart, Kimberly Thigpen; Hemminger, Laura; Schlegel, Barry; Stephan, Wendy; Pitman, Lisa

2006-01-01

Recently published research can be paired with engaging activities to keep students informed about the rapidly changing world of science. "Environmental Health Perspectives" (EHP), a peer-reviewed environmental health research journal (published by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, part of the National Institutes of Health),…

Peer Review of Best Practices

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Pearlman, J.; Buttigieg, P. L.; Simpson, P.; Munoz, C.; Dufois, F.; Heslop, E. E.

2017-12-01

To ensure the quality of oceanographic data, there is a clear need to employ best practices (BPs) for ocean observation and information management. However, effectively discovering these BPs is a challenge, hindering harmonized quality assurance across projects and programmes. To remedy this, we are prototyping a resource for the stable archiving and efficient discovery of BPs through a granular, semantically indexed, and consistently formatted web resource. While these technical advances have value, they cannot ensure improved oceanographic data quality without effective and inclusive peer review processes. Peer review of digitized best practices can take a number of forms from traditional (blind) peer review as practiced by journal publishers through to the evolving "open" approach where community reviews have both the authors and reviewers identified. This presentation will discuss the options for peer review mechanisms for best practices, including a hybrid approach where both expert panels and open community review are used to improve methodologies and thus downstream data quality. It is not yet clear if the ocean community prefers open versus blind reviews for best practices. It is also unclear the extent to which innovation versus solid technical base should have a higher priority in the reviews. Further, it is not clear whether the reviews should use an internal expert panel of the IODE OceanBestPractices Repository (http://www.oceanbestpractices.net/) or should be done as part of a journal publications process or both, as mentioned above. Thus, we will also describe our future approach to `field test' these review models on a multi-stakeholder compendium of digitized best practice documents.

Policy, Practice, and Research Agenda for Emergency Medical Services Oversight: A Systematic Review and Environmental Scan.

PubMed

Taymour, Rekar K; Abir, Mahshid; Chamberlin, Margaret; Dunne, Robert B; Lowell, Mark; Wahl, Kathy; Scott, Jacqueline

2018-02-01

Introduction In a 2015 report, the Institute of Medicine (IOM; Washington, DC USA), now the National Academy of Medicine (NAM; Washington, DC USA), stated that the field of Emergency Medical Services (EMS) exhibits signs of fragmentation; an absence of system-wide coordination and planning; and a lack of federal, state, and local accountability. The NAM recommended clarifying what roles the federal government, state governments, and local communities play in the oversight and evaluation of EMS system performance, and how they may better work together to improve care. This systematic literature review and environmental scan addresses NAM's recommendations by answering two research questions: (1) what aspects of EMS systems are most measured in the peer-reviewed and grey literatures, and (2) what do these measures and studies suggest for high-quality EMS oversight? To answer these questions, a systematic literature review was conducted in the PubMed (National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Institutes of Health; Bethesda, Maryland USA), Web of Science (Thomson Reuters; New York, New York USA), SCOPUS (Elsevier; Amsterdam, Netherlands), and EMBASE (Elsevier; Amsterdam, Netherlands) databases for peer-reviewed literature and for grey literature; targeted web searches of 10 EMS-related government agencies and professional organizations were performed. Inclusion criteria required peer-reviewed literature to be published between 1966-2016 and grey literature to be published between 1996-2016. A total of 1,476 peer-reviewed titles were reviewed, 76 were retrieved for full-text review, and 58 were retained and coded in the qualitative software Dedoose (Manhattan Beach, California USA) using a codebook of themes. Categorizations of measure type and level of application were assigned to the extracted data. Targeted websites were systematically reviewed and 115 relevant grey literature documents were retrieved. A total of 58 peer-reviewed articles met inclusion criteria; 46 included process, 36 outcomes, and 18 structural measures. Most studies applied quality measures at the personnel level (40), followed by the agency (28) and system of care (28), and few at the oversight level (5). Numerous grey literature articles provided principles for high-quality EMS oversight. Limited quality measurement at the oversight level is an important gap in the peer-reviewed literature. The grey literature is ahead in this realm and can guide the policy and research agenda for EMS oversight quality measurement. Taymour RK , Abir M , Chamberlin M , Dunne RB , Lowell M , Wahl K , Scott J . Policy, practice, and research agenda for Emergency Medical Services oversight: a systematic review and environmental scan. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(1):89-97.

Conflict of interest and disclosure policies in psychiatry and medicine: a comparative study of peer-reviewed journals.

PubMed

Khurana, Gauri; Henderson, Schuyler; Walter, Garry; Martin, Andrés

2012-01-01

The authors reviewed and characterized conflict of interest (COI) and disclosure policies published in peer-reviewed psychiatric and nonpsychiatric journals. The authors examined peer-reviewed publications in the psychiatric (N=20) and nonpsychiatric (N=20) literature. Using qualitative and quantitative approaches, they designed an instrument to compare COI and disclosure policies appearing in print or journal websites between January and May 2009. All journals published COI/disclosure policies that were accessible in print and online. There was substantial variability in policies, but little variability appeared to be field-specific. Psychiatric journals were more likely to request "complete" disclosure, and nonpsychiatric journals to request "relevant" disclosure, but medical journals tended to provide more detailed information about what could constitute a potential conflict and asked for broader, potentially relevant funding sources. Nonpsychiatric journals were more likely to give examples in their policies. Psychiatric journals were more likely to publish disclosures. This preliminary study suggests that there are discrepancies in the disclosure and COI information that journals request from authors. By and large, such discrepancies are not substantially different between psychiatric and nonpsychiatric journals. Challenges in codifying COI policies and creating standardized approaches across periodicals and across disciplines may reflect ongoing debates about what exactly constitutes a COI, what needs to be disclosed, and who is responsible for disclosing. Further study is warranted into how journals convey COI policies and how such policies can be optimized.

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity/Expression Related Peer Victimization in Adolescence: A Systematic Review of Associated Psychosocial and Health Outcomes

PubMed Central

Collier, Kate L.; van Beusekom, Gabriël; Bos, Henny M. W.; Sandfort, Theo G. M.

2012-01-01

This article reviews research on psychosocial and health outcomes associated with peer victimization related to adolescent sexual orientation and gender identity or expression. Using four electronic databases and supplementary methods, we identified 39 relevant studies. These studies were published between 1995 and 2012 and conducted in 12 different countries. The studies were diverse in terms of their approaches to sampling participants, assessing participants’ sexual orientation, operationalizing peer victimization, and with regard to the psychosocial and health outcomes studied in relation to peer victimization. Despite the methodological diversity across studies, there is fairly strong evidence that peer victimization related to sexual orientation and gender identity or expression is associated with a diminished sense of school belonging and higher levels of depressive symptoms; findings regarding the relationship between peer victimization and suicidality have been more mixed. Peer victimization related to sexual orientation and gender identity or expression is also associated with disruptions in educational trajectories, traumatic stress, and alcohol and substance use. Recommendations for future research and interventions are discussed. PMID:23480074

Sexual orientation and gender identity/expression related peer victimization in adolescence: a systematic review of associated psychosocial and health outcomes.

PubMed

Collier, Kate L; van Beusekom, Gabriël; Bos, Henny M W; Sandfort, Theo G M

2013-01-01

This article reviews research on psychosocial and health outcomes associated with peer victimization related to adolescent sexual orientation and gender identity or expression. Using four electronic databases and supplementary methods, we identified 39 relevant studies. These studies were published between 1995 and 2012 and conducted in 12 different countries. The studies were diverse in terms of their approaches to sampling participants, assessing participants' sexual orientation, operationalizing peer victimization, and with regard to the psychosocial and health outcomes studied in relation to peer victimization. Despite the methodological diversity across studies, there is fairly strong evidence that peer victimization related to sexual orientation and gender identity or expression is associated with a diminished sense of school belonging and higher levels of depressive symptoms; findings regarding the relationship between peer victimization and suicidality have been more mixed. Peer victimization related to sexual orientation and gender identity or expression is also associated with disruptions in educational trajectories, traumatic stress, and alcohol and substance use. Recommendations for future research and interventions are discussed.

Bibliometric analysis of poison center-related research published in peer-review journals.

PubMed

Forrester, M B

2016-07-01

Poison centers advance knowledge in the field of toxicology through publication in peer-review journals. This investigation describes the pattern of poison center-related publications. Cases were poison center-related research published in peer-review journals during 1995-2014. These were identified through searching the PubMed database, reviewing the tables of contents of selected toxicology journals, and reviewing abstracts of various national and international meetings. The following variables for each publication were identified: year of publication, journal, type of publication (meeting abstract vs. other, i.e. full article or letter to the editor), and the country(ies) of the poison center(s) included in the research. Of the 3147 total publications, 62.1% were meeting abstracts. There were 263 publications in 1995-1999, 536 in 2000-2004, 999 in 2005-2009, and 1349 in 2010-2014. The publications were in 234 different journals. The journals in which the highest number of research was published were Clinical Toxicology (69.7%), Journal of Medical Toxicology (2.2%), and Veterinary and Human Toxicology (2.1%). The research was reported from 62 different countries. The countries with the highest number of publications were the United States (67.9%), United Kingdom (6.5%), Germany (3.9%), France (2.5%), and Italy (2.4%). The number of publications increased greatly over the 20 years. Although the publications were in a large number of journals, a high proportion of the publications were in one journal. While the research came from a large number of countries, the preponderance came from the United States. © The Author(s) 2015.

Meaningful Experiences in Physical Education and Youth Sport: A Review of the Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Beni, Stephanie; Fletcher, Tim; Ní Chróinín, Déirdre

2017-01-01

The purpose of this research is to review the literature about young people's meaningful experiences in physical education and youth sport. We reviewed 50 empirical peer-reviewed articles published in English since 1987. Five themes were identified as central influences to young people's meaningful experiences in physical education and sport:…

A Systematic Review of the Prevalence of Psychiatric Disorders in Adults with Intellectual Disability, 2003-2010

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Buckles, Jason; Luckasson, Ruth; Keefe, Elizabeth

2013-01-01

Research regarding the prevalence of psychiatric conditions co-occurring with intellectual disability in adults was reviewed. Particular attention was paid to the qualities of sampling and diagnostic methodology, which have been identified as needs in two recent reviews. Sixteen articles published in peer-reviewed journals between 2003 and 2009…

Why Academics Choose to Publish in a Mega-Journal

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Shopovski, Jovan; Marolov, Dejan

2017-01-01

With their broad scope, high publishing volume, a peer review process based on the scientific soundness of the content, and an open access model, mega journals have become an important part of scholarly publishing. The main aim of this paper is to determine the most important factor that influenced researchers' decisions to submit their academic…

Cancer Information Summaries

Cancer.gov

Peer-reviewed, evidence-based summaries on topics including adult and pediatric cancer treatment, supportive and palliative care, screening, prevention, genetics, and complementary and alternative medicine. References to published literature are included.

SU-F-T-231: Improving the Efficiency of a Radiotherapy Peer-Review System for Quality Assurance

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

Hsu, S; Basavatia, A; Garg, M

Purpose: To improve the efficiency of a radiotherapy peer-review system using a commercially available software application for plan quality evaluation and documentation. Methods: A commercial application, FullAccess (Radialogica LLC, Version 1.4.4), was implemented in a Citrix platform for peer-review process and patient documentation. This application can display images, isodose lines, and dose-volume histograms and create plan reports for peer-review process. Dose metrics in the report can also be benchmarked for plan quality evaluation. Site-specific templates were generated based on departmental treatment planning policies and procedures for each disease site, which generally follow RTOG protocols as well as published prospective clinicalmore » trial data, including both conventional fractionation and hypo-fractionation schema. Once a plan is ready for review, the planner exports the plan to FullAccess, applies the site-specific template, and presents the report for plan review. The plan is still reviewed in the treatment planning system, as that is the legal record. Upon physician’s approval of a plan, the plan is packaged for peer review with the plan report and dose metrics are saved to the database. Results: The reports show dose metrics of PTVs and critical organs for the plans and also indicate whether or not the metrics are within tolerance. Graphical results with green, yellow, and red lights are displayed of whether planning objectives have been met. In addition, benchmarking statistics are collected to see where the current plan falls compared to all historical plans on each metric. All physicians in peer review can easily verify constraints by these reports. Conclusion: We have demonstrated the improvement in a radiotherapy peer-review system, which allows physicians to easily verify planning constraints for different disease sites and fractionation schema, allows for standardization in the clinic to ensure that departmental policies are maintained, and builds a comprehensive database for potential clinical outcome evaluation.« less

What makes a phenomenological study phenomenological? An analysis of peer-reviewed empirical nursing studies.

PubMed

Norlyk, Annelise; Harder, Ingegerd

2010-03-01

This article contributes to the debate about phenomenology as a research approach in nursing by providing a systematic review of what nurse researchers hold as phenomenology in published empirical studies. Based on the assumption that presentations of phenomenological approaches in peer-reviewed journals have consequences for the quality of future research, the aim was to analyze articles presenting phenomenological studies and, in light of the findings, raise a discussion about addressing scientific criteria. The analysis revealed considerable variations, ranging from brief to detailed descriptions of the stated phenomenological approach, and from inconsistencies to methodological clarity and rigor. Variations, apparent inconsistencies, and omissions made it unclear what makes a phenomenological study phenomenological. There is a need for clarifying how the principles of the phenomenological philosophy are implemented in a particular study before publishing. This should include an articulation of methodological keywords of the investigated phenomenon, and how an open attitude was adopted.

Alignment of single-case design (SCD) research with individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing with the what Works Clearinghouse standards for SCD research.

PubMed

Wendel, Erica; Cawthon, Stephanie W; Ge, Jin Jin; Beretvas, S Natasha

2015-04-01

The authors assessed the quality of single-case design (SCD) studies that assess the impact of interventions on outcomes for individuals who are deaf or hard-of-hearing (DHH). More specifically, the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) standards for SCD research were used to assess design quality and the strength of evidence of peer-reviewed studies available in the peer-reviewed, published literature. The analysis yielded four studies that met the WWC standards for design quality, of which two demonstrated moderate to strong evidence for efficacy of the studied intervention. Results of this review are discussed in light of the benefits and the challenges to applying the WWC design standards to research with DHH individuals and other diverse, low-incidence populations. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Leading by Example? ALA Division Publications, Open Access, and Sustainability

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hall, Nathan; Arnold-Garza, Sara; Gong, Regina; Shorish, Yasmeen

2016-01-01

This investigation explores scholarly communication business models in American Library Association (ALA) division peer-reviewed academic journals. Previous studies reveal the numerous issues organizations and publishers face in the academic publishing environment. Through an analysis of documented procedures, policies, and finances of five ALA…

14 CFR § 1260.136 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research...

A Case Study in E-Journal Developments: The Scandinavian Position.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Joa, Harald

1997-01-01

Provides an overview of peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly electronic journals in Scandinavia from a publisher's point of view. Discusses the electronic journals market in Scandinavia, international electronic publishing, the Institute for Scientific Information's Electronic Library Project, the one-stop shopping concept, and copyright and…

Don't be rejected, how can we help authors, reviewers and editors?: Report of a Symposium for Editors Publishers and Others with an Interest in Scientific Publication, Held in Boston on Wednesday, 11 March 2015, during the Annual Meeting of the International Association for Dental Research.

PubMed

Eaton, K A; Innes, N; Balaji, S M; Pugh, C; Honkala, E; Lynch, C D

2017-02-01

This satellite symposium was the fifth in a series for editors, publishers, reviewers and all those with an interest in scientific publishing. It was held on Wednesday, 11 March 2015 at the IADR meeting in Boston, Massachusetts. The symposium attracted more than 210 attendees. The symposium placed an emphasis on strategies to ensure that papers are accepted by peer reviewed journals. The speaker, representing the Journal of Dental Research gave a history of peer review and explained how to access material to advise new authors. The speaker from India outlined the problems that occur when there is no culture for dental research and it is given a low priority in dental education. He outlined remedies. The speaker from SAGE publications described the help that publishers and editors can provide authors. The final speaker suggested that in developing countries it was essential to create alliances with dental researchers in developed countries and that local conferences to which external speakers were invited, stimulated research both in terms of quantity and quality. A wide ranging discussion then took place. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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.

Analysis of the Revision Process by American Journal of Roentgenology Reviewers and Section Editors: Metrics of Rejected Manuscripts and Their Final Disposition.

PubMed

Cejas, Claudia

2017-06-01

The objective of this study was to evaluate metrics related to manuscripts rejected by AJR with and without review during 2014 and to determine their final disposition: no record of eventual publication, eventually published, published with modified authors and title, published with the same title but modified authors, and published with modified title but the same authors. A total of 1245 unsolicited manuscripts submitted from January to December 2014 were included in this retrospective analysis. Data were extracted from the AJR's manuscript submission system. Standard statistical analysis was used to assess the fate of a sample of 200 rejected manuscripts. Of the 200 manuscripts studied, 117 (59%) were published in other scientific journals (61 with revision, 56 without revision; Χ 2 = 0.329, p = 0.566). Thirty-two of the 61 manuscripts (52%) rejected after peer review were later published in other journals without changes in their titles or authors, 16 (26%) with changes only in authors, 10 (16%) with changes only in their titles, and three (5%) with changes in authors and titles. Twenty-six of the 56 manuscripts (46%) rejected without peer review were published without changes in their titles or authors, 17 (30%) with changes in authors, 11 (20%) with changes only in their titles, and two (4%) with changes in both authors and titles (p = 0.686). Ten articles were published in open access journals. Of the remaining articles, those that had been reviewed were published in journals with a mean impact factor ± SD of 2.37 ± 1.30, and those that had not been reviewed were published in journals with a mean impact factor of 2.04 ± 1.06. Analysis of the 25th and 75th percentiles revealed that values were also higher for the group rejected with review (Wilcoxon rank sum test: W = 1679, p = 0.1127). Out of 61 articles rejected for publication with review, 52.5% were published with changes to their abstracts, whereas the remaining 47.5% were unchanged. This analysis found that manuscripts submitted to AJR that were rejected after review were published in journals with higher impact factors than those rejected without review. The commentaries provided by AJR reviewers and section editors appear to improve the quality of rejected manuscripts and thus contribute to the scientific community.

A decade of environmental public health tracking (2002-2012): progress and challenges.

PubMed

Kearney, Gregory D; Namulanda, Gonza; Qualters, Judith R; Talbott, Evelyn O

2015-01-01

The creation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Environmental Public Health Tracking Program spawned an invigorating and challenging approach toward implementing the nation's first population-based, environmental disease tracking surveillance system. More than 10 years have passed since its creation and an abundance of peer-reviewed articles have been published spanning a broad variety of public health topics related primarily to the goal of reducing diseases of environmental origin. To evaluate peer-reviewed literature related to Environmental Public Health Tracking during 2002-2012, recognize major milestones and challenges, and offer recommendations. A narrative overview was conducted using titles and abstracts of peer-reviewed articles, key word searches, and science-based search engine databases. Eighty published articles related to "health tracking" were identified and categorized according to 4 crossed-central themes. The Science and Research theme accounted for the majority of published articles, followed by Policy and Practice, Collaborations Among Health and Environmental Programs, and Network Development. Overall, progress was reported in the areas of data linkage, data sharing, surveillance methods, and network development. Ongoing challenges included formulating better ways to establish the connections between health and the environment, such as using biomonitoring, public water systems, and private well water data. Recommendations for future efforts include use of data to inform policy and practice and use of electronic health records data for environmental health surveillance.

Educational Leaders and Emotions: An International Review of Empirical Evidence 1992-2012

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Berkovich, Izhak; Eyal, Ori

2015-01-01

The aim of the present article is to review the international evidence about emotional aspects related to educational leaders. The review focuses on empirical studies published in peer-refereed educational journals between 1992 and 2012. First, we address the importance of researching emotions for understanding educational leaders. Next, we…

42 CFR 90.10 - Notice and comment period.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

..., PRACTICES, AND PROCEDURES § 90.10 Notice and comment period. Following internal review by ATSDR and external peer review of a draft final report of the results of a health effects study, ATSDR will publish a notice that the draft final report is available for public review and comment. At a minimum, the notice...

Framing Students' Progression in Understanding Matter: A Review of Previous Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hadenfeldt, Jan Christoph; Liu, Xiufeng; Neumann, Knut

2014-01-01

This manuscript presents a systematic review of the research on how students conceptualise matter. Understanding the structure and properties of matter is an essential part of science literacy. Over the last decades the number of studies on students' conceptions of matter published in peer-reviewed journals has increased significantly. These…

Interventions for Toddlers with Autism Spectrum Disorders: An Evaluation of Research Evidence

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Schertz, Hannah H.; Reichow, Brian; Tan, Paulo; Vaiouli, Potheini; Yildirim, Emine

2012-01-01

Recently emerging intervention studies for toddlers with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) were reviewed through a systematic assessment of intervention outcomes, research rigor, and intervention features. The review includes published peer-reviewed experimental studies of toddlers with high risk for or diagnosis of ASD in which the majority of…

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…

Teleconference versus face-to-face scientific peer review of grant application: effects on review outcomes.

PubMed

Gallo, Stephen A; Carpenter, Afton S; Glisson, Scott R

2013-01-01

Teleconferencing as a setting for scientific peer review is an attractive option for funding agencies, given the substantial environmental and cost savings. Despite this, there is a paucity of published data validating teleconference-based peer review compared to the face-to-face process. Our aim was to conduct a retrospective analysis of scientific peer review data to investigate whether review setting has an effect on review process and outcome measures. We analyzed reviewer scoring data from a research program that had recently modified the review setting from face-to-face to a teleconference format with minimal changes to the overall review procedures. This analysis included approximately 1600 applications over a 4-year period: two years of face-to-face panel meetings compared to two years of teleconference meetings. The average overall scientific merit scores, score distribution, standard deviations and reviewer inter-rater reliability statistics were measured, as well as reviewer demographics and length of time discussing applications. The data indicate that few differences are evident between face-to-face and teleconference settings with regard to average overall scientific merit score, scoring distribution, standard deviation, reviewer demographics or inter-rater reliability. However, some difference was found in the discussion time. These findings suggest that most review outcome measures are unaffected by review setting, which would support the trend of using teleconference reviews rather than face-to-face meetings. However, further studies are needed to assess any correlations among discussion time, application funding and the productivity of funded research projects.

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.

21 CFR 812.35 - Supplemental applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... control procedures of § 820.30, preclinical/animal testing, peer reviewed published literature, or other... the verification and validation testing, as appropriate, demonstrated that the design outputs met the...

21 CFR 812.35 - Supplemental applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... control procedures of § 820.30, preclinical/animal testing, peer reviewed published literature, or other... the verification and validation testing, as appropriate, demonstrated that the design outputs met the...

21 CFR 812.35 - Supplemental applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... control procedures of § 820.30, preclinical/animal testing, peer reviewed published literature, or other... the verification and validation testing, as appropriate, demonstrated that the design outputs met the...

21 CFR 812.35 - Supplemental applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... control procedures of § 820.30, preclinical/animal testing, peer reviewed published literature, or other... the verification and validation testing, as appropriate, demonstrated that the design outputs met the...

Peer consultation on relationship between PAC profile and toxicity of petroleum substances.

PubMed

Patterson, Jacqueline; Maier, Andrew; Kohrman-Vincent, Melissa; Dourson, Michael L

2013-11-01

An expert peer consultation panel reviewed a report by the PAC Analysis Task Group, which hypothesized that systemic, developmental, and reproductive toxicity observed in repeated-dose dermal toxicity studies was related to polycyclic aromatic compound (PAC) content. Peer consultations seek to solicit scientific and technical input from experts on the scientific basis and merits of the subject report. This peer consultation panel included nine scientists with expertise in petroleum chemistry, biostatistics, toxicology, risk assessment, structure activity, and reproductive and developmental toxicology. The panel evaluated the technical quality of the PAC report and provided recommendations for improving the statistical and biological approaches. The PAC report authors revised their methods and documentation, which are published elsewhere in this supplement. A review of the post peer consultation manuscripts confirmed that many of the key suggestions from expert panel members were considered and incorporated. In cases where the PAC report authors did not fully incorporate panel suggestions from the peer consultation, they have provided an explanation and support for their decision. This peer consultation demonstrates the value of formal engagement of peers in development of new scientific methods and approaches. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Transition From Peer Review to Peer Learning: Experience in a Radiology Department.

PubMed

Donnelly, Lane F; Dorfman, Scott R; Jones, Jeremy; Bisset, George S

2017-10-18

To describe the process by which a radiology department moved from peer review to peer collaborative improvement (PCI) and review data from the first 16 months of the PCI process. Data from the first 16 months after PCI were reviewed: number of case reviews performed, number of learning opportunities identified, percentage yield of learning opportunities identified, type of learning opportunities identified, and comparison of the previous parameters between case randomly reviewed versus actively pushed (issues actively identified and entered). Changes in actively pushed cases were also assessed as volume per month over the 16 months (run chart). Faculty members were surveyed about their perception of the conversion to PCI. In all, 12,197 cases were peer reviewed, yielding 1,140 learning opportunities (9.34%). The most common types of learning opportunities for all reviewed cases included perception (5.1%) and reporting (1.9%). The yield of learning opportunities from actively pushed cases was 96.3% compared with 3.88% for randomly reviewed cases. The number of actively pushed cases per month increased over the course of the period and established two new confidence intervals. The faculty survey revealed that the faculty perceived the new PCI process as positive, nonpunitive, and focused on improvement. The study demonstrates that a switch to PCI is perceived as nonpunitive and associated with increased radiologist submission of learning opportunities. Active entering of identified learning opportunities had a greater yield and perceived value, compared with random review of cases. Copyright © 2017 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The Molecule Pages database

PubMed Central

Saunders, Brian; Lyon, Stephen; Day, Matthew; Riley, Brenda; Chenette, Emily; Subramaniam, Shankar

2008-01-01

The UCSD-Nature Signaling Gateway Molecule Pages (http://www.signaling-gateway.org/molecule) provides essential information on more than 3800 mammalian proteins involved in cellular signaling. The Molecule Pages contain expert-authored and peer-reviewed information based on the published literature, complemented by regularly updated information derived from public data source references and sequence analysis. The expert-authored data includes both a full-text review about the molecule, with citations, and highly structured data for bioinformatics interrogation, including information on protein interactions and states, transitions between states and protein function. The expert-authored pages are anonymously peer reviewed by the Nature Publishing Group. The Molecule Pages data is present in an object-relational database format and is freely accessible to the authors, the reviewers and the public from a web browser that serves as a presentation layer. The Molecule Pages are supported by several applications that along with the database and the interfaces form a multi-tier architecture. The Molecule Pages and the Signaling Gateway are routinely accessed by a very large research community. PMID:17965093

The Molecule Pages database.

PubMed

Saunders, Brian; Lyon, Stephen; Day, Matthew; Riley, Brenda; Chenette, Emily; Subramaniam, Shankar; Vadivelu, Ilango

2008-01-01

The UCSD-Nature Signaling Gateway Molecule Pages (http://www.signaling-gateway.org/molecule) provides essential information on more than 3800 mammalian proteins involved in cellular signaling. The Molecule Pages contain expert-authored and peer-reviewed information based on the published literature, complemented by regularly updated information derived from public data source references and sequence analysis. The expert-authored data includes both a full-text review about the molecule, with citations, and highly structured data for bioinformatics interrogation, including information on protein interactions and states, transitions between states and protein function. The expert-authored pages are anonymously peer reviewed by the Nature Publishing Group. The Molecule Pages data is present in an object-relational database format and is freely accessible to the authors, the reviewers and the public from a web browser that serves as a presentation layer. The Molecule Pages are supported by several applications that along with the database and the interfaces form a multi-tier architecture. The Molecule Pages and the Signaling Gateway are routinely accessed by a very large research community.

Entering new publication territory in chemoinformatics and chemical information science.

PubMed

Bajorath, Jürgen

2015-01-01

The F1000Research publishing platform offers the opportunity to launch themed article collections as a part of its dynamic publication environment. The idea of article collections is further expanded through the generation of publication channels that focus on specific scientific areas or disciplines. This editorial introduces the Chemical Information Science channel of F1000Research designed to collate high-quality publications and foster a culture of open peer review. Articles will be selected by guest editor(s) and a group of experts, the channel Editorial Board, and subjected to open peer review.

Peer teaching as an educational tool in Pharmacy schools; fruitful or futile.

PubMed

Aburahma, Mona Hassan; Mohamed, Heba Moustafa

2017-11-01

In the past decade, various health care programs have implemented diverse types of peer-assisted learning (PAL) programs, in particularly peer teaching (PT), due to their reported benefits for students (both those undertaking teaching and those being taught), teachers, and educational institutes. Unfortunately, peer teaching is still under-recognized in pharmacy programs worldwide when compared to other health care programs. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the published literature centered on formal PT programs that are implemented in pharmacy schools. In addition, this review focuses on the methodologies adopted for peer teacher recruitment and training as well as the benefits gained by students (both those undertaking teaching and those being taught). The rationales behind PT implementation are recapitulated as well. Finally, a simple scheme for successful implementation of PT activity is provided to serve as a groundwork for educators. Pre-defined key terms were used to search for experimental peer teaching activities in pharmacy schools between January 2000 and June 2016. Titles were selected based on pre-set eligibility criteria. Only complete research articles with clear design and evaluation sections were included in this review. Studies about inter-professional peer teaching activities between pharmacy students and other healthcare professions were also included. Six relevant educational research articles containing peer teaching activities were included. A lot of variety exists between different pharmacy courses implementing PT, the format/setting of PT, how peer teachers are selected, and how training and evaluation are implemented. The studies reviewed confirmed that PT was well received by most of the students and had a positive impact on their learning outcome. These findings cannot be generalized due to the insufficient number of studies published beside their methodological limitations and inadequate descriptions of the PT format. Though PT may be regarded as a feasible teaching strategy, care must be taken during implementation to ensure the fulfillment of the educational objectives. Proper validation of any PT initiative is required before incorporation into the pharmacy curriculum. More research using proper design and suitable sample sizes are recommended to determine the effect of PT activity on students' learning, skills development and confidence. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The learner as co-creator: A new peer review and self-assessment feedback form created by student nurses.

PubMed

Duers, Lorraine E

2017-11-01

Engagement with peer review and self-assessment is not always regarded by student nurses as an activity that results in a positive learning experience. Literature indicates that withdrawal from the learning process becomes attractive to individuals affected by a negative experience of peer review. Literature also provides examples of student nurses' feeling 'torn to shreds' during the process of peer review, resulting in loss of confidence and self-esteem. An influencing factor in such situations appears to be the absence of specific learner-driven criteria against which student nurses can assess peer and self-performance. The idea was thus ignited, that creation and utilisation of a learner-driven feedback form might potentially prevent, or at least minimise, the possibility of negative peer review experience. Set within the context of a pre-registration nursing programme, within a Higher Education institution, student nurses (n=25), created a peer review/self-assessment feedback form. Its potential cross-discipline, global applicability is reasonably speculated. Purposive sampling, followed by Stratified Random sampling, maximised participant variation. Data collection took place on 34 occasions, utilising focus group discussions using Nominal Group Technique, a practical task which was video recorded for mediating artefact purposes, and individual interviews. Analysis was concept and theme driven. The study found that participants desired a new feedback form that specifically asks the evaluator to judge human qualities, such as 'compassion' and 'kindness', in addition to the skills and knowledge criteria that any peer review or self-assessment form used currently had incorporated. Providing the participants with the opportunity to develop criteria, against which performance could be measured, with emphasis being afforded to student inclusivity and resultant shift in power balance from the educator to the learner, embraces the idea of teaching and learning in the 21st Century. Crown Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Indigenous health program evaluation design and methods in Australia: a systematic review of the evidence.

PubMed

Lokuge, Kamalini; Thurber, Katherine; Calabria, Bianca; Davis, Meg; McMahon, Kathryn; Sartor, Lauren; Lovett, Raymond; Guthrie, Jill; Banks, Emily

2017-10-01

Indigenous Australians experience a disproportionately higher burden of disease compared to non-Indigenous Australians. High-quality evaluation of Indigenous health programs is required to inform health and health services improvement. We aimed to quantify methodological and other characteristics of Australian Indigenous health program evaluations published in the peer-reviewed literature. Systematic review of peer-reviewed literature (November 2009-2014) on Indigenous health program evaluation. We identified 118 papers describing evaluations of 109 interventions; 72.0% were university/research institution-led. 82.2% of evaluations included a quantitative component; 49.2% utilised quantitative data only and 33.1% used both quantitative and qualitative data. The most common design was a before/after comparison (30.5%, n=36/118). 7.6% of studies (n=9/118) used an experimental design: six individual-level and three cluster-randomised controlled trials. 56.8% (67/118) reported on service delivery/process outcomes (versus health or health risk factor outcomes) only. Given the number of Indigenous health programs that are implemented, few evaluations overall are published in the peer-reviewed literature and, of these, few use optimal methodologies such as mixed methods and experimental design. Implications for public health: Multiple strategies are required to increase high-quality, accessible evaluation in Indigenous health, including supporting stronger research-policy-practice partnerships and capacity building for evaluation by health services and government. © 2017 The Authors.

Protocol for developing a Database of Zoonotic disease Research in India (DoZooRI).

PubMed

Chatterjee, Pranab; Bhaumik, Soumyadeep; Chauhan, Abhimanyu Singh; Kakkar, Manish

2017-12-10

Zoonotic and emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) represent a public health threat that has been acknowledged only recently although they have been on the rise for the past several decades. On an average, every year since the Second World War, one pathogen has emerged or re-emerged on a global scale. Low/middle-income countries such as India bear a significant burden of zoonotic and EIDs. We propose that the creation of a database of published, peer-reviewed research will open up avenues for evidence-based policymaking for targeted prevention and control of zoonoses. A large-scale systematic mapping of the published peer-reviewed research conducted in India will be undertaken. All published research will be included in the database, without any prejudice for quality screening, to broaden the scope of included studies. Structured search strategies will be developed for priority zoonotic diseases (leptospirosis, rabies, anthrax, brucellosis, cysticercosis, salmonellosis, bovine tuberculosis, Japanese encephalitis and rickettsial infections), and multiple databases will be searched for studies conducted in India. The database will be managed and hosted on a cloud-based platform called Rayyan. Individual studies will be tagged based on key preidentified parameters (disease, study design, study type, location, randomisation status and interventions, host involvement and others, as applicable). The database will incorporate already published studies, obviating the need for additional ethical clearances. The database will be made available online, and in collaboration with multisectoral teams, domains of enquiries will be identified and subsequent research questions will be raised. The database will be queried for these and resulting evidence will be analysed and published in peer-reviewed journals. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

"Echo attributions" and other risks when publishing on novel therapies without peer review.

PubMed

Rosen, G M; Davison, G C

2001-10-01

A special series on Thought Field Therapy in the Journal of Clinical Psychology provides an opportunity for psychologists to learn about techniques and theories outside the mainstream of our field. Unfortunately, by publishing this series of manuscripts without meeting the standards of peer review, the Journal also provides an avenue for the misuse of its good reputation and the improper promotion of untested methods. "Echo attributions" can be made whereby an author attributes the source of his own words to the professional journal in which the text appears. Historical examples illustrate that such misuse of scientific journals and institutions occurs. A formal statement of guidelines is needed to instruct authors on appropriate versus unethical representations of their publications. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Publication Rates of Studies Presented at the International Society of Craniofacial Surgery Congress.

PubMed

Dobson, Hannah; Wall, Steven

2016-11-01

The proportion of presentations achieving publication in a peer-review journal has been suggested to demonstrate the quality of research presented at a conference. No data is available examining the publication rate of research presented at Craniofacial Surgery meetings. The aim of the study was to examine the publication rate of abstracts presented at the International Society of Craniofacial Surgery Biennial Congresses from 2003 to 2011. A search was made of the PubMed database for publication of podium presentations of International Society of Craniofacial Surgery Congresses between 2003 and 2011. Thirty-five percent of podium presentations were published in a peer-reviewed journal. Thirty-one percent of presentations were published within 4 years, and the rate of publication decreased 2 years following presentation.

A suggested outline for writing curriculum development journal articles: the IDCRD format.

PubMed

Reznich, C B; Anderson, W A

2001-01-01

During the past decade, medical school and residency faculty have been active in developing and revising curricula for medical education programs. Many of these curriculum development efforts ultimately are published in peer-reviewed professional journals as articles or abstracts. Unlike research publications, no uniform format currently exists for reporting curriculum development efforts in the peer-reviewed literature. A suggested format for organizing curriculum development manuscripts consists of the introduction, development, curriculum, results, and discussion (IDCRD). Detailed descriptions of each section are discussed herein. The IDCRD manuscript outline is intended to provide useful guidance to medical educators in publishing their curriculum development efforts. Journal editors are encouraged to recognize the importance of providing uniform descriptions of curricula so that readers can benefit from the experience of others and replicate successful curriculum efforts.

From Manuscript to Article: Publishing Educational Technology Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Niederhauser, Dale S.; Wetzel, Keith; Lindstrom, Denise L.

2004-01-01

The publishing process is often challenging for new educational technology scholars. This article provides insights into the publication process to help them understand and to increase the chances that their work will be accepted for publication in high-quality peer-reviewed journals. Suggestions for developing a program of research, a description…

34 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... purposes. (d)(1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data...

34 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... purposes. (d)(1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data...

34 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... purposes. (d)(1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data...

20 CFR 435.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... research data. (1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research...

20 CFR 435.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... research data. (1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research...

20 CFR 435.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... research data. (1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research...

20 CFR 435.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... research data. (1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research...

34 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... purposes. (d)(1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data...

20 CFR 435.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... research data. (1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research...

34 CFR 74.36 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

...” material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include: (A) Trade... study. (ii) Published is defined as either when: (A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed... purposes. (d)(1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data...

Publishing and Perishing: An Academic Literacies Framework for Investigating Research Productivity

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Nygaard, Lynn P.

2017-01-01

The current discourse on research productivity (how much peer-reviewed academic output is published by faculty) is dominated by quantitative research on individual and institutional traits; implicit assumptions are that academic writing is a predominately cognitive activity, and that lack of productivity represents some kind of deficiency.…

Check Sample Abstracts.

PubMed

Alter, David; Grenache, David G; Bosler, David S; Karcher, Raymond E; Nichols, James; Rajadhyaksha, Aparna; Camelo-Piragua, Sandra; Rauch, Carol; Huddleston, Brent J; Frank, Elizabeth L; Sluss, Patrick M; Lewandrowski, Kent; Eichhorn, John H; Hall, Janet E; Rahman, Saud S; McPherson, Richard A; Kiechle, Frederick L; Hammett-Stabler, Catherine; Pierce, Kristin A; Kloehn, Erica A; Thomas, Patricia A; Walts, Ann E; Madan, Rashna; Schlesinger, Kathie; Nawgiri, Ranjana; Bhutani, Manoop; Kanber, Yonca; Abati, Andrea; Atkins, Kristen A; Farrar, Robert; Gopez, Evelyn Valencerina; Jhala, Darshana; Griffin, Sonya; Jhala, Khushboo; Jhala, Nirag; Bentz, Joel S; Emerson, Lyska; Chadwick, Barbara E; Barroeta, Julieta E; Baloch, Zubair W; Collins, Brian T; Middleton, Owen L; Davis, Gregory G; Haden-Pinneri, Kathryn; Chu, Albert Y; Keylock, Joren B; Ramoso, Robert; Thoene, Cynthia A; Stewart, Donna; Pierce, Arand; Barry, Michelle; Aljinovic, Nika; Gardner, David L; Barry, Michelle; Shields, Lisa B E; Arnold, Jack; Stewart, Donna; Martin, Erica L; Rakow, Rex J; Paddock, Christopher; Zaki, Sherif R; Prahlow, Joseph A; Stewart, Donna; Shields, Lisa B E; Rolf, Cristin M; Falzon, Andrew L; Hudacki, Rachel; Mazzella, Fermina M; Bethel, Melissa; Zarrin-Khameh, Neda; Gresik, M Vicky; Gill, Ryan; Karlon, William; Etzell, Joan; Deftos, Michael; Karlon, William J; Etzell, Joan E; Wang, Endi; Lu, Chuanyi M; Manion, Elizabeth; Rosenthal, Nancy; Wang, Endi; Lu, Chuanyi M; Tang, Patrick; Petric, Martin; Schade, Andrew E; Hall, Geraldine S; Oethinger, Margret; Hall, Geraldine; Picton, Avis R; Hoang, Linda; Imperial, Miguel Ranoa; Kibsey, Pamela; Waites, Ken; Duffy, Lynn; Hall, Geraldine S; Salangsang, Jo-Anne M; Bravo, Lulette Tricia C; Oethinger, Margaret D; Veras, Emanuela; Silva, Elvia; Vicens, Jimena; Silva, Elvio; Keylock, Joren; Hempel, James; Rushing, Elizabeth; Posligua, Lorena E; Deavers, Michael T; Nash, Jason W; Basturk, Olca; Perle, Mary Ann; Greco, Alba; Lee, Peng; Maru, Dipen; Weydert, Jamie Allen; Stevens, Todd M; Brownlee, Noel A; Kemper, April E; Williams, H James; Oliverio, Brock J; Al-Agha, Osama M; Eskue, Kyle L; Newlands, Shawn D; Eltorky, Mahmoud A; Puri, Puja K; Royer, Michael C; Rush, Walter L; Tavora, Fabio; Galvin, Jeffrey R; Franks, Teri J; Carter, James Elliot; Kahn, Andrea Graciela; Lozada Muñoz, Luis R; Houghton, Dan; Land, Kevin J; Nester, Theresa; Gildea, Jacob; Lefkowitz, Jerry; Lacount, Rachel A; Thompson, Hannis W; Refaai, Majed A; Quillen, Karen; Lopez, Ana Ortega; Goldfinger, Dennis; Muram, Talia; Thompson, Hannis

2009-02-01

The following abstracts are compiled from Check Sample exercises published in 2008. These peer-reviewed case studies assist laboratory professionals with continuing medical education and are developed in the areas of clinical chemistry, cytopathology, forensic pathology, hematology, microbiology, surgical pathology, and transfusion medicine. Abstracts for all exercises published in the program will appear annually in AJCP.

The Scientific Library Presents “How to Get Published in a Research Journal” on May 16 | Poster

Cancer.gov

When aiming to publish a scientific work, every writer should consider the following questions: - Do you know the best way to structure a scientific paper? - Have you identified the most appropriate journal? - Do you understand the peer-review process?

A protocol of a cross-sectional study evaluating an online tool for early career peer reviewers assessing reports of randomised controlled trials.

PubMed

Chauvin, Anthony; Moher, David; Altman, Doug; Schriger, David L; Alam, Sabina; Hopewell, Sally; Shanahan, Daniel R; Recchioni, Alessandro; Ravaud, Philippe; Boutron, Isabelle

2017-09-15

Systematic reviews evaluating the impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review for biomedical publications highlighted that interventions were limited and have little impact. This study aims to compare the accuracy of early career peer reviewers who use an innovative online tool to the usual peer reviewer process in evaluating the completeness of reporting and switched primary outcomes in completed reports. This is a cross-sectional study of individual two-arm parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in the BioMed Central series medical journals, BMJ , BMJ Open and Annals of Emergency Medicine and indexed with the publication type 'Randomised Controlled Trial'. First, we will develop an online tool and training module based (a) on the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010 checklist and the Explanation and Elaboration document that would be dedicated to junior peer reviewers for assessing the completeness of reporting of key items and (b) the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Outcome Monitoring Project process used to identify switched outcomes in completed reports of the primary results of RCTs when initially submitted. Then, we will compare the performance of early career peer reviewers who use the online tool to the usual peer review process in identifying inadequate reporting and switched outcomes in completed reports of RCTs at initial journal submission. The primary outcome will be the mean number of items accurately classified per manuscript. The secondary outcomes will be the mean number of items accurately classified per manuscript for the CONSORT items and the sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratio to detect the item as adequately reported and to identify a switch in outcomes. We aim to include 120 RCTs and 120 early career peer reviewers. The research protocol was approved by the ethics committee of the INSERM Institutional Review Board (21 January 2016). The study is based on voluntary participation and informed written consent. NCT03119376. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

How to run a successful Journal

PubMed Central

Jawaid, Shaukat Ali; Jawaid, Masood

2017-01-01

Publishing and successfully running a good quality peer reviewed biomedical scientific journal is not an easy task. Some of the pre-requisites include a competent experienced editor supported by a team. Long term sustainability of a journal will depend on good quality manuscripts, active editorial board, good quality of reviewers, workable business model to ensure financial support, increased visibility which will ensure increased submissions, indexation in various important databases, online availability and easy to use website. This manuscript outlines the logistics and technical issues which need to be resolved before starting a new journal and ensuring sustainability of a good quality peer reviewed journal. PMID:29492089

Peer Review and Publication of Research Protocols and Proposals: A Role for Open Access Journals

PubMed Central

2004-01-01

Peer-review and publication of research protocols offer several advantages to all parties involved. Among these are the following opportunities for authors: external expert opinion on the methods, demonstration to funding agencies of prior expert review of the protocol, proof of priority of ideas and methods, and solicitation of potential collaborators. We think that review and publication of protocols is an important role for Open Access journals. Because of their electronic form, openness for readers, and author-pays business model, they are better suited than traditional journals to ensure the sustainability and quality of protocol reviews and publications. In this editorial, we describe the workflow for investigators in eHealth research, from protocol submission to a funding agency, to protocol review and (optionally) publication at JMIR, to registration of trials at the International eHealth Study Registry (IESR), and to publication of the report. One innovation at JMIR is that protocol peer reviewers will be paid a honorarium, which will be drawn partly from a new submission fee for protocol reviews. Separating the article processing fee into a submission and a publishing fee will allow authors to opt for “peer-review only” (without subsequent publication) at reduced costs, if they wish to await a funding decision or for other reasons decide not to make the protocol public. PMID:15471763

Peer-review and publication of research protocols and proposals: a role for open access journals.

PubMed

Eysenbach, Gunther

2004-09-30

Peer-review and publication of research protocols offer several advantages to all parties involved. Among these are the following opportunities for authors: external expert opinion on the methods, demonstration to funding agencies of prior expert review of the protocol, proof of priority of ideas and methods, and solicitation of potential collaborators. We think that review and publication of protocols is an important role for Open Access journals. Because of their electronic form, openness for readers, and author-pays business model, they are better suited than traditional journals to ensure the sustainability and quality of protocol reviews and publications. In this editorial, we describe the workflow for investigators in eHealth research, from protocol submission to a funding agency, to protocol review and (optionally) publication at JMIR, to registration of trials at the International eHealth Study Registry (IESR), and to publication of the report. One innovation at JMIR is that protocol peer reviewers will be paid a honorarium, which will be drawn partly from a new submission fee for protocol reviews. Separating the article processing fee into a submission and a publishing fee will allow authors to opt for "peer-review only" (without subsequent publication) at reduced costs, if they wish to await a funding decision or for other reasons decide not to make the protocol public.

The impact of peer review on paediatric forensic reports.

PubMed

Kariyawasam, Uditha

2016-10-01

To retrospectively evaluate the common grammar and spelling errors of the medico-legal reports written by the doctors at the Victorian Forensic Paediatric Medical Service (VFPMS) in both Royal Children's Hospital (RCH) and Monash Medical Centre. The reports were evaluated at two points in time; before and after peer review. The aim of the study was to ascertain whether peer review improved the grammar and spelling in VFPMS medico-legal reports. Draft VFPMS reports are sent to the VFPMS medical director for peer review. The current study sampled 50 reports that were sent consecutively to Dr. Anne Smith from 1st of May 2015. The 50 corresponding final reports were then retrieved from the VFPMS database. The 50 pairs of draft and final reports were scored using a 50-point scoring system. The scores of the draft reports were compared to the scores of the final report to assess if there was a change in quality as measured using an explicit criteria audit of report structure, simple grammar, jargon use and spelling. The audit did not include evaluation of the validity of forensic opinions. The overall scores were statistically analysed using descriptive statistics and a paired T-test. The scores of the reports improved by 2.24% when the final reports were compared to the draft reports (p < 0.001). The peer-review process resulted in a significantly higher quality of medico-legal reports. The report writing and peer-review process could be assisted by an abbreviated version of the checklist used for the audit. Crown Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Reporting and publishing guidelines: article 12 in Integrating and coordinating efforts in COPD guideline development. An official ATS/ERS workshop report.

PubMed

Wilson, Kevin C; Irwin, Richard S; File, Thomas M; Schünemann, Holger J; Guyatt, Gordon H; Rabe, Klaus F

2012-12-01

Professional societies, like many other organizations around the world, have recognized the need to use rigorous processes to ensure that health care recommendations are informed by the best available research evidence. This is the twelfth of a series of 14 articles that were prepared to advise guideline developers in respiratory and other diseases. This article discusses the reporting and publishing of guidelines. The authors formulated and discussed the following questions on the reporting and publishing of guidelines. (1) What should be reported in guidelines? (2) How should guidelines be written? (3) How should the bottom-line message be conveyed? (4) How should guidelines be packaged? (5) Where should guidelines be published? (6) Who benefits from the publication of guidelines? (7) What information should be vetted by the editor(s)? (8) How should guidelines be peer reviewed? We conducted a review of the literature, looking for systematic reviews and methodological research that addressed these questions, but we did not conduct a full systematic review. Our conclusions are based on the available evidence from the published literature and logical arguments from experienced guideline developers. There is little empirical evidence that addresses the reporting and publishing of guidelines. A standard format for reporting guidelines is desirable to ensure that guidelines are comprehensive and that all of the information necessary to judge their quality is presented. In addition, guidelines should contain concise evidence-based recommendations. To facilitate the use of guidelines by consumers, it is preferable to publish them in journals that serve the target audience and to package them in multiple ways. Editors and peer reviewers should ensure that reporting standards have been met, potential conflicts of interest have been adequately addressed and made public, and that the recommendations address important clinical questions.

A short guide to peer-reviewed, MEDLINE-indexed complementary and alternative medicine journals.

PubMed

Morgan, Sherry; Littman, Lynn; Palmer, Christina; Singh, Gurneet; LaRiccia, Patrick J

2012-01-01

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) comprises a multitude of disciplines, for example, acupuncture, ayurvedic medicine, biofeedback, herbal medicine, and homeopathic medicine. While research on CAM interventions has increased and the CAM literature has proliferated since the mid-1990s, a number of our colleagues have expressed difficulties in deciding where to publish CAM articles. In response, we created a short guide to peer-reviewed MEDLINE-indexed journals that publish CAM articles. We examined numerous English-language sources to identify titles that met our criteria, whether specific to or overlapping CAM. A few of the resources in which we found the journal titles that we included are Alternative Medicine Foundation, American Holistic Nurses Association, CINAHL/Nursing Database, Journal Citation Reports database, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Research Council for Complementary Medicine. We organized the 69 selected titles for easy use by creating 2 user-friendly tables, one listing titles in alphabetical order and one listing them in topical categories. A few examples of the topical categories are Acupuncture, CAM (general), Chinese Medicine, Herbal/Plant/Phytotherapy, Neuroscience/Psychology, Nursing/Clinical Care. Our study is the first to list general CAM journals, specialty CAM journals, and overlapping mainstream journals that are peer reviewed, in English, and indexed in MEDLINE. Our goal was to assist both authors seeking publication and mainstream journal editors who receive an overabundance of publishable articles but must recommend that authors seek publication elsewhere due to space and priority issues. Publishing in journals indexed by and included in MEDLINE (or PubMed) ensures that citations to articles will be found easily. Copyright © 2012 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

A framework for improving resident research participation and scholarly output.

PubMed

Manring, M M; Panzo, Julia A; Mayerson, Joel L

2014-01-01

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires that "faculty should encourage and support residents in scholarly activities." There are no guidelines, however, to illustrate how this should be done, and only a small number of published reports offer examples of successful efforts to spur resident research. We sought to improve our residents' participation in scholarly activities. We describe a multifaceted program to quickly build resident scholarship at an orthopaedic department. Large academic medical center in the Midwestern United States. An experienced medical editor was recruited to assist faculty and mentor residents in coordinating research projects and to direct publishing activity. Additional publishing requirements were added to the resident curriculum beyond those already required by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Residents were required to select a faculty research mentor to guide all research projects toward a manuscript suitable for submission to a peer-reviewed journal. Activities were monitored by the editor and the resident coordinator. Over 4 years, total department peer-reviewed publications increased from 33 to 163 annually. Despite a decrease in resident complement, the number of peer-reviewed publications with a resident author increased from 6 in 2009 to 53 in 2012. The addition of an experienced medical editor, changes in program requirements, and an increased commitment to promotion of resident research across the faculty led to a dramatic increase in resident publications. Our changes may be a model for other programs that have the financial resources and faculty commitment necessary to achieve a rapid turnaround. Copyright © 2014 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Extracurricular scientific production among medical students has increased in the past decade.

PubMed

Andersen, Sofie Bech; Østergaard, Lauge; Fosbøl, Philip Loldrup; Fosbøl, Emil Loldrup

2015-09-01

Undergraduate research among medical students is essential in the education of future physicians and scientists. This study aimed to evaluate the scientific yield of extracurricular undergraduate research among medical students. Medical students at the University of Copenhagen who completed an extracurricular research year between January 2004 and June 2013 were evaluated through a manual search in PubMed MEDLINE. The primary focus was the number of peer-reviewed, published articles. Of the 363 included students, 3.1% did their research in 2004-2005 compared with 46.5% in 2012-2013. After three years, 70.4% of the students had published a peer-reviewed article, and of all the 363 students, 36.5%, had published as a first author. In total, 87.7% had a medical specialty as their research area versus a surgical specialty. Most students were involved in cardiology (14.1%). Cardiology was also associated with the greatest scientific yield with a median number of 0.8 publications per year after the students concluded their undergraduate research period. Three or more years after concluding their undergraduate research, 32.8% of the students had continued with research in the context of a PhD programme. Overall, the number of medical students who engaged in extracurricular research followed an increasing trend, and more than two-thirds of these students published a peer-reviewed paper within three years. Cardiology was the most popular specialty and also the specialty with the greatest scientific yield. A third of the undergraduate research students continued doing research in the context of a PhD programme.

Do continuing medical education articles foster shared decision making?

PubMed

Labrecque, Michel; Lafortune, Valérie; Lajeunesse, Judith; Lambert-Perrault, Anne-Marie; Manrique, Hermes; Blais, Johanne; Légaré, France

2010-01-01

Defined as reviews of clinical aspects of a specific health problem published in peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed medical journals, offered without charge, continuing medical education (CME) articles form a key strategy for translating knowledge into practice. This study assessed CME articles for mention of evidence-based information on benefits and harms of available treatment and/or preventive options that are deemed essential for shared decision making (SDM) to occur in clinical practice. Articles were selected from 5 medical journals that publish CME articles and are provided free of charge to primary-care physicians of the Province of Quebec, Canada. Two individuals independently scored each article with the use of a 10-item checklist based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. In case of discrepancy, the item score was established by team consensus. Scores were added to produce a total article score ranging from 0 (no item present) to 10 (all items present). Thirty articles (6 articles per journal) were selected. Total article scores ranged from 1 to 9, with a mean (+/- SD) of 3.1 +/- 2.0 (95% confidence interval 2.8-4.3). Health conditions and treatment options were the items most frequently discussed in the articles; next came treatment benefits. Possible harms, the use of the same denominators for benefits and harms, and methods to facilitate the communication of benefits and harms to patients were almost never described. No significant differences between journals were observed. The CME articles evaluated did not include the evidence-based information necessary to foster SDM in clinical practice. Peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed medical journals should require CME articles to include this type of information.

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.

A Review of the Effects of Self-Monitoring on Reading Performance of Students with Disabilities

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Joseph, Laurice M.; Eveleigh, Elisha L.

2011-01-01

The purpose of this review was to synthesize the effects of self-monitoring methods on reading achievement for students with disabilities. Studies examining the self-monitoring of reading behaviors that were published in peer-reviewed journals from 1987 to 2008 were synthesized with regard to types of participants, settings, research designs,…

Comparison of the Predictive Validity and Consistency among Preference Assessment Procedures: A Review of the Literature

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kang, Soyeon; O'Reilly, Mark; Lancioni, Giulio; Falcomata, Terry S.; Sigafoos, Jeff; Xu, Ziwei

2013-01-01

We reviewed 14 experimental studies comparing different preference assessments for individuals with developmental disabilities that were published in peer-reviewed journals between 1985 and 2012. Studies were summarized based on the following six variables: (a) the number of participants, (b) the type of disability, (c) the number and type of…

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…

A Systematic Review of the Relationship between High School Dropout and Substance Use

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Townsend, Loraine; Flisher, Alan J.; King, Gary

2007-01-01

A systematic review of peer-reviewed, empirical literature published between 1990 and 2006 was undertaken to determine whether existing research could provide evidence, and a deeper understanding of the relationship between dropping out of high school and the use of substances such as tobacco, alcohol, cannabis/marijuana and other illicit drugs.…

Cues and Concerns by Patients in Medical Consultations: A Literature Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Zimmermann, Christa; Del Piccolo, Lidia; Finset, Arnstein

2007-01-01

The aim of the current article is to review the peer-reviewed research literature on cues and concerns published between 1975 and 2006. To be included, articles had to report observational studies based on patient-physician consultations and report findings on patient expressions of cues and/or concerns. Quantitative and qualitative studies from…

Literature and Practice: A Critical Review of MOOCs

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Chiappe-Laverde, Andres; Hine, Nicolas; Martínez-Silva, Jose Andres

2015-01-01

This article focuses on a review of both literature and practical experiences concerning MOOCs. The literature analyzed was published in peer-reviewed journals between 2007 and 2013. 268 items were selected for this study, of which 100 were analyzed in detail. The issues raised by this analysis were used as the criteria for the analysis of 10…

Barriers to undergraduate peer-physical examination of the lower limb in the health sciences and strategies to improve inclusion: a review.

PubMed

Hendry, Gordon James

2013-10-01

Peer-physical examination is a widely adopted and an integral component of the undergraduate curriculum for many health science programs. Unwillingness or perceived inability to participate in peer-physical examination classes may have a negative impact upon students' abilities to competently conduct physical examinations of patients in future as registered health professionals. A literature review on the perceptions and attitudes of peer-physical examination of the lower limb amongst medical and health science students was conducted to identify potential barriers to participation, and to review strategies to improve participation in classes designed to develop clinical examination skills. A pragmatic search strategy of the literature from PubMed and Google Scholar published prior to June 2012 yielded 23 relevant articles. All articles were concerned with the views of medical students' education and there were no articles explicitly addressing the role of peer-physical examination in health science disciplines. Several ethical issues were identified including feelings of coercion, embarrassment, and perceptions of a lack of consideration for cultural and religious beliefs. The available evidence suggests that barriers to participation may be overcome by implementing standard protocols concerned with obtaining informed written consent, adequate choice of peer-examiner, changing facilities and garment advice, and possible alternative learning methods.

Peer review at the Health Information and Libraries Journal.

PubMed

Grant, Maria J

2014-12-01

At its best, peer review can mean receiving constructive feedback to help you make the most of your writing. At the Health Information and Libraries Journal, we strive to make the peer review a positive process for both authors and referees. We adopt a process of double-blind peer review. To receive two reviews in a timely manner, three referees are initially invited for each article submitted. The referees are asked to submit their review noting errors, areas of ambiguity or clarification required before the editor and editorial team consider the manuscript ready for publication. As with most journals, it's unlikely that your writing will be accepted in its original form; a typical outcome will be for a recommendation for major or minor revisions. This is good! It means the editorial team has seen something of likely interest to their readership and wants to help you develop it to a publishable standard. There can be a surprising amount of development and change in a manuscript from original submission through to publication. While you may be experienced in your field, you may not have much experience of writing for publication. As a referee, you get an intriguing insight into the shape of manuscripts in their original form. © 2014 The authors. Health Information and Libraries Journal © 2014 Health Libraries Journal.

Are Peer Reviewers Encouraged to Use Reporting Guidelines? A Survey of 116 Health Research Journals

PubMed Central

Hirst, Allison; Altman, Douglas G.

2012-01-01

Background Pre-publication peer review of manuscripts should enhance the value of research publications to readers who may wish to utilize findings in clinical care or health policy-making. Much published research across all medical specialties is not useful, may be misleading, wasteful and even harmful. Reporting guidelines are tools that in addition to helping authors prepare better manuscripts may help peer reviewers in assessing them. We examined journals' instructions to peer reviewers to see if and how reviewers are encouraged to use them. Methods We surveyed websites of 116 journals from the McMaster list. Main outcomes were 1) identification of online instructions to peer reviewers and 2) presence or absence of key domains within instructions: on journal logistics, reviewer etiquette and addressing manuscript content (11 domains). Findings Only 41/116 journals (35%) provided online instructions. All 41 guided reviewers about the logistics of their review processes, 38 (93%) outlined standards of behaviour expected and 39 (95%) contained instruction about evaluating the manuscript content. There was great variation in explicit instruction for reviewers about how to evaluate manuscript content. Almost half of the online instructions 19/41 (46%) mentioned reporting guidelines usually as general statements suggesting they may be useful or asking whether authors had followed them rather than clear instructions about how to use them. All 19 named CONSORT for reporting randomized trials but there was little mention of CONSORT extensions. PRISMA, QUOROM (forerunner of PRISMA), STARD, STROBE and MOOSE were mentioned by several journals. No other reporting guideline was mentioned by more than two journals. Conclusions Although almost half of instructions mentioned reporting guidelines, their value in improving research publications is not being fully realised. Journals have a responsibility to support peer reviewers. We make several recommendations including wider reference to the EQUATOR Network online library (www.equator-network.org/). PMID:22558178

Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey

PubMed Central

Toews, Ingrid; Glenton, Claire; Lewin, Simon; Berg, Rigmor C.; Noyes, Jane; Booth, Andrew; Marusic, Ana; Malicki, Mario; Munthe-Kaas, Heather M.; Meerpohl, Joerg J.

2016-01-01

Background Qualitative research findings are increasingly used to inform decision-making. Research has indicated that not all quantitative research on the effects of interventions is disseminated or published. The extent to which qualitative researchers also systematically underreport or fail to publish certain types of research findings, and the impact this may have, has received little attention. Methods A survey was delivered online to gather data regarding non-dissemination and dissemination bias in qualitative research. We invited relevant stakeholders through our professional networks, authors of qualitative research identified through a systematic literature search, and further via snowball sampling. Results 1032 people took part in the survey of whom 859 participants identified as researchers, 133 as editors and 682 as peer reviewers. 68.1% of the researchers said that they had conducted at least one qualitative study that they had not published in a peer-reviewed journal. The main reasons for non-dissemination were that a publication was still intended (35.7%), resource constraints (35.4%), and that the authors gave up after the paper was rejected by one or more journals (32.5%). A majority of the editors and peer reviewers “(strongly) agreed” that the main reasons for rejecting a manuscript of a qualitative study were inadequate study quality (59.5%; 68.5%) and inadequate reporting quality (59.1%; 57.5%). Of 800 respondents, 83.1% “(strongly) agreed” that non-dissemination and possible resulting dissemination bias might undermine the willingness of funders to support qualitative research. 72.6% and 71.2%, respectively, “(strongly) agreed” that non-dissemination might lead to inappropriate health policy and health care. Conclusions The proportion of non-dissemination in qualitative research is substantial. Researchers, editors and peer reviewers play an important role in this. Non-dissemination and resulting dissemination bias may impact on health care research, practice and policy. More detailed investigations on patterns and causes of the non-dissemination of qualitative research are needed. PMID:27487090

Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey.

PubMed

Toews, Ingrid; Glenton, Claire; Lewin, Simon; Berg, Rigmor C; Noyes, Jane; Booth, Andrew; Marusic, Ana; Malicki, Mario; Munthe-Kaas, Heather M; Meerpohl, Joerg J

2016-01-01

Qualitative research findings are increasingly used to inform decision-making. Research has indicated that not all quantitative research on the effects of interventions is disseminated or published. The extent to which qualitative researchers also systematically underreport or fail to publish certain types of research findings, and the impact this may have, has received little attention. A survey was delivered online to gather data regarding non-dissemination and dissemination bias in qualitative research. We invited relevant stakeholders through our professional networks, authors of qualitative research identified through a systematic literature search, and further via snowball sampling. 1032 people took part in the survey of whom 859 participants identified as researchers, 133 as editors and 682 as peer reviewers. 68.1% of the researchers said that they had conducted at least one qualitative study that they had not published in a peer-reviewed journal. The main reasons for non-dissemination were that a publication was still intended (35.7%), resource constraints (35.4%), and that the authors gave up after the paper was rejected by one or more journals (32.5%). A majority of the editors and peer reviewers "(strongly) agreed" that the main reasons for rejecting a manuscript of a qualitative study were inadequate study quality (59.5%; 68.5%) and inadequate reporting quality (59.1%; 57.5%). Of 800 respondents, 83.1% "(strongly) agreed" that non-dissemination and possible resulting dissemination bias might undermine the willingness of funders to support qualitative research. 72.6% and 71.2%, respectively, "(strongly) agreed" that non-dissemination might lead to inappropriate health policy and health care. The proportion of non-dissemination in qualitative research is substantial. Researchers, editors and peer reviewers play an important role in this. Non-dissemination and resulting dissemination bias may impact on health care research, practice and policy. More detailed investigations on patterns and causes of the non-dissemination of qualitative research are needed.

Metabolically-Derived Human Ventilation Rates: A Revised Approach Based Upon Oxygen Consumption Rates (External Review Draft)

EPA Science Inventory

EPA has released a draft report entitled, Metabolically-Derived Human Ventilation Rates: A Revised Approach Based Upon Oxygen Consumption Rates, for independent external peer review and public comment. NCEA published the Exposure Factors Handbook in 1997. This comprehens...

On Research Methodology in Applied Linguistics in 2002-2008

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Martynychev, Andrey

2010-01-01

This dissertation examined the status of data-based research in applied linguistics through an analysis of published research studies in nine peer-reviewed applied linguistics journals ("Applied Language Learning, The Canadian Modern Language Review / La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, Current Issues in Language Planning, Dialog on Language…

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...

Cheerleading and Cynicism of Effective Mentoring in Current Empirical Research

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Crutcher, Paul A.; Naseem, Samina

2016-01-01

This article presents the results of a review of current empirical research of effective practices in teacher mentoring. Compiling literature published since 2000 in peer-reviewed journals, we examine arguments for mentoring practices to improve teacher candidate and novice teacher experiences and skills. The emergent "effective"…

The California spotted owl: current state of knowledge

Treesearch

R.J. Gutiérrez; Patricia N. Manley; Peter A. Stine

2017-01-01

This conservation assessment represents a comprehensive review by scientists of the current scientific knowledge about the ecology, habitat use, population dynamics, and current threats to the viability of the California spotted owl (Strix occidentalis). It is based primarily on peer-reviewed published information with an emphasis on new scientific...

Evaluation of Educational Administration: A Decade Review of Research (2001-2010)

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Parylo, Oksana

2012-01-01

This sequential mixed methods study analyzed how program evaluation was used to assess educational administration and examined thematic trends in educational evaluation published over 10 years (2001-2010). First, qualitative content analysis examined the articles in eight peer-reviewed evaluation journals. This analysis revealed that numerous…

Unearthing a Genre

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Fink, Leon

2007-01-01

Much of academic publishing depends on peer review, a literary form that never sees the light of day and only rarely reveals its author's name to the intended reader. While a negative judgment can be upsetting, the serious review, no matter what the ultimate verdict on publication, normally contains probing comments and suggestions that will keep…

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.

Teleconference versus Face-to-Face Scientific Peer Review of Grant Application: Effects on Review Outcomes

PubMed Central

Gallo, Stephen A.; Carpenter, Afton S.; Glisson, Scott R.

2013-01-01

Teleconferencing as a setting for scientific peer review is an attractive option for funding agencies, given the substantial environmental and cost savings. Despite this, there is a paucity of published data validating teleconference-based peer review compared to the face-to-face process. Our aim was to conduct a retrospective analysis of scientific peer review data to investigate whether review setting has an effect on review process and outcome measures. We analyzed reviewer scoring data from a research program that had recently modified the review setting from face-to-face to a teleconference format with minimal changes to the overall review procedures. This analysis included approximately 1600 applications over a 4-year period: two years of face-to-face panel meetings compared to two years of teleconference meetings. The average overall scientific merit scores, score distribution, standard deviations and reviewer inter-rater reliability statistics were measured, as well as reviewer demographics and length of time discussing applications. The data indicate that few differences are evident between face-to-face and teleconference settings with regard to average overall scientific merit score, scoring distribution, standard deviation, reviewer demographics or inter-rater reliability. However, some difference was found in the discussion time. These findings suggest that most review outcome measures are unaffected by review setting, which would support the trend of using teleconference reviews rather than face-to-face meetings. However, further studies are needed to assess any correlations among discussion time, application funding and the productivity of funded research projects. PMID:23951223

Dangerous Predatory Publishers Threaten Medical Research.

PubMed

Beall, Jeffrey

2016-10-01

This article introduces predatory publishers in the context of biomedical sciences research. It describes the characteristics of predatory publishers, including spamming and using fake metrics, and it describes the problems they cause for science and universities. Predatory journals often fail to properly manage peer review, allowing pseudo-science to be published dressed up as authentic science. Academic evaluation is also affected, as some researchers take advantage of the quick, easy, and cheap publishing predatory journals provide. By understanding how predatory publishers operate, researchers can avoid becoming victimized by them.

Publication Outlets for School Psychology Faculty: 2010 to 2015

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hulac, David; Johnson, Natalie D.; Ushijima, Shiho C.; Schneider, Maryia M.

2016-01-01

Many school psychology faculty are required to publish for purposes of retention and promotion. It is useful to have an understanding of the different outlets for scholarly publications. In the present study, we investigated the peer-reviewed journals in which school psychology faculty were published between 2010 and 2015, the number of articles…

The Future of Humanities Labor

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bauerlein, Mark

2008-01-01

"Publish or perish" has long been the formula of academic labor at research universities, but for many humanities professors that imperative has decayed into a simple rule of production. The publish-or-perish model assumed a peer-review process that maintained quality, but more and more it is the bare volume of printed words that counts. When…

Scientific Journal Publishing: Yearly Volume and Open Access Availability

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bjork, Bo-Christer; Roos, Annikki; Lauri, Mari

2009-01-01

Introduction: We estimate the total yearly volume of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles published world-wide as well as the share of these articles available openly on the Web either directly or as copies in e-print repositories. Method: We rely on data from two commercial databases (ISI and Ulrich's Periodicals Directory) supplemented by…

The Use of Online Posts to Identify Barriers to and Facilitators of HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Comparison to a Systematic Review of the Peer-Reviewed Literature.

PubMed

Hannaford, Alisse; Lipshie-Williams, Madeleine; Starrels, Joanna L; Arnsten, Julia H; Rizzuto, Jessica; Cohen, Phillip; Jacobs, Damon; Patel, Viraj V

2018-04-01

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) remains an under-utilized HIV prevention tool among men who have sex with men (MSM). To more comprehensively elucidate barriers and facilitators to PrEP use among US MSM, we conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed published articles and content analysis of online posts about PrEP. We searched peer-reviewed databases (Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar) using MESH headings and keywords about PrEP and/or HIV prevention from 2005 to 2015. We included original studies among MSM in the US that reported on barriers, facilitators, or other factors related to PrEP use. We also searched online posts and associated comments (news articles, opinion pieces, blogs and other social media posts) in diverse venues (Facebook, Slate Outward, Huffington Post Gay Voices, Queerty, and My PrEP Experience blog) to identify posts about PrEP. We used content analysis to identify themes and compare potential differences between the peer-reviewed literature and online posts. We identified 25 peer-reviewed articles and 28 online posts meeting inclusion criteria. We identified 48 unique barriers and 46 facilitators to using PrEP. These 94 themes fit into six overarching categories: (1) access (n = 14), (2) attitudes/beliefs (n = 24), (3) attributes of PrEP (n = 13), (4) behaviors (n = 11), (5) sociodemographic characteristics (n = 8), and (6) social network (n = 6). In all categories, analysis of online posts resulted in identification of a greater number of unique themes. Thirty-eight themes were identified in the online posts that were not identified in the peer-reviewed literature. We identified barriers and facilitators to PrEP in online posts that were not identified in a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature. By incorporating data both from a systematic review of peer-reviewed articles and from online posts, we have identified salient and novel information about barriers to and facilitators of PrEP use. Traditional research approaches may not comprehensively capture current factors important for designing and implementing PrEP related interventions.

Grey literature in meta-analyses.

PubMed

Conn, Vicki S; Valentine, Jeffrey C; Cooper, Harris M; Rantz, Marilyn J

2003-01-01

In meta-analysis, researchers combine the results of individual studies to arrive at cumulative conclusions. Meta-analysts sometimes include "grey literature" in their evidential base, which includes unpublished studies and studies published outside widely available journals. Because grey literature is a source of data that might not employ peer review, critics have questioned the validity of its data and the results of meta-analyses that include it. To examine evidence regarding whether grey literature should be included in meta-analyses and strategies to manage grey literature in quantitative synthesis. This article reviews evidence on whether the results of studies published in peer-reviewed journals are representative of results from broader samplings of research on a topic as a rationale for inclusion of grey literature. Strategies to enhance access to grey literature are addressed. The most consistent and robust difference between published and grey literature is that published research is more likely to contain results that are statistically significant. Effect size estimates of published research are about one-third larger than those of unpublished studies. Unfunded and small sample studies are less likely to be published. Yet, importantly, methodological rigor does not differ between published and grey literature. Meta-analyses that exclude grey literature likely (a) over-represent studies with statistically significant findings, (b) inflate effect size estimates, and (c) provide less precise effect size estimates than meta-analyses including grey literature. Meta-analyses should include grey literature to fully reflect the existing evidential base and should assess the impact of methodological variations through moderator analysis.

What Is the Best Strategy "Evidence-Based Practice" to Teach Literacy Skills for Students with Multiple Disabilities? A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Almalki, Nabil

2016-01-01

A systematic review of literature was carried out on peer-reviewed journals published from 2000 to 2015 to help in determining the best strategy of evidence-based practice that can be applied in teaching literacy skills among students with multiple disabilities. A total of 12 studies were reviewed, some of which included science and mathematics…

Enhance Your Career by Writing Your Own Books as Supplemental Materials: How to Produce Them and How to Use Them in Class

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Lichter-Heath, Laurie; Whittenbury, Beth K.

2014-01-01

Although self-publishing designed to enhance student understanding is important to promote learning objectives and can contribute to the field of knowledge, self-publishing without peer review is generally not acceptable for promotion and tenure purposes. However, there is a growing trend that recognizes the use of self-published items to help…

A Bibliometric Analysis of Highly Cited and High Impact Occupational Therapy Publications by American Authors.

PubMed

Gutman, Sharon A; Brown, Ted; Ho, Yuh-Shan

2017-07-01

A bibliometric analysis was completed of peer-reviewed literature from 1991-2015, written by American occupational therapists, to examine US high impact scholarship with "occupational therapy" and "occupational therapist(s)" used as keywords to search journal articles' publication title, abstract, author details, and keywords. Results included 1,889 journal articles from 1991-2015 published by American occupational therapists as first or corresponding author. Sixty-nine articles attained a TotalCitation 2015 ≥ 50 and 151 attained a Citation 2015 ≥ 5 indicating that they were the most highly cited literature produced in this period. Although the majority (58%) of this literature was published in occupational therapy-specific journals, 41% was published in interdisciplinary journals. Results illustrate that the volume of highly cited American occupational therapy peer-reviewed literature has grown over the last two decades. There is need for the profession to strategize methods to enhance the publication metrics of occupational therapy-specific journals to reduce the loss of high quality publications to external periodicals.

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

The UK National Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Resources and Outcomes Project--a feasibility study of large-scale clinical service peer review.

PubMed

Roberts, Christopher M; Buckingham, Rhona J; Stone, Robert A; Lowe, Derek; Pearson, Michael G

2010-10-01

Service provision and clinical outcomes for patients admitted with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease remain unacceptably variable despite guidelines and performance feedback of national audit, data. This study aims to assess the impact of mutual peer review on service improvement. The initial phase of this study was to assess the feasibility and determine the practicalities of delivering such a peer review programme on a large scale. All UK acute hospitals were invited to participate in a reciprocal peer review programme administered by a central team from three UK health organizations. Hospitals with the most resources were paired with those with the least (as defined in a baseline survey) and pairs randomized on a 3:2 basis into intervention or control groups. A number of key quality indicators were derived to measure service levels at the beginning and end of the study. Peer review teams included clinicians and managers from acute and primary care organizations and when possible a patient representative. Visits were focussed on four key areas of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease service. Teams were to agree service improvements and submit plans signed off by participants. Monthly change diaries were to be used to record progress towards agreed goals. A total of 100 hospitals participated in the programme. Overall, 52 of 54 peer review visits took place within a 4-week time frame and all units submitted service improvement plans within an agreed time frame. Secondary care representatives participated in all visits, primary care in 30 but patients in only 17. The mean number of diaries returned was 2, but 94% of units returned initial and final versions. It is possible to deliver successful large-scale mutual peer review using a limited but focussed programme. Participation of patients and use of change diaries requires further evaluation. © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

[Impact of quality measurement, transparency and peer review on in-hospital mortality - retrospective before-after study with 63 hospitals].

PubMed

Nimptsch, Ulrike; Peschke, Dirk; Mansky, Thomas

2016-10-01

In 2008 the 'Initiative Qualitätsmedizin' (initiative for quality in medical care, IQM) was established as a voluntary non-profit association of hospital providers of all kinds of ownership. Currently, about 350 hospitals from Germany and Switzerland participate in IQM. Member hospitals are committed to a quality strategy based on measuring outcome indicators using administrative data, peer review procedures to improve medical quality, and transparency by public reporting. This study aims to investigate whether voluntary implementation of this approach is associated with improvements in medical outcome. Within a retrospective before-after study 63 hospitals, which started to participate in IQM between 2009 and 2011, were monitored. In-hospital mortality in these hospitals was studied for 14 selected inpatient services in comparison to the German national average. The analyses examine whether in-hospital mortality declined after participation of the studied hospitals in IQM, independently of secular trends or deviations in case mix when compared to the national average, and whether such findings were associated with initial hospital performance or peer review procedures. Declining in-hospital mortality was observed in hospitals with initially subpar performance. These declines were statistically significant for treatment of myocardial infarction, heart failure, pneumonia, and septicemia. Similar, but statistically non-significant trends were observed for nine further treatments. Following peer-review procedures significant declines in in-hospital mortality were observed for treatments of myocardial infarction, heart failure, and pneumonia. Mortality declines after peer reviews regarding stroke, hip fracture and colorectal resection were not significant, and after peer reviews regarding mechanically ventilated patients no changes were observed. The results point to a positive impact of the quality approach applied by IQM on clinical outcomes. A more targeted selection of hospitals to be peer-reviewed might further enhance the impact of this approach. Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier GmbH.

A summary of the vocabulary research with students who are deaf or hard of hearing.

PubMed

Luckner, John L; Cooke, Christine

2010-01-01

Vocabulary is essential for communicating, reading, thinking, and learning. In comparison to typical hearing peers, students who are deaf or hard of hearing demonstrate vocabulary knowledge that is quantitatively reduced. The authors review and summarize research studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 1967 and 2008 focusing on vocabulary and students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Forty-one studies are examined. A summary of each study is presented in a table, and potential educational implications are described. The authors note the paucity of research to guide instruction and provide suggestions for future research.

On the Need for Quantitative Bias Analysis in the Peer-Review Process.

PubMed

Fox, Matthew P; Lash, Timothy L

2017-05-15

Peer review is central to the process through which epidemiologists generate evidence to inform public health and medical interventions. Reviewers thereby act as critical gatekeepers to high-quality research. They are asked to carefully consider the validity of the proposed work or research findings by paying careful attention to the methodology and critiquing the importance of the insight gained. However, although many have noted problems with the peer-review system for both manuscripts and grant submissions, few solutions have been proposed to improve the process. Quantitative bias analysis encompasses all methods used to quantify the impact of systematic error on estimates of effect in epidemiologic research. Reviewers who insist that quantitative bias analysis be incorporated into the design, conduct, presentation, and interpretation of epidemiologic research could substantially strengthen the process. In the present commentary, we demonstrate how quantitative bias analysis can be used by investigators and authors, reviewers, funding agencies, and editors. By utilizing quantitative bias analysis in the peer-review process, editors can potentially avoid unnecessary rejections, identify key areas for improvement, and improve discussion sections by shifting from speculation on the impact of sources of error to quantification of the impact those sources of bias may have had. © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Bridging knowledge, policies and practices across the ageing and disability fields: a protocol for a scoping review to inform the development of a taxonomy.

PubMed

Nalder, Emily Joan; Putnam, Michelle; Salvador-Carulla, Luis; Spindel, Andria; Batliwalla, Zinnia; Lenton, Erica

2017-10-25

Bridging is a term used to describe activities, or tasks, used to promote collaboration and knowledge exchange across fields. This paper reports the protocol for a scoping review which aims to identify and characterise peer reviewed evidence describing bridging activities, between the ageing and disability fields. The purpose is to clarify the concepts underpinning bridging to inform the development of a taxonomy, and identify research strengths and gaps. A scoping review will be conducted. We will search Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, PsycInfo, Sociological Abstracts and the Cochrane Library, to identify peer reviewed publications (reviews, experimental, observational, qualitative designs and expert commentaries) describing bridging activities. Grey literature, and articles not published in English will be excluded. Two investigators will independently complete article selection and data abstraction to minimise bias. A data extraction form will be iteratively developed and information from each publication will be extracted: (1) bibliographic, (2) methodological, (3) demographic, and (4) bridging information. Qualitative content analysis will be used to describe key concepts related to bridging. To our knowledge, this will be the first scoping review to describe bridging of ageing and disability knowledge, services and policies. The findings will inform the development of a taxonomy to define models of bridging that can be implemented and further evaluated to enable integrated care and improve systems and services for those ageing with disability. Ethics is not required because this is a scoping review of published literature. Findings will be disseminated through stakeholder meetings, conference presentations and peer reviewed publication. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Pushing Traditional Publishing Boundaries in the Journal of Astronomy & Earth Science Education JAESE

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Slater, T. F.

2017-12-01

Responding to the community's need for an archival journal to document program evaluation and educational impact of programs and innovations, the Journal of Astronomy & Earth Science Education (JAESE.org) is a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal designed to serve the discipline-based astronomy, planetary, and geosciences education research community. JAESE's first issue was published on December 31, 2014 and has published four volumes and seven issues since that time. By far, the median article topic has been focused on planetarium education research, while there have only been a few articles on conventional solid-Earth geosciences education research. Although there is not yet an even distribution of topics across the field, there is a relatively even distribution among author demographics. Authors include a range of both junior and senior members of the field. There have been significantly more female authors than male authors. Submissions are distributed as blind-copies to two or three peer reviewers with authors' names and identifying information redacted from the manuscript. The average time to complete the first round of peer-review reviewers is 6.2-weeks. There have been too few manuscripts to reliably publish a "percentage acceptance rate." Taken together, JAESE's guiding Editorial Advisory Board judges this to be a successful first few years. In a purposeful effort to make JAESE authors' scholarly works as widely accessible as possible, JAESE adopted an open-access business model. JAESE articles are available to read free-of-charge over the Internet, delivered as PDFs. To date, the most common way articles are downloaded by readers is through Google Scholar. Instead of charging readers and libraries recurring subscription fees, JAESE charges authors a nominal submission fee and a small open-access fee, averaging about $700 USD. These charges are far lower than the traditional page charges and gold-package open-access fees typically charged to authors or their institutions by typical scientific journals, making JAESE an attractive publishing venue for many scholars to make their work as widely read as possible. Author guidelines and Reviewer Applications are available at http://www.jaese.org

Decoupling the scholarly journal

PubMed Central

Priem, Jason; Hemminger, Bradley M.

2011-01-01

Although many observers have advocated the reform of the scholarly publishing system, improvements to functions like peer review have been adopted sluggishly. We argue that this is due to the tight coupling of the journal system: the system's essential functions of archiving, registration, dissemination, and certification are bundled together and siloed into tens of thousands of individual journals. This tight coupling makes it difficult to change any one aspect of the system, choking out innovation. We suggest that the solution is the “decoupled journal (DcJ).” In this system, the functions are unbundled and performed as services, able to compete for patronage and evolve in response to the market. For instance, a scholar might deposit an article in her institutional repository, have it copyedited and typeset by one company, indexed for search by several others, self-marketed over her own social networks, and peer reviewed by one or more stamping agencies that connect her paper to external reviewers. The DcJ brings publishing out of its current seventeenth-century paradigm, and creates a Web-like environment of loosely joined pieces—a marketplace of tools that, like the Web, evolves quickly in response to new technologies and users' needs. Importantly, this system is able to evolve from the current one, requiring only the continued development of bolt-on services external to the journal, particularly for peer review. PMID:22493574

2015 Relaunch as Open Access Pediatric Neurology Briefs.

PubMed

Millichap, John J; Millichap, J Gordon

2015-01-01

Pediatric Neurology Briefs (PNB) has been published monthly since 1987 as a continuing education service designed to expedite and facilitate review of current medical literature concerning pediatric neurology. In 2015, PNB is relaunched as an open access, peer-reviewed, journal with an expanded editorial board. PNB has a new website and content management system capable of organizing peer-review and providing improved indexing, DOI assignment, and online full-text article view. Digitization of back issues, archiving, and inclusion in PubMed are future goals. The new online open access PNB aims to reach more physicians, researchers, and other healthcare providers with highlights of the latest advances in pediatric neurology and commentaries by specialists in the field.

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.

An Annotated Bibliography: Using Theories of Self-Regulation to Understand How Adults Learn in Various Contexts

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Artino, Anthony R., Jr.

2007-01-01

The present report presents an annotated bibliography of peer-reviewed articles that employed theories of self-regulation to understand how adults learn in various contexts. Seven scholarly articles, published between 2000 and 2006, were reviewed and summarized. Articles reviewed include (1) Self-regulation in a Web-based Course: A Case Study (J.…

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.

Bibliographic analysis of scientific research on selected topics in public health nutrition in West Africa: Review of articles published from 1998 to 2008.

PubMed

Aaron, Grant J; Wilson, Shelby E; Brown, Kenneth H

2010-01-01

Few countries in West Africa have the capacity for carrying out advanced training in nutrition and public health. To provide additional information on current regional applied nutrition research capacity and productivity, we analysed peer-reviewed articles on key public health nutrition topics that were published from 1998 to 2008. Using MEDLINE/PubMed, the following terms were searched: 'breast feeding', 'infant nutrition physiology' (comprising complementary feeding and weaning), 'protein energy malnutrition', 'nutrition and infection', 'vitamin A', 'iodine', 'zinc' and 'overweight', each linked with the term 'Western Africa'. In total, 412 unique articles (37±6 articles per year) were identified. Most research focused on infant and young child feeding practices, selected micronutrient deficiencies, and the emerging problem of overweight and obesity. The primary author of nearly half (46%) the publications was located in an institution outside of West Africa. Most articles were published in English (90%), and nearly half of all articles (41%) were cross-sectional studies. Our findings indicate that few peer-reviewed research studies are being published on key public health topics in the West African region, considering the magnitude of nutrition problems in this region. New approaches are needed to encourage and support research capacity and output in West Africa.

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.

A call to improve sampling methodology and reporting in young novice driver research.

PubMed

Scott-Parker, B; Senserrick, T

2017-02-01

Young drivers continue to be over-represented in road crash fatalities despite a multitude of research, communication and intervention. Evidence-based improvement depends to a great extent upon research methodology quality and its reporting, with known limitations in the peer-review process. The aim of the current research was to review the scope of research methodologies applied in 'young driver' and 'teen driver' research and their reporting in four peer-review journals in the field between January 2006 and December 2013. In total, 806 articles were identified and assessed. Reporting omissions included participant gender (11% of papers), response rates (49%), retention rates (39%) and information regarding incentives (44%). Greater breadth and specific improvements in study designs and reporting are thereby identified as a means to further advance the field. 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/.

Cystic fibrosis in young children: A review of disease manifestation, progression, and response to early treatment.

PubMed

VanDevanter, Donald R; Kahle, Jennifer S; O'Sullivan, Amy K; Sikirica, Slaven; Hodgkins, Paul S

2016-03-01

Studies have described illness associated with cystic fibrosis (CF) early in life, but there is no comprehensive accounting of the prevalence and ages of disease manifestation and progression described in individual studies. We searched for peer-reviewed English-language studies of the health of children ≤6years old with CF (published 1990-2014). Structural abnormalities and dysfunction of the digestive and respiratory systems were summarized across relevant studies by system and age group. Primary studies (125 total) from 22 countries described abnormalities, dysfunction, and disease progression in infancy and early childhood. Improved health was consistently observed in association with diagnosis via newborn screening compared with cohorts diagnosed later by symptomatic presentation. The peer-reviewed literature is remarkably consistent: CF-associated growth impairment and airway abnormalities are reported at birth, and disease progression is reported in infancy and throughout childhood. Earlier access to routine CF management is associated with improved subsequent health status. Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Randomised controlled trials of homeopathy in humans: characterising the research journal literature for systematic review.

PubMed

Mathie, Robert T; Hacke, Daniela; Clausen, Jürgen; Nicolai, Ton; Riley, David S; Fisher, Peter

2013-01-01

A new programme of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in homeopathy will distinguish important attributes of RCT records, including: placebo controlled versus other-than-placebo (OTP) controlled; individualised versus non-individualised homeopathy; peer-reviewed (PR) versus non peer-reviewed (NPR) sources. (a) To outline the methods used to search and categorise the RCT literature; (b) to report details of the records retrieved; (c) to compare our retrieved records with those reported in two previous systematic reviews (Linde et al., 1997; Shang et al., 2005). Ten major electronic databases were searched for records published up to the end of 2011. A record was accepted for subsequent systematic review if it was a substantive report of a clinical trial of homeopathic treatment or prophylaxis in humans, randomised and controlled, and published in a PR or NPR journal. 489 records were potentially eligible: 226 were rejected as non-journal, minor or repeat publications, or lacking randomisation and/or controls and/or a 'homeopathic' intervention; 263 (164 PR, 99 NPR) were acceptable for systematic review. The 263 accepted records comprised 217 (137 PR, 80 NPR) placebo-controlled RCTs, of which 121 were included by, 66 were published after, and 30 were potentially eligible for, but not listed by, Linde or Shang. The 137 PR records of placebo-controlled RCTs comprise 41 on individualised homeopathy and 96 on non-individualised homeopathy. Our findings clarify the RCT literature in homeopathy. The 263 accepted journal papers will be the basis for our forthcoming programme of systematic reviews. Copyright © 2012 The Faculty of Homeopathy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

Peer-reviewed and unbiased research, rather than 'sound science', should be used to evaluate endocrine-disrupting chemicals.

PubMed

Trasande, Leonardo; Vandenberg, Laura N; Bourguignon, Jean-Pierre; Myers, John Peterson; Slama, Remy; Vom Saal, Frederick; Zoeller, Robert Thomas

2016-11-01

Evidence increasingly confirms that synthetic chemicals disrupt the endocrine system and contribute to disease and disability across the lifespan. Despite a United Nations Environment Programme/WHO report affirmed by over 100 countries at the Fourth International Conference on Chemicals Management, 'manufactured doubt' continues to be cast as a cloud over rigorous, peer-reviewed and independently funded scientific data. This study describes the sources of doubt and their social costs, and suggested courses of action by policymakers to prevent disease and disability. The problem is largely based on the available data, which are all too limited. Rigorous testing programmes should not simply focus on oestrogen, androgen and thyroid. Tests should have proper statistical power. 'Good laboratory practice' (GLP) hardly represents a proper or even gold standard for laboratory studies of endocrine disruption. Studies should be evaluated with regard to the contamination of negative controls, responsiveness to positive controls and dissection techniques. Flaws in many GLP studies have been identified, yet regulatory agencies rely on these flawed studies. Peer-reviewed and unbiased research, rather than 'sound science', should be used to evaluate endocrine-disrupting chemicals. 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/.

Occupational therapy publications by Australian authors: A bibliometric analysis.

PubMed

Brown, Ted; Gutman, Sharon A; Ho, Yuh-Shan

2018-01-18

Bibliometrics refers to the collection and measurement of publishing and citation data configurations with the goal of quantifying the influence of scholarly activities. Advantages of bibliometrics include the generation of quantitative indicators of impact, productivity, quality and collaboration. Those parties who benefit from the results of bibliometric analysis include researchers, educators, journal publishers, employers and research funding bodies. A bibliometric analysis was completed of peer-reviewed literature from 1991 to 2015, written by Australian occupational therapists (who were able to be identified as such), and indexed in the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-Expanded) or the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) databases. "Occupational therapy" and "occupational therapist(s)" were used as keywords to search journal articles' publication title, abstract, author details, keywords and KeyWord Plus. Between 1991 and 2015, 752 peer-reviewed journal articles were published by Australian occupational therapy authors. On average, those articles had 3.7 authors, 35 references, and were nine pages in length. The top four journals in which Australian occupational therapists published were Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, British Journal of Occupational Therapy, American Journal of Occupational Therapy, and Physical and Occupational Therapy in Paediatrics. The four Australian institutions that generated the largest number of occupational therapy articles were the University of Queensland, University of Sydney, La Trobe University, and Monash University. The top four countries with whom Australian authors collaborated in manuscript writing were the United Kingdom, United States, Canada and Sweden. The volume of occupational therapy peer-reviewed literature has grown over the last two decades. Australian authors have and continue to make significant contributions to the occupational therapy body of knowledge nationally and internationally. © 2018 Occupational Therapy Australia.

Urological research in sub-Saharan Africa: a retrospective cohort study of abstracts presented at the Nigerian Association of Urological Surgeons conferences.

PubMed

Bello, Jibril Oyekunle

2013-11-14

Nigeria is one of the top three countries in Africa in terms of science research output and Nigerian urologists' biomedical research output contributes to this. Each year, urologists in Nigeria gather to present their recent research at the conference of the Nigerian Association of Urological Surgeons (NAUS). These abstracts are not thoroughly vetted as are full length manuscripts published in peer reviewed journals but the information they disseminate may affect clinical practice of attendees. This study aims to describe the characteristics of abstracts presented at the annual conferences of NAUS, the quality of the abstracts as determined by the subsequent publication of full length manuscripts in peer-review indexed journals and the factors that influence such successful publication. Abstracts presented at the 2007 to 2010 NAUS conferences were identified through conference abstracts books. Using a strict search protocol, publication in peer-reviewed journals was determined. The abstracts characteristics were analyzed and their quality judged by subsequent successful publishing of full length manuscripts. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 16.0 software to determine factors predictive of successful publication. Only 75 abstracts were presented at the NAUS 2007 to 2010 conferences; a quarter (24%) of the presented abstracts was subsequently published as full length manuscripts. Median time to publication was 15 months (range 2-40 months). Manuscripts whose result data were analyzed with 'beyond basic' statistics of frequencies and averages were more likely to be published than those with basic or no statistics. Quality of the abstracts and thus subsequent publication success is influenced by the use of 'beyond basic' statistics in analysis of the result data presented. There is a need for improvement in the quality of urological research from Nigeria.

American College of Gastroenterology

MedlinePlus

... nature.com/ctg for more information. ACG Case Reports Journal ACG Case Reports Journal is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal ... to provide an opportunity to share interesting case reports. Edited by GI fellows, it is published bi- ...

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…

The State of the Empirical Research Literature on Stakeholder Involvement in Program Evaluation

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Brandon, Paul R.; Fukunaga, Landry L.

2014-01-01

Evaluators widely agree that stakeholder involvement is a central aspect of effective program evaluation. With the exception of articles on collaborative evaluation approaches, however, a systematic review of the breadth and depth of the literature on stakeholder involvement has not been published. In this study, we examine peer-reviewed empirical…

Addressing the General Education Curriculum in General Education Settings with Students with Severe Disabilities

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Ballard, Sarah L.; Dymond, Stacy K.

2017-01-01

This systematic literature review examined research on stakeholders' beliefs about addressing the general education curriculum in general education classrooms with students with severe disabilities (SD). The investigation was limited to studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 1997 and 2015. Ten articles were identified and then…

A Meta-Analytic Review of School-Based Prevention for Cannabis Use

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Porath-Waller, Amy J.; Beasley, Erin; Beirness, Douglas J.

2010-01-01

This investigation used meta-analytic techniques to evaluate the effectiveness of school-based prevention programming in reducing cannabis use among youth aged 12 to 19. It summarized the results from 15 studies published in peer-reviewed journals since 1999 and identified features that influenced program effectiveness. The results from the set of…

Qualitative Research in Distance Education: An Analysis of Journal Literature 2005-2012

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hauser, Laura

2013-01-01

This review study examines the current research literature in distance education for the years 2005 to 2012. The author found 382 research articles published during that time in four prominent peer-reviewed research journals. The articles were classified and coded as quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods. Further analysis found another…

The Impact of Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids in Reducing Child Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Transler, Catherine; Eilander, Ans; Mitchell, Siobhan; van de Meer, Nelly

2010-01-01

Objectives: To review the impact of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) in reducing ADHD symptoms in children. Methods: Peer-reviewed experimental literature published from 1980 to Mai 2009 is consulted (Psychinfo, Medline, and resulting reference lists). Results: Placebo-controlled studies with ADHD or hyperactive children show no effects on…

Reviewing Instructional Studies Conducted Using Video Modeling to Children with Autism

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Acar, Cimen; Diken, Ibrahim H.

2012-01-01

This study explored 31 instructional research articles written using video modeling to children with autism and published in peer-reviewed journals. The studies in this research have been reached by searching EBSCO, Academic Search Complete, ERIC and other Anadolu University online search engines and using keywords such as "autism, video modeling,…

European urology: quality, impact, online.

PubMed

Catto, James W F; Montorsi, Francesco; Schulman, Claude

2013-10-01

European Urology provides contemporary, cutting-edge urologic research, guidance, and discussion. The journal continues to invite collaborative reviews, to invest in rapid but fair peer review, to seek the best research, and to serve the needs of readers and patients. Copyright © 2013 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

A Decade Revisited and a Step toward the Future: Incremental but Quintessential Progress

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Jin, D.-S.; Kim, M. H.; Park, D.

2014-01-01

This study scrutinizes "Asia Pacific Education Review" ("APER") that has been weathered 13 years of journey from its inception. Numerically, 504 peer-reviewed articles have been published so far, and 0.5 of impact factor has been achieved. This article recollects the history of "APER," overhaul the accomplishment and…

Music therapy in pediatric oncology: a review of the literature.

PubMed

Hilliard, Russell E

2006-01-01

The review of literature provides an overview of both qualitative and quantitative research studies in the area of pediatric oncology music therapy. A total of 12 studies were reviewed. Eight used qualitative and four used quantitative research methods. All articles were published in peer-reviewed journals. This review summarizes the use of music therapy in treating the physical, emotional , social, and developmental needs of children undergoing curative and palliative treatment for cancer.

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.

Southeastern Virtual Institute for Health Equity and Wellness (SE VIEW)

DTIC Science & Technology

2014-07-01

The Obesity Society (September 2012). We intend to publish at least one manuscript but additional analysis for publication in a peer reviewed ... reviewed by an academic as well as a community reviewer and were selected based on the strength of the partnership and the potential for continued...Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism and Diabetes Reviews . He is a member of the American Society for Clinical Investigation, the

An International Call for Democratizing the Academic Journal Culture from a Community of Editors

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Mullen, Carol A.; Pryor, Caroline R.; Browne-Ferrigno, Tricia; Harris, Sandra L.

2013-01-01

In our reflective essay from our multiple perspectives as journal editors, peer reviewers, and published authors, we present ideas about editorial support, democracy, and innovation in the publishing process. As four tenured professors who work in universities in the states of Illinois, Virginia, Texas, and Kentucky, we are a community of editors…

Be Creative, Determined, and Wise: Open Library Publishing and the Global South

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Baker, Matthew

2009-01-01

Libraries throughout the world are increasingly involved in the production of scholarly publications. Much of this has been thanks to the growth of open access (OA) publishing in all its forms, from peer-reviewed "gold" journals to "green" self-archiving, and electronic theses and dissertation (ETD) repositories. As a result, more and more of the…

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...

Methodological Orientations of Articles Appearing in Allied Health's Top Journals: Who Publishes What and Where

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Alderman, Pamela Lea McCloud

2012-01-01

This study examined articles published in the major peer-reviewed journals, either hard copy, web, or both formats, in five allied health professions from January 2006 to December 2010. Research journals used in this study include: "Journal of Dental Hygiene," "Journal of the American Dietetic Association," "Journal of…

Publishing an Article: The Goal for a Graduate Course

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Hilke, Michael

2013-01-01

This essay discusses the effectiveness of a graduate course for physics students, with a course goal to write a publishable article on a modern research topic (graphene). I analyze the tools used to this end, which included Web 2.0 methods, in-class discussions and presentations, as well as extensive peer-review. In addition to producing a…

An Analysis of Factors Predicting Successful Transition From Pancreatology Abstracts to Full Publications.

PubMed

Grunwald, Douglas; Feuerstein, Joseph D; Maier, Irena Maria; Sheth, Sunil G

2017-01-01

Historically, less than half of peer-reviewed abstracts are published. We set out to determine how many pancreas-related abstracts are published within 5 years of presentation at gastroenterology conferences and to determine a model that predicts successful transition from abstract to journal publication. We collected data on study design from all pancreas-related abstracts at the 2010 Digestive Disease Week (DDW), American College of Gastroenterology, and American Pancreatic Association conferences. We then determined whether an abstract was published by October 2015 using a standardized search algorithm. Of 412 abstracts, 39.8% were published. Studies that were of basic science or translational design (P = 0.02, 0.01, respectively); had more listed authors (P = 0.05); employed randomized, prospective, and multicenter methodology (P = 0.02); and were accepted to DDW (P = 0.02) were more likely to be published. After regression, basic/translational studies (P = 0.002, 0.02, respectively) and DDW-accepted abstracts (P = 0.004) continued to predict successful publication. It is not clear why only 40% of the pancreas abstracts from 2010 were published 5 years later. Some abstracts may go unpublished because of methodological flaws that escape detection during abstract peer review. Therefore, physicians should use caution when applying abstract data to their clinical decision making.

Occupational exposure to ethylene oxide--OSHA. Final rule: supplemental statement of reasons.

PubMed

1985-01-02

On June 22, 1984, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) published a final standard for ethylene oxide (EtO) that established a permissible exposure limit of 1 part EtO per million parts of air determined as an 8-hour time--weighted average (TWA) concentration (29 CFR 1910.1047, 49 FR 25734). The standard also includes provisions for methods of exposure control, personal protective equipment, measurement of employee exposure, training, signs, and labels, medical surveillance, regulated areas, emergencies and recordkeeping. The basis for this action was a determination by OSHA, based on human and animal data, that exposure to EtO presents a carcinogenic, mutagenic, genotoxic, reproductive, neurologic, and sensitization hazard to workers. During the rulemaking proceedings that led to the establishment of the 1 ppm TWA, the issue of whether there was a need for a short-term exposure limit (STEL) for workers protection from EtO was raised. OSHA reserved decision on the adoption of a STEL at the conclusion of the rulemaking in order to permit peer review of the available evidence and to review more fully the arguments and pertinent data regarding the STEL issue. Upon receipt of the analyses from most of the peer reviewers, OSHA published a notice to that effect on September 19, 1984 (49 FR 36659) and invited public comment on the pertinent issues addressed in the peer reviews. Based on the entire rulemaking record, including the peer reviews and public comments received since June 22, the Assistant Secretary has determined that adoption of a STEL for EtO is not warranted by the available health evidence, and that a STEL is not reasonably necessary or appropriate for inclusion in the final EtO standard. OSHA has also asked that NIOSH fund certain additional studies related to whether a dose-rate relationship can be established for EtO, and OSHA will review the results of those studies when they become available.

Problems and challenges of predatory journals.

PubMed

Richtig, Georg; Berger, Marina; Lange-Asschenfeldt, Bernhard; Aberer, Werner; Richtig, Erika

2018-05-05

The companies publishing predatory journals are an emerging problem in the area of scientific literature since they only seek to drain money from authors without providing any customer service for the authors or their readership. These predatory journals try to attract new submissions by aggressive email advertising and high acceptance rates. But in turn, they do not provide proper peer-review and therefore the scientific quality of submitted articles is questionable. This is important because more and more people, including patients, are reading such journals and rely on the information they provide. Consequently, predatory journals are a serious threat to the integrity of medical science, and it is crucial for scientists, physicians and even patients to be aware of this problem. In this review, we briefly summarize the history of the open access movement, as well as the rise of and roles played by predatory journals. In conclusion, young and unexperienced authors publishing in a predatory journal must be aware of the damage of their reputation, of inadequate peer-review processes and that unprofitable journals might get closed and all published articles in that journal might be lost. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

How to Write a Scholarly Book Review for Publication in a Peer-Reviewed Journal

PubMed Central

Lee, Alexander D.; Green, Bart N.; Johnson, Claire D.; Nyquist, Julie

2010-01-01

Purpose: To describe and discuss the processes used to write scholarly book reviews for publication in peer-reviewed journals and to provide a recommended strategy and book appraisal worksheet to use when conducting book reviews. Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature was conducted in June 2009 using a combination of controlled vocabulary and truncated text words to capture articles relevant to writing scholarly book reviews for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Results: The initial search identified 839 citations. Following the removal of duplicates and the application of selection criteria, a total of 78 articles were included in this review including narrative commentaries (n = 26), editorials or journal announcements (n = 25), original research (n = 18), and journal correspondence pieces (n = 9). Discussion: Recommendations for planning and writing an objective and quality book review are presented based on the evidence gleaned from the articles reviewed and from the authors' experiences. A worksheet for conducting a book review is provided. Conclusions: The scholarly book review serves many purposes and has the potential to be an influential literary form. The process of publishing a successful scholarly book review requires the reviewer to appreciate the book review publication process and to be aware of the skills and strategies involved in writing a successful review. PMID:20480015

Online peer support interventions for chronic conditions: a scoping review protocol.

PubMed

Munce, Sarah Elizabeth Patricia; Shepherd, John; Perrier, Laure; Allin, Sonya; Sweet, Shane N; Tomasone, Jennifer R; Nelson, Michelle L A; Guilcher, Sara J T; Hossain, Saima; Jaglal, Susan

2017-09-24

Peer support is receiving increasing attention as both an effective and cost-effective intervention method to support the self-management of chronic health conditions. Given that an increasing proportion of Canadians have internet access and the increasing implementation of web-based interventions, online peer support interventions are a promising option to address the burden of chronic diseases. Thus, the specific research question of this scoping review is the following: What is known from the existing literature about the key characteristics of online peer support interventions for adults with chronic conditions? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use the methodological frameworks used by Arksey and O'Malley as well as Levac and colleagues for the current scoping review. To be eligible for inclusion, studies must report on adults (≥18 years of age) with one of the Public Health Agency of Canada chronic conditions or HIV/AIDS. We will limit our review to peer support interventions delivered through online formats. All study designs will be included. Only studies published from 2012 onwards will be included to ensure relevance to the current healthcare context and feasibility. Furthermore, only English language studies will be included. Studies will be identified by searching a variety of databases. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts identified by the literature search for inclusion (ie, level 1 screening), the full text articles (ie, level 2 screening) and then perform data abstraction. Abstracted data will include study characteristics, participant population, key characteristics of the intervention and outcomes collected. This review will identify the key features of online peer support interventions and could assist in the future development of other online peer support programmes so that effective and sustainable programmes can be developed. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

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.

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

Ethics and Community Involvement in Syntheses Concerning American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian Health: A Systematic Review

PubMed Central

Around Him, Deana M.

2014-01-01

Background The objective of the research was to review reporting of ethical concerns and community involvement in peer-reviewed systematic reviews or meta-analyses concerning American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian (AI/AN/NH) health. Methods Text words and indexed vocabulary terms were used to query PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Native Health Database for systematic reviews or meta-analyses concerning AI/AN/NH health published in peer-reviewed journals, followed by a search through reference lists. Each article was abstracted by two independent reviewers; results were discussed until consensus was reached. Results We identified 107 papers published from 1986–2012 that were primarily about AI/AN/NH health or presented findings separately for AI/AN/NH communities. Two reported seeking indigenous reviewer feedback; none reported seeking input from tribes and communities. Approximately 7% reported on institutional review board (IRB) approval of included studies, 5% reported on tribal approval, and 4% referenced the sovereignty of AI/AN tribes. Approximately 63% used evidence from more than one AI/AN/NH population study, and 28% discussed potential benefits to communities from the synthesis research. Conclusions Reporting of ethics and community involvement are not prominent. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses making community-level inferences may pose risks to communities. Future systematic reviews and meta-analyses should consider ethical and participatory dimensions of research. PMID:25089283

Study of Predatory Open Access Nursing Journals.

PubMed

Oermann, Marilyn H; Conklin, Jamie L; Nicoll, Leslie H; Chinn, Peggy L; Ashton, Kathleen S; Edie, Alison H; Amarasekara, Sathya; Budinger, Susan C

2016-11-01

The purpose of this study was to identify predatory journals in nursing, describe their characteristics and editorial standards, and document experiences of authors, peer reviewers, and editors affiliated with these journals. Using two sources that list predatory journals, the research team created a list of nursing journals. In Phase One, the team collected data on characteristics of predatory nursing journals such as types of articles published, article processing charge, and peer review process. In Phase Two, the team surveyed a sample of authors, reviewers, and editors to learn more about their experiences with their affiliated journals. Data from the review of predatory nursing journals were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Written comments were summarized and categorized. There were 140 predatory nursing journals from 75 publishers. Most journals were new, having been inaugurated in the past 1 to 2 years. One important finding was that many journals only published one or two volumes and then either ceased publishing or published fewer issues and articles after the first volume. Journal content varied widely, and some journals published content from dentistry and medicine, as well as nursing. Qualitative findings from the surveys confirmed previously published anecdotal evidence, including authors selecting journals based on spam emails and inability to halt publication of a manuscript, despite authors' requests to do so. Predatory journals exist in nursing and bring with them many of the "red flags" that have been noted in the literature, including lack of transparency about editorial processes and misleading information promoted on websites. The number of journals is high enough to warrant concern in the discipline about erosion of our scholarly literature. Nurses rely on the published literature to provide evidence for high-quality, safe care that promotes optimal patient outcomes. Research published in journals that do not adhere to the highest standards of publishing excellence have the potential to compromise nursing scholarship and is an area of concern. © 2016 Sigma Theta Tau International.

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…

Trends and Patterns in Massive Open Online Courses: Review and Content Analysis of Research on MOOCs (2008-2015)

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Bozkurt, Aras; Akgün-Özbek, Ela; Zawacki-Richter, Olaf

2017-01-01

To fully understand the phenomenon of massive open online courses (MOOCs), it is important to identify and map trends and patterns in research on MOOCs. This study does so by reviewing 362 empirical articles published in peer-reviewed journals from 2008 to 2015. For the purpose of this study, content analysis and discourse analysis were employed…

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

Influence of peer review on the reporting of primary outcome(s) and statistical analyses of randomised trials.

PubMed

Hopewell, Sally; Witt, Claudia M; Linde, Klaus; Icke, Katja; Adedire, Olubusola; Kirtley, Shona; Altman, Douglas G

2018-01-11

Selective reporting of outcomes in clinical trials is a serious problem. We aimed to investigate the influence of the peer review process within biomedical journals on reporting of primary outcome(s) and statistical analyses within reports of randomised trials. Each month, PubMed (May 2014 to April 2015) was searched to identify primary reports of randomised trials published in six high-impact general and 12 high-impact specialty journals. The corresponding author of each trial was invited to complete an online survey asking authors about changes made to their manuscript as part of the peer review process. Our main outcomes were to assess: (1) the nature and extent of changes as part of the peer review process, in relation to reporting of the primary outcome(s) and/or primary statistical analysis; (2) how often authors followed these requests; and (3) whether this was related to specific journal or trial characteristics. Of 893 corresponding authors who were invited to take part in the online survey 258 (29%) responded. The majority of trials were multicentre (n = 191; 74%); median sample size 325 (IQR 138 to 1010). The primary outcome was clearly defined in 92% (n = 238), of which the direction of treatment effect was statistically significant in 49%. The majority responded (1-10 Likert scale) they were satisfied with the overall handling (mean 8.6, SD 1.5) and quality of peer review (mean 8.5, SD 1.5) of their manuscript. Only 3% (n = 8) said that the editor or peer reviewers had asked them to change or clarify the trial's primary outcome. However, 27% (n = 69) reported they were asked to change or clarify the statistical analysis of the primary outcome; most had fulfilled the request, the main motivation being to improve the statistical methods (n = 38; 55%) or avoid rejection (n = 30; 44%). Overall, there was little association between authors being asked to make this change and the type of journal, intervention, significance of the primary outcome, or funding source. Thirty-six percent (n = 94) of authors had been asked to include additional analyses that had not been included in the original manuscript; in 77% (n = 72) these were not pre-specified in the protocol. Twenty-three percent (n = 60) had been asked to modify their overall conclusion, usually (n = 53; 88%) to provide a more cautious conclusion. Overall, most changes, as a result of the peer review process, resulted in improvements to the published manuscript; there was little evidence of a negative impact in terms of post hoc changes of the primary outcome. However, some suggested changes might be considered inappropriate, such as unplanned additional analyses, and should be discouraged.

How Sensor, Signal, and Imaging Informatics May Impact Patient Centered Care and Care Coordination

PubMed Central

Moreau-Gaudry, A.

2015-01-01

Summary Objective This synopsis presents a selection for the IMIA (International Medical Informatics Association) Yearbook 2015 of excellent research in the broad field of Sensor, Signal, and Imaging Informatics published in the year 2014, with a focus on patient centered care coordination. Methods The two section editors performed a systematic initial selection and a double blind peer review process to select a list of candidate best papers in the domain published in 2014, from the PubMed and Web of Science databases. A set of MeSH keywords provided by experts was used. This selection was peer-reviewed by external reviewers. Results The review process highlighted articles illustrating two current trends related to care coordination and patient centered care: the enhanced capacity to predict the evolution of a disease based on patient-specific information can impact care coordination; similarly, better perception of the patient and his treatment could lead to enhanced personalized care with a potential impact on care coordination. Conclusions This review shows the multiplicity of angles from which the question of patient-centered care can be addressed, with consequences on care coordination that will need to be confirmed and demonstrated in the future. PMID:26293856

Factors influencing pharmacist performance: a review of the peer-reviewed literature.

PubMed

Schafheutle, Ellen Ingrid; Seston, Elizabeth Mary; Hassell, Karen

2011-10-01

To undertake a review of peer-reviewed literature to explore factors affecting pharmacists' performance. The following databases were searched: Medline, Embase, Scopus, ISI Web of Knowledge and PsychInfo. Inclusion criteria were: English language only, published between 1990 and 2010 and published in the United Kingdom (UK), United States of America (USA), Canada, Australia, New Zealand or Europe. The search strategy identified 37 items. The review found that there was some evidence to suggest that pharmacists with certain characteristics (e.g. being male, being of ethnic minority origin, working in community pharmacy and having trained overseas) were more likely to experience performance problems. Factors relating to workload and work environment were associated with performance problems, particularly in relation to errors. There was some limited evidence to suggest that experiencing problems with alcohol or drugs could negatively impact on pharmacists' performance. The findings suggest that pharmacist performance may be affected by multiple factors, including personal characteristics such as age, gender, ethnicity, place of primary qualification, factors associated with the workplace and mental and physical health problems. The evidence is not unequivocal and gaps in the literature exist, suggesting that pharmacist performance is an under-researched area. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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.

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.

Publication patterns of oral and poster presentations at the annual meetings of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons.

PubMed

Patel, Akash J; Cherian, Jacob; Fox, Benjamin D; Whitehead, William E; Curry, Daniel J; Luerssen, Thomas G; Jea, Andrew

2011-12-01

National and international meetings, such as the Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) meetings, provide a central location for the gathering and dissemination of research. The purpose of this study was to determine the publication rates of both oral and poster presentations at CNS and AANS meetings in peer-reviewed journals. The authors reviewed all accepted abstracts, presented as either oral or poster presentations, at the CNS and AANS meetings from 2003 to 2005. This information was then used to search PubMed to determine the rate of publication of the abstracts presented at the meetings. Abstracts were considered published if the data presented at the meeting was identical to that in the publication. The overall publication rate was 32.48% (1243 of 3827 abstracts). On average, 41.28% of oral presentations and 29.03% of poster presentations were eventually published. Of those studies eventually published, 98.71% were published within 5 years of presentation at the meeting. Published abstracts were published most frequently in the Journal of Neurosurgery and Neurosurgery. Approximately one-third of all presentations at the annual CNS and AANS meetings will be published in peer-reviewed, MEDLINE-indexed journals. These meetings are excellent forums for neurosurgical practitioners to be exposed to current research. Oral presentations have a significantly higher rate of eventual publication compared with poster presentations, reflecting their higher quality. The Journal of Neurosurgery and Neurosurgery have been the main outlets of neurosurgical research from these meetings.

Community-based interventions to prevent fatal overdose from illegal drugs: a systematic review protocol.

PubMed

Okolie, Chukwudi; Evans, Bridie Angela; John, Ann; Moore, Chris; Russell, Daphne; Snooks, Helen

2015-11-03

Drug overdose is the most frequent cause of death among people who misuse illegal drugs. People who inject these drugs are 14-17 times more likely to die than their non-drug using peers. Various strategies to reduce drug-related deaths have failed to meet target reductions. Research into community-based interventions for preventing drug overdose deaths is promising. This review seeks to identify published studies describing community-based interventions and to evaluate their effectiveness at reducing drug overdose deaths. We will systematically search key electronic databases using a search strategy which groups terms into four facets: (1) Overdose event, (2) Drug classification, (3) Intervention and (4) Setting. Searches will be limited where possible to international literature published in English between 1998 and 2014. Data will be extracted by two independent reviewers using a predefined table adapted from the Cochrane Collaboration handbook. The quality of included studies will be evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. We will conduct a meta-analysis for variables which can be compared across studies, using statistical methods to control for heterogeneity where appropriate. Where clinical or statistical heterogeneity prevents a valid numerical synthesis, we will employ a narrative synthesis to describe community-based interventions, their delivery and use and how effectively they prevent fatal overdoses. We will publish findings from this systematic review in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and present results at national and international conferences. It will be disseminated electronically and in print. PROSPERO CRD42015017833. 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/

Incidence of neonatal necrotising enterocolitis in high-income countries: a systematic review.

PubMed

Battersby, Cheryl; Santhalingam, Tharsika; Costeloe, Kate; Modi, Neena

2018-03-01

To conduct a systematic review of neonatal necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) rates in high-income countries published in peer-reviewed journals. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed databases for observational studies published in peer-reviewed journals. We selected studies reporting national, regional or multicentre rates of NEC in 34 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Two investigators independently screened studies against predetermined criteria. For included studies, we extracted country, year of publication in peer-reviewed journal, study time period, study population inclusion and exclusion criteria, case definition, gestation or birth weight-specific NEC and mortality rates. Of the 1888 references identified, 120 full manuscripts were reviewed, 33 studies met inclusion criteria, 14 studies with the most recent data from 12 countries were included in the final analysis. We identified an almost fourfold difference, from 2% to 7%, in the rate of NEC among babies born <32 weeks' gestation and an almost fivefold difference, from 5% to 22%, among those with a birth weight <1000 g but few studies covered the entire at-risk population. The most commonly applied definition was Bell's stage ≥2, which was used in seven studies. Other definitions included Bell's stage 1-3, definitions from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, International Classification for Diseases and combinations of clinical and radiological signs as specified by study authors. The reasons for international variation in NEC incidence are an important area for future research. Reliable inferences require clarity in defining population coverage and consistency in the case definition applied. PROSPERO INTERNATIONAL PROSPECTIVE REGISTER OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42015030046. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Value and usability of unpublished data sources for systematic reviews and network meta-analyses.

PubMed

Halfpenny, Nicholas James Anthony; Quigley, Joan Mary; Thompson, Juliette Catherine; Scott, David Alexander

2016-12-01

Peer-reviewed publications and conference proceedings are the mainstay of data sources for systematic reviews and network meta-analyses (NMA), but access to informative unpublished data is now becoming commonplace. To explore the usefulness of three types of 'grey' literature-clinical trials registries, clinical study reports and data from regulatory authorities-we conducted four case studies. The reporting of outcome data in peer-reviewed publications, the clinical trials registries and the clinical study reports for two clinical trials-one in melanoma, one in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA)-was examined. In addition, we assessed the value of including unpublished data from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in evidence syntheses of hepatitis C virus (HCV) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), respectively. For the clinical trials in melanoma and JIA, we identified outcome parameters on ClinicalTrials.gov additional to those reported in the peer-reviewed publications: subgroup data and additional efficacy end points/extended follow-up, respectively. The clinical study report also provided results for several subgroups unavailable elsewhere. For HCV and COPD, additional outcome data were obtained from the EMA European Public Assessment Report (EPAR) and the FDA, respectively, including data on subgroups and mortality. We conclude that data from these grey literature sources have the potential to influence results of systematic reviews and NMAs, and may thus have implications for healthcare decisions. However, it is important to consider carefully the availability, reliability and consequent usability of these data sources in systematic reviews and NMAs. 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/.

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.

Should copyright be transferred before a manuscript is accepted?

PubMed

Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A

2017-10-01

Academic journals that undergo a process of academic scrutiny often pass a stage of peer review and subsequent editorial approval. In a process that can take weeks or months (in some cases, even years), an author aims to satisfy the requirements of peer reviewer and editorial scrutiny that would merit publication of their work. It is customary to, in traditional, non-open access journals, to then sign over copyright to the publisher, upon which the publisher then issues a proof, and the manuscript is then published. Even though it is obvious that an author would not submit to a journal with the objective of having it rejected, the issue of the timing of copyright transfer is one which does not appear to have been discussed in the literature, possibly because the order of transfer, i.e., after acceptance of a paper for publication, seems naturally logical. With the modernization of online submission systems, the transfer of copyright tends to occur online, after acceptance. However, on occasion, some journals request the transfer of copyright before peer review and editorial processing occurs, i.e., upon the act of submission. This letter examines three cases of Springer Nature plant science journals that demand the transfer of copyright to the journal's society upon submission, in direct violation of their instructions for authors. Authors have no right to challenge this discrepancy, nor can they complete submission in accordance with the instructions for authors because they are forced to submit copyright upon submission. Not only does transfer of copyright at such an early stage of the publishing process constitute a waste of authors' time-a precious commodity in a cut-throat field of science-in the three cases indicated in this paper, they may constitute a violation of authors' rights. The ethics of this request by the journals and publisher need to be debated.

A new chapter in environmental sensing: The Open-Source Published Environmental Sensing (OPENS) laboratory

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Selker, J. S.; Roques, C.; Higgins, C. W.; Good, S. P.; Hut, R.; Selker, A.

2015-12-01

The confluence of 3-Dimensional printing, low-cost solid-state-sensors, low-cost, low-power digital controllers (e.g., Arduinos); and open-source publishing (e.g., Github) is poised to transform environmental sensing. The Open-Source Published Environmental Sensing (OPENS) laboratory has launched and is available for all to use. OPENS combines cutting edge technologies and makes them available to the global environmental sensing community. OPENS includes a Maker lab space where people may collaborate in person or virtually via on-line forum for the publication and discussion of environmental sensing technology (Corvallis, Oregon, USA, please feel free to request a free reservation for space and equipment use). The physical lab houses a test-bed for sensors, as well as a complete classical machine shop, 3-D printers, electronics development benches, and workstations for code development. OPENS will provide a web-based formal publishing framework wherein global students and scientists can peer-review publish (with DOI) novel and evolutionary advancements in environmental sensor systems. This curated and peer-reviewed digital collection will include complete sets of "printable" parts and operating computer code for sensing systems. The physical lab will include all of the machines required to produce these sensing systems. These tools can be addressed in person or virtually, creating a truly global venue for advancement in monitoring earth's environment and agricultural systems. In this talk we will present an example of the process of design and publication the design and data from the OPENS-Permeameter. The publication includes 3-D printing code, Arduino (or other control/logging platform) operational code; sample data sets, and a full discussion of the design set in the scientific context of previous related devices. Editors for the peer-review process are currently sought - contact John.Selker@Oregonstate.edu or Clement.Roques@Oregonstate.edu.

Why articles are retracted: a retrospective cross-sectional study of retraction notices at BioMed Central

PubMed Central

2016-01-01

Objectives To assess why articles are retracted from BioMed Central journals, whether retraction notices adhered to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, and are becoming more frequent as a proportion of published articles. Design/setting Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 134 retractions from January 2000 to December 2015. Results 134 retraction notices were published during this timeframe. Although they account for 0.07% of all articles published (190 514 excluding supplements, corrections, retractions and commissioned content), the rate of retraction is rising. COPE guidelines on retraction were adhered to in that an explicit reason for each retraction was given. However, some notices did not document who retracted the article (eight articles, 6%) and others were unclear whether the underlying cause was honest error or misconduct (15 articles, 11%). The largest proportion of notices was issued by the authors (47 articles, 35%). The majority of retractions were due to some form of misconduct (102 articles, 76%), that is, compromised peer review (44 articles, 33%), plagiarism (22 articles, 16%) and data falsification/fabrication (10 articles, 7%). Honest error accounted for 17 retractions (13%) of which 10 articles (7%) were published in error. The median number of days from publication to retraction was 337.5 days. Conclusions The most common reason to retract was compromised peer review. However, the majority of these cases date to March 2015 and appear to be the result of a systematic attempt to manipulate peer review across several publishers. Retractions due to plagiarism account for the second largest category and may be reduced by screening manuscripts before publication although this is not guaranteed. Retractions due to problems with the data may be reduced by appropriate data sharing and deposition before publication. Adopting a checklist (linked to COPE guidelines) and templates for various classes of retraction notices would increase transparency of retraction notices in future. PMID:27881524

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.

Targeting strategies of mHealth interventions for maternal health in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol

PubMed Central

Abejirinde, Ibukun-Oluwa Omolade; Dieleman, Marjolein; Bardají, Azucena; Broerse, Jacqueline E W; Van Belle, Sara

2018-01-01

Introduction Recently, there has been a steady increase in mobile health (mHealth) interventions aimed at improving maternal health of women in low-income and middle-income countries. While there is evidence indicating that these interventions contribute to improvements in maternal health outcomes, other studies indicate inconclusive results. This uncertainty has raised additional questions, one of which pertains to the role of targeting strategies in implementing mHealth interventions and the focus on pregnant women and health workers as target groups. This review aims to assess who is targeted in different mHealth interventions and the importance of targeting strategies in maternal mHealth interventions. Methods and analysis We will search for peer-reviewed, English-language literature published between 1999 and July 2017 in PubMed, Web of Knowledge (Science Direct, EMBASE) and Cochrane Central Registers of Controlled Trials. The study scope is defined by the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes framework: P, community members with maternal or reproductive needs; I, electronic health or mHealth programmes geared at improving maternal or reproductive health; C, other non-electronic health or mHealth-based interventions; O, maternal health measures including family planning, antenatal care attendance, health facility delivery and postnatal care attendance. Ethics and dissemination This study is a review of already published or publicly available data and needs no ethical approval. Review results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at international conferences. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017072280. PMID:29478019

Why articles are retracted: a retrospective cross-sectional study of retraction notices at BioMed Central.

PubMed

Moylan, Elizabeth C; Kowalczuk, Maria K

2016-11-23

To assess why articles are retracted from BioMed Central journals, whether retraction notices adhered to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, and are becoming more frequent as a proportion of published articles. Retrospective cross-sectional analysis of 134 retractions from January 2000 to December 2015. 134 retraction notices were published during this timeframe. Although they account for 0.07% of all articles published (190 514 excluding supplements, corrections, retractions and commissioned content), the rate of retraction is rising. COPE guidelines on retraction were adhered to in that an explicit reason for each retraction was given. However, some notices did not document who retracted the article (eight articles, 6%) and others were unclear whether the underlying cause was honest error or misconduct (15 articles, 11%). The largest proportion of notices was issued by the authors (47 articles, 35%). The majority of retractions were due to some form of misconduct (102 articles, 76%), that is, compromised peer review (44 articles, 33%), plagiarism (22 articles, 16%) and data falsification/fabrication (10 articles, 7%). Honest error accounted for 17 retractions (13%) of which 10 articles (7%) were published in error. The median number of days from publication to retraction was 337.5 days. The most common reason to retract was compromised peer review. However, the majority of these cases date to March 2015 and appear to be the result of a systematic attempt to manipulate peer review across several publishers. Retractions due to plagiarism account for the second largest category and may be reduced by screening manuscripts before publication although this is not guaranteed. Retractions due to problems with the data may be reduced by appropriate data sharing and deposition before publication. Adopting a checklist (linked to COPE guidelines) and templates for various classes of retraction notices would increase transparency of retraction notices 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/.

Making the First Cut: An Analysis of Academic Medicine Editors' Reasons for Not Sending Manuscripts Out for External Peer Review.

PubMed

Meyer, Holly S; Durning, Steven J; Sklar, David P; Maggio, Lauren A

2018-03-01

Manuscripts submitted to Academic Medicine (AM) undergo an internal editor review to determine whether they will be sent for external peer review. Increasingly, manuscripts are rejected at this early stage. This study seeks to inform scholars about common reasons for internal editor review rejections, increase transparency of the process, and provide suggestions for improving submissions. A mixed-methods approach was used to retrospectively analyze editors' free-text comments. Descriptive content analysis was performed of editors' comments for 369 manuscripts submitted between December 2014 and December 2015, and rejected prior to external peer review from AM. Comments were analyzed, categorized, and counted for explicit reasons for rejection. Nine categories of rejection reasons were identified: ineffective study question and/or design (338; 92%); suboptimal data collection process (180; 49%); weak discussion and/or conclusions (139; 37%); unimportant or irrelevant topic to the journal's mission (137; 37%); weak data analysis and/or presentation of results (120; 33%); text difficult to follow, to understand (89; 24%); inadequate or incomplete introduction (67; 18%); other publishing considerations (42; 11%); and issues with scientific conduct (20; 5%). Manuscripts had, on average, three or more reasons for rejection. Findings suggest that clear identification of a research question that is addressed by a well-designed study methodology on a topic aligned with the mission of the journal would address many of the problems that lead to rejection through the internal review process. The findings also align with research on external peer review.

75 FR 52958 - Solicitation for Nominations for Members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-30

... on specific topics or methods. A diversity of perspectives is valuable to the work of the USPSTF. To... of research published in peer reviewed literature and in the methods of evidence review; 2... primary health care clinical experience may be selected based on their expertise in methodological issues...

Utilization and Limitations of the American College Health Association's National College Health Assessment Instrument: A Systematic Review

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Rahn, Rhonda N.; Pruitt, Buster; Goodson, Patricia

2016-01-01

Objective: To analyze the literature in which researchers have utilized the National College Health Assessment (NCHA) I or the NCHA II. Participants and Methods: The authors selected peer-reviewed articles published between 2004 and July 2013 utilizing a single search term: National College Health Assessment. Articles were assessed for instrument…

75 FR 44809 - Office of the Secretary Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-07-29

... Management and Budget published the Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review on December 15, 2004... submission of the following public information collection requests (ICR) to the Office of Management and... estimated total burden may be obtained from the RegInfo.gov Web site at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do...

What Research Says about MOOCs--An Explorative Content Analysis

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Zawacki-Richter, Olaf; Bozkurt, Aras; Alturki, Uthman; Aldraiweesh, Ahmed

2018-01-01

Since the first offering of a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) in 2008, the body of literature on this new phenomenon of open learning has grown tremendously. In this regard, this article intends to identify and map patterns in research on MOOCs by reviewing 362 empirical articles published in peer-reviewed journals from 2008 to 2015. For the…

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…

On the Validity of Student Evaluation of Teaching: The State of the Art

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Spooren, Pieter; Brockx, Bert; Mortelmans, Dimitri

2013-01-01

This article provides an extensive overview of the recent literature on student evaluation of teaching (SET) in higher education. The review is based on the SET meta-validation model, drawing upon research reports published in peer-reviewed journals since 2000. Through the lens of validity, we consider both the more traditional research themes in…

RETRACTED: Investigation of plasmonic studies on morphology of deposited silver thin films having different thicknesses by soft computing methodologies-A comparative study

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Zakaria, Rozalina; Noh, Siti Munirah Che; Petković, Dalibor; Shamshirband, Shahaboddin; Penny, Richard

2014-09-01

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). This article has been retracted at the request of the Editor. After a thorough investigation, the Editor has concluded that the acceptance of this article was based upon the positive advice of at least one faked reviewer report. The report was submitted from a fictitious email account which was provided to the journal as a suggested reviewer by the corresponding author during the submission of the paper. This manipulation of the peer-review process represents a clear violation of the fundamentals of peer review, our publishing policies, and publishing ethics standards. Apologies are offered to the readers of the journal that this deception was not detected during the submission process. Section 3 of the article plagiarizes part of the text that appeared in the article published by R. Maity et al in Hydrological Processes 24 (2010) 917-923, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7535. The article also duplicates parts of the articles previously published by the authors in the Journal of the Optical Society of America A 31 (2014) 1023-1030, http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/JOSAA.31.001023, Infrared Physics & Technology 65 (2014) 94-102, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infrared.2014.04.005 and Plasmonics 9 (2014) 1189-1196, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11468-014-9730-3.

Sensor Suits for Human Motion Detection

DTIC Science & Technology

2006-02-18

published (b) Papers published in peer-reviewed journals (1) Shunji Moromugi, Y. Koujina, Seigo Ariki, Akira Okamoto, Takayuki Tanaka, Maria Q...of ISOT2005 (9) Seok-Hwan Kim, Shunji Moromugi and Takakazu Ishimatsu, (2004). "Development of advanced walking assist system employing stiffness...sensor", Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems, Bangkok, Thailand, pp.1638-1641. (10) Shunji Moromugi

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

Filling the gap between biology and computer science

PubMed Central

Aguilar-Ruiz, Jesús S; Moore, Jason H; Ritchie, Marylyn D

2008-01-01

This editorial introduces BioData Mining, a new journal which publishes research articles related to advances in computational methods and techniques for the extraction of useful knowledge from heterogeneous biological data. We outline the aims and scope of the journal, introduce the publishing model and describe the open peer review policy, which fosters interaction within the research community. PMID:18822148

Focus issue: teaching tools and learning opportunities.

PubMed

Gough, Nancy R

2010-04-27

Science Signaling provides authoring experience for students and resources for educators. Students experience the writing and revision process involved in authoring short commentary articles that are published in the Journal Club section. By publishing peer-reviewed teaching materials, Science Signaling provides instructors with feedback that improves their materials and an outlet to share their tips and techniques and digital resources with other teachers.

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.…

Factors influencing publication of scientific articles derived from masters theses in public health.

PubMed

Hollmann, Malen; Borrell, Carme; Garin, Olatz; Fernández, Esteve; Alonso, Jordi

2015-05-01

To evaluate theses of a Masters program in Public Health (MPH), in terms of the students' and theses' characteristics that influence publication of the thesis as a scientific article. Longitudinal study of students who successfully completed the MPH at Universitat Pompeu Fabra and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain) from 2006 to 2010. Participants completed an electronic survey and additional data were gathered from university files. 162 students participated in the study (83 % response rate). 60.5 % had already published an article derived from their thesis at the time of the study or were in process of publishing it. The likelihood of publishing in a peer-reviewed journal was greater among women (aRR = 1.41), among those who had a bachelor's degree in sciences other than health (aRR = 1.40), had completed the MPH on time (aRR = 2.10), had enrolled in a doctoral program after the MPH (aRR = 1.44) or had a masters thesis score of ≥7 (aRR = 1.61). The majority of MPH students published their thesis in a peer-reviewed journal. The strongest predictors of successful publication were related to academic performance.

Methods used in adaptation of health-related guidelines: A systematic survey.

PubMed

Abdul-Khalek, Rima A; Darzi, Andrea J; Godah, Mohammad W; Kilzar, Lama; Lakis, Chantal; Agarwal, Arnav; Abou-Jaoude, Elias; Meerpohl, Joerg J; Wiercioch, Wojtek; Santesso, Nancy; Brax, Hneine; Schünemann, Holger; Akl, Elie A

2017-12-01

Adaptation refers to the systematic approach for considering the endorsement or modification of recommendations produced in one setting for application in another as an alternative to de novo development. To describe and assess the methods used for adapting health-related guidelines published in peer-reviewed journals, and to assess the quality of the resulting adapted guidelines. We searched Medline and Embase up to June 2015. We assessed the method of adaptation, and the quality of included guidelines. Seventy-two papers were eligible. Most adapted guidelines and their source guidelines were published by professional societies (71% and 68% respectively), and in high-income countries (83% and 85% respectively). Of the 57 adapted guidelines that reported any detail about adaptation method, 34 (60%) did not use a published adaptation method. The number (and percentage) of adapted guidelines fulfilling each of the ADAPTE steps ranged between 2 (4%) and 57 (100%). The quality of adapted guidelines was highest for the "scope and purpose" domain and lowest for the "editorial independence" domain (respective mean percentages of the maximum possible scores were 93% and 43%). The mean score for "rigor of development" was 57%. Most adapted guidelines published in peer-reviewed journals do not report using a published adaptation method, and their adaptation quality was variable.

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.

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

Top reviewers for the Journal of Nuclear Materials - 2017

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

2018-01-01

The Journal of Nuclear Materials achieves its scientific excellence through several familiar editorial activities. Manuscripts are submitted by authors describing their research methods and results, a constructive refereeing process is generously provided by peer reviewers, and the many steps and decisions of the editorial process are carried out by the Editors with assistance from the Advisory Editorial Board. With the exception of peer reviewers, the names of the people within these groups are published in the pages of the Journal, thereby providing recognition in the community for their work. However, all of our Journal constituents owe a large debt of gratitude to reviewers. They dedicate time, energy and remarkable depth of expertise to evaluate submitted manuscripts. As a result of their work most manuscripts are substantively improved. We also recognize the fact that many times the underlying research itself is advanced by the recommendations of our reviewers.

A review of peer-assisted learning to deliver interprofessional supplementary image interpretation skills.

PubMed

Bain, P; Wareing, A; Henderson, I

2017-09-01

Peer-assisted learning provides a means through which individuals can learn from one another through a reciprocal process. Radiographic image interpretation skills are fundamental to both diagnostic radiography students and medical students due to their shared role in preliminary evaluation of conventional radiographic images. Medical students on graduation, may not be well prepared to carry out image interpretation, since evidence suggests that they perform less well than radiographers in e.g. Accident and Emergency situations. A review of literature was conducted exploring the application of peer-assisted learning within diagnostic radiography and health education more widely as well as the practice of initial image interpretation. An extensive and systematic search strategy was developed which provided a range of material related to the areas. An overview was obtained of the effectiveness of peer-assisted learning and the issues associated with development of image interpretation skills and a degree of discrepancy was identified between the two cohorts regarding their interpretative competence and confidence. This inconsistency may create an opportunity to apply peer-assisted learning, better preparing both disciplines for the practical application of image interpretation skills. The review identified the lack of a substantial evidence base relating to peer-assisted learning in radiography. Peer-assisted learning is not widely embraced in an interprofessional context. Multiple positive factors of such an intervention are identified which outweigh perceived negative issues. Student teacher and learner may benefit as should the clinical service from enhanced practitioner performance. The findings justify further research to develop the evidence base. Copyright © 2017 The College of Radiographers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Doctoral prepared nurses in Denmark and their scientific production between 1976 and 2005.

PubMed

Bjørn, A; Hundrup, Y A; Wagner, L

2008-06-01

Nursing research in Denmark has evolved over the last 30 years. By 2005, 48 Danish nurses had earned a doctoral degree. The Danish Nurses Organization formalized a strategy for development of nursing research for the period 1999-2002. The strategy was evaluated in 2004. One point in the evaluation was that the nurses' publication of peer-reviewed articles in journals with an Impact Factor did not show in the bibliographic measure used in health sciences. The purpose of this study is to identify the number of Danish nurses holding a doctoral degree by the end of 2005 and to document their scientific production. A descriptive design based on a national register of all nurses in Denmark holding doctoral degrees was used to explore the curricula vitae and publication lists of 38 out of 48 (79%) nurses on the register. Authorship of all 48 graduated nurses was sought in the databases: PubMed and CINAHL. A pattern of growing engagement in publishing peer-reviewed articles was identified among the Danish nurses holding a doctoral degree. Fifty per cent of these doctoral prepared nurses published peer-reviewed papers. The majority apparently pursued a career in health sciences. Nursing as an academic discipline is evolving in Denmark but, with its roots in clinical nursing, scientists may have to be aware of the necessity to prevail as a discipline through scientific production.

Medicolegal Death Scene Investigations After Natural Disaster- and Weather-Related Events: A Review of the Literature

PubMed Central

Rocha, Luciana A.; Fromknecht, Catharine Q.; Redman, Sarah Davis; Brady, Joanne E.; Hodge, Sarah E.; Noe, Rebecca S.

2017-01-01

Background The number of disaster-related deaths recorded by vital statistics departments often differs from that reported by other agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-National Weather Service storm database and the American Red Cross. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has launched an effort to improve disaster-related death scene investigation reporting practices to make data more comparable across jurisdictions, improve accuracy of reporting disaster-related deaths, and enhance identification of risk and protective factors. We conducted a literature review to examine how death scene data are collected and how such data are used to determine disaster relatedness. Methods Two analysts conducted a parallel search using Google and Google Scholar. We reviewed published peer-reviewed articles and unpublished documents including relevant forms, protocols, and worksheets from coroners, medical examiners, and death scene investigators. Results We identified 177 documents: 32 published peer-reviewed articles and 145 other documents (grey literature). Published articles suggested no consistent approach for attributing deaths to a disaster. Researchers generally depended on death certificates to identify disaster-related deaths; several studies also drew on supplemental sources, including medical examiner, coroner, and active surveillance reports. Conclusions These results highlight the critical importance of consistent, accurate data collection during a death investigation. Review of the grey literature found variation in use of death scene data collection tools, indicating the potential for widespread inconsistency in data captured for routine reporting and public health surveillance. Findings from this review will be used to develop guidelines and tools for capturing disaster-related death investigation data. PMID:28845205

The relationship and effects of golf on physical and mental health: a scoping review protocol.

PubMed

Murray, A; Daines, L; Archibald, D; Hawkes, R; Grant, L; Mutrie, N

2016-06-01

Golf is a sport played in 206 countries worldwide by over 50 million people. It is possible that participation in golf, which is a form of physical activity, may be associated with effects on longevity, the cardiovascular, metabolic and musculoskeletal systems, as well as on mental health and well-being. We outline our scoping review protocol to examine the relationships and effects of golf on physical and mental health. Best practice methodological frameworks suggested by Arksey and O'Malley, Levac et al and the Joanna Briggs Institute will serve as our guide, providing clarity and rigour. A scoping review provides a framework to (1) map the key concepts and evidence, (2) summarise and disseminate existing research findings to practitioners and policymakers and (3) identify gaps in the existing research. A three-step search strategy will identify reviews as well as original research, published and grey literature. An initial search will identify suitable search terms, followed by a search using keyword and index terms. Two reviewers will independently screen identified studies for final inclusion. We will map key concepts and evidence, and disseminate existing research findings to practitioners and policymakers through peer-reviewed and non-peer reviewed publications, conferences and in-person communications. We will identify priorities for further study. This method may prove useful to examine the relationships and effects of other sports on health. 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/

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...

7 CFR 550.42 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Regulations of the Department of Agriculture (Continued) AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF...

2 CFR 200.315 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. ...) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under a Federal award that were...

7 CFR 550.42 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Regulations of the Department of Agriculture (Continued) AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF...

7 CFR 550.42 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Regulations of the Department of Agriculture (Continued) AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF...

7 CFR 550.42 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Regulations of the Department of Agriculture (Continued) AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF...

7 CFR 550.42 - Intangible property.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-01-01

... research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This “recorded” material excludes physical... information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study. (ii) Published is defined... Regulations of the Department of Agriculture (Continued) AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF...

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.

In Referees We Trust? Controversies over Grant Peer Review in the Late Twentieth Century

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Baldwin, Melinda

While many accounts of external refereeing assume that it has been a consistent part of science since the seventeenth century, the practice developed far more slowly and haphazardly than many observers realize, and it was not until after the Second World War that ''peer review'' became considered an essential part of scientific publishing or grant-making. This talk will explore refereeing procedures at American grant-giving organizations in the twentieth century, focusing especially on the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health. The creators of the NSF and the NIH put refereeing systems in place at their foundation. However, the form and function of these systems differed from modern ''peer review'' in several important ways. At the NSF the initial purpose of the referee process was to advise the NSF program directors, not to dictate funding decisions. At the NIH, small ''study sections'' devoted to particular subjects made recommendations to the NIH leadership, which rendered final judgments. However, beginning in the 1960s a series of controversies about NIH and NSF grants placed refereeing procedures at these organizations under more intense scrutiny. These debates culminated in six days of Special Oversight Hearings into the NSF's peer review process in the summer of 1975. Following the hearings, both the NSF and NIH reformed their review processes to place more emphasis on referees' opinions about grant proposals, making peer review increasingly responsible for decision-making. These controversies illustrate that refereeing continued to undergo significant changes in form and purpose throughout the twentieth century, and further suggest that both the scientific community and the public placed increased emphasis on the role of the referee during the late twentieth century.

Indigenous Youth Peer-Led Health Promotion in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the United States: A Systematic Review of the Approaches, Study Designs, and Effectiveness.

PubMed

Vujcich, Daniel; Thomas, Jessica; Crawford, Katy; Ward, James

2018-01-01

Youth peer-led interventions have become a popular way of sharing health information with young people and appear well suited to Indigenous community contexts. However, no systematic reviews focusing on Indigenous youth have been published. We conducted a systematic review to understand the range and characteristics of Indigenous youth-led health promotion projects implemented and their effectiveness. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, and ProQuest Social Sciences databases was conducted, supplemented by gray literature searches. Included studies focused on interventions where young Indigenous people delivered health information to age-matched peers. Twenty-four studies were identified for inclusion, based on 20 interventions (9 Australian, 4 Canadian, and 7 from the United States of America). Only one intervention was evaluated using a randomized controlled study design. The majority of evaluations took the form of pre-post studies. Methodological limitations were identified in a majority of studies. Study outcomes included improved knowledge, attitude, and behaviors. Currently, there is limited high quality evidence for the effectiveness of peer-led health interventions with Indigenous young people, and the literature is dominated by Australian-based sexual health interventions. More systematic research investigating the effectiveness of peer-led inventions is required, specifically with Indigenous populations. To improve health outcomes for Indigenous youth, greater knowledge of the mechanisms and context under which peer-delivered health promotion is effective in comparison to other methods of health promotion is needed.

Is it becoming harder to secure reviewers for peer review? A test with data from five ecology journals.

PubMed

Albert, Arianne Y K; Gow, Jennifer L; Cobra, Alison; Vines, Timothy H

2016-01-01

There is concern in the academic publishing community that it is becoming more difficult to secure reviews for peer-reviewed manuscripts, but much of this concern stems from anecdotal and rhetorical evidence. We examined the proportion of review requests that led to a completed review over a 6-year period (2009-2015) in a mid-tier biology journal ( Molecular Ecology ). We also re-analyzed previously published data from four other mid-tier ecology journals ( Functional Ecology , Journal of Ecology , Journal of Animal Ecology , and Journal of Applied Ecology ), looking at the same proportion over the period 2003 to 2010. The data from Molecular Ecology showed no significant decrease through time in the proportion of requests that led to a review (proportion in 2009 = 0.47 (95 % CI = 0.43 to 0.52), proportion in 2015 = 0.44 (95 % CI = 0.40 to 0.48)). This proportion did decrease for three of the other ecology journals (changes in proportions from 2003 to 2010 = -0.10, -0.18, and -0.09), while the proportion for the fourth ( Functional Ecology ) stayed roughly constant (change in proportion = -0.04). Overall, our data suggest that reviewer agreement rates have probably declined slightly but not to the extent suggested by the anecdotal and rhetorical evidence.

Evolution of Scholarly Publishing and Library Services in Astronomy - Impact, Challenges, and Opportunities

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Wesley, Hema; Sheshadri, Geetha

2015-08-01

Science publishing and its procedures have evolved rapidly and incredibly. Technical advances in the production and promotion of science content have dramatically widened the visibility and reach, deepened the impact and intensified the thrust of our journals’ science content. Nevertheless, it is also true that with speed and ease of automation, quality is to be ferociously guarded. Could traditional methods when juxtaposed with the continuous onslaught of newer technologies, in our publishing procedures, be the answer. Are people still the quintessential element in technology?Why do we publish; the phrase “Publish or Perish” has itself, interestingly, evolved in its meaning. How have publishing procedures evolved through the years; what is the impact of these developments; what are the challenges and opportunities for scholarly publishers in this digital age. How do we cope with and preempt the abuse and distortion of internet data, and with unethical practices that threaten to cripple the peer review system, and jeopardize publishing ethics and academic integrity. How can publishers fulfill their responsibility to publish content that is explicitly original.With increasing demand from the astronomical community for e-journals and other e-resources and with the gradual loss of value for printed journals, librarians are developing and maintaining e-libraries and providing access to digital resources, and re-engineering their roles to provide advancing tools for e-pub content.How can we prepare for the future of publishing, or is it already here with the popularity of pre-print servers. How have publishers responded to the Open Access model while being aware that ‘the price of keeping something free comes with a cost’. Will potential authors be confused with identifying traditional peer reviewed content, the predatory journals, the fake reviewers, placing research in institutional repositories, copyright and licenses. Are libraries impacted by these developments in their journal pricing schemes.

Systematic and Open Identification of Researchers and Authors: Focus on Open Researcher and Contributor ID

PubMed Central

Akazhanov, Nurbek A.; Voronov, Alexander A.; Kitas, George D.

2014-01-01

Unique identifiers of researchers and authors can help all stakeholders of scientific communications improve their workflows. There have been several attempts to establish professional networks of scholars and list their scholarly achievements on digital platforms. Some of these platforms such as Google Scholar, Web of Knowledge and PubMed are searched to pick relevant peer reviewers, assess authors' publication history or choose suitable candidates for research and academic projects. However, each of these hubs has its specific applications, limiting the universal use for permanent tagging of researcher profiles. The Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) initiative, launched in 2012, is aimed at registering scholarly contributors and averting the persistent ambiguity of recorded author names. The ORCID registry is growing fast and integrating with other ID-generating platforms, thereby increasing the functionality of the integrated systems. ORCID identifiers are increasingly used for selecting peer reviewers and acknowledging various scholarly contributions (e.g., published articles, reviewer comments, conference presentations). The initiative offers unique opportunities for transparent disclosures of author contributions and competing interests and improving ethical standards of research, editing, and publishing. PMID:25408574

Peer-reviewed public health journals from Arabic-speaking countries: An updated snapshot.

PubMed

Aboul-Enein, Basil H; Bernstein, Joshua; Bowser, Jacquelyn E

2017-02-01

There is a positive association between availability of regional peer-reviewed public health information systems and progressive change in community and population health. The objective of this brief report was to identify public health journals in Arabic-speaking countries actively publishing as of 2016. We conducted an electronic search in several electronic database records for public health journals using a combination of search terms. We excluded journals that focused on human medicine, veterinary medicine, nursing, and other discipline-specific or clinical health professions. We identified twenty-five public health journals for review. Five journals were interrupted or discontinued. Only three journals had a consistent, uninterrupted active publication history of greater than 20 years. Most journals were not in the regional native language. Introduction of regional public health-dedicated journals with in-print and electronic availability and also to be published in region-native languages may require interdisciplinary partnerships. Region-wide public health journals such as the Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal could serve as an ideal model for the establishment of additional local and regional public health journals in Arabic-speaking countries.

Systematic and open identification of researchers and authors: focus on open researcher and contributor ID.

PubMed

Gasparyan, Armen Yuri; Akazhanov, Nurbek A; Voronov, Alexander A; Kitas, George D

2014-11-01

Unique identifiers of researchers and authors can help all stakeholders of scientific communications improve their workflows. There have been several attempts to establish professional networks of scholars and list their scholarly achievements on digital platforms. Some of these platforms such as Google Scholar, Web of Knowledge and PubMed are searched to pick relevant peer reviewers, assess authors' publication history or choose suitable candidates for research and academic projects. However, each of these hubs has its specific applications, limiting the universal use for permanent tagging of researcher profiles. The Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) initiative, launched in 2012, is aimed at registering scholarly contributors and averting the persistent ambiguity of recorded author names. The ORCID registry is growing fast and integrating with other ID-generating platforms, thereby increasing the functionality of the integrated systems. ORCID identifiers are increasingly used for selecting peer reviewers and acknowledging various scholarly contributions (e.g., published articles, reviewer comments, conference presentations). The initiative offers unique opportunities for transparent disclosures of author contributions and competing interests and improving ethical standards of research, editing, and publishing.

Programmatic and teaching initiatives for ethnically diverse nursing students: a literature review.

PubMed

Torregosa, Marivic B; Morin, Karen H

2012-06-01

The purpose of this study was to examine the evidence of programmatic and teaching initiatives implemented by nursing faculty to enhance the academic success rates of ethnically diverse students (EDS). A search of the literature in the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and MEDLINE databases, wherein primary sources about programmatic and teaching initiative to promote academic success among EDS, was conducted. Using specific the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature subject headings and Medical Subject Headings, 230 articles were retrieved from both databases. A total of 22 peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2011 were included in the literature review. We found that evidence on the predominant programmatic and teaching initiatives for EDS academic success was inconclusive. The most common programmatic and teaching initiatives implemented by nursing faculty were peer mentoring, faculty-student mentoring, social networking, academic support, and financial support. Although positive student outcomes were reported about programmatic and teaching initiatives for EDS, the evidence remained inconclusive. Recommendations for policy and future research in this area of nursing education research were provided. Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier B.V.

76 FR 44933 - Determination on Adding Cancer, or a Certain Type of Cancer, to the List of WTC-Related Health...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-27

... scientific and medical evidence, including findings and recommendations of Clinical Centers of Excellence, published in peer- reviewed journals to determine if, based on such evidence, cancer or a certain type of... Scientific and Medical Evidence Related to Cancer for the World Trade Center Health Program.'' The Review can...

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

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”. ...

Surveillance Systems from Public Health Institutions and Scientific Societies for Antimicrobial Resistance and Healthcare-Associated Infections in Europe (SUSPIRE): protocol for a systematic review.

PubMed

Núñez-Núñez, María; Navarro, María Dolores; Gkolia, Panagiota; Babu Rajendran, Nithya; Del Toro, María Dolores; Voss, Andreas; Sharland, Mike; Sifakis, Frangiscos; Tacconelli, Evelina; Rodríguez-Baño, Jesús

2017-03-27

The worldwide spread of antimicrobial resistance is now recognised as a global public health threat. Owing to the geographical heterogeneity, complexity and continuously evolving dynamics of resistant organisms and genes, surveillance is a key tool for understanding, measuring and informing actions in the fight against this problem. To date there is no harmonisation of key indicators or of methodologies used to obtain them. The main objective of this project is to systematically review and analyse the current publicly available surveillance activities on antimicrobial resistance and healthcare-associated infections in Europe. Eligible activities are those endorsed by regional, national or transnational health organisations and scientific societies providing data on a periodic basis. Grey and peer-reviewed literature will be searched with no language restrictions. Three independent reviewers will perform a two-step selection process using a previously piloted, tailored electronic data extraction form. Descriptive summaries and tables of all relevant findings will be performed and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. We did not seek ethical approval for this study because the data to be collected are not linked to individuals. Data will be presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. CRD42016033867. 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/.

Structural violence and marginalisation. The sexual and reproductive health experiences of separated young people on the move. A rapid review with relevance to the European humanitarian crisis.

PubMed

Mason-Jones, A J; Nicholson, P

2018-05-01

To explore the main sexual and reproductive health (SRH) issues for separated young migrants. We conducted a rapid review. The search for articles published between 2000 and June 2017 including peer-reviewed and 'grey' published literature from a range of databases including MEDLINE, AMED, Embase, ASSIA, Scopus, Web of Science and websites of international organisations (Missing Children Alliance, United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), Human Rights Watch, United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and FBX Centre for Health and Human Rights) took place over 4 months. Themes emerging from the included studies and articles were synthesised. We found 44 articles from a range of countries of which 64% were peer-reviewed and 36% were from 'grey' literature. Structural violence and marginalisation were the key analytical themes that emerged and included young people's vulnerability to violence, unmet knowledge and service needs, barriers and stigma and poor SRH outcomes. This is the first known review to summarise the key SRH issues for separated young migrants. As Europe hosts the greatest number of separated young people in recent history, their unique SRH concerns risk being overlooked. Public health practitioners and policy makers are encouraged to challenge the gaps that exist in their services. Copyright © 2018 The Royal Society for Public Health. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Validity of urinary monoamine assay sales under the “spot baseline urinary neurotransmitter testing marketing model”

PubMed Central

Hinz, Marty; Stein, Alvin; Uncini, Thomas

2011-01-01

Spot baseline urinary monoamine assays have been used in medicine for over 50 years as a screening test for monoamine-secreting tumors, such as pheochromocytoma and carcinoid syndrome. In these disease states, when the result of a spot baseline monoamine assay is above the specific value set by the laboratory, it is an indication to obtain a 24-hour urine sample to make a definitive diagnosis. There are no defined applications where spot baseline urinary monoamine assays can be used to diagnose disease or other states directly. No peer-reviewed published original research exists which demonstrates that these assays are valid in the treatment of individual patients in the clinical setting. Since 2001, urinary monoamine assay sales have been promoted for numerous applications under the “spot baseline urinary neurotransmitter testing marketing model”. There is no published peer-reviewed original research that defines the scientific foundation upon which the claims for these assays are made. On the contrary, several articles have been published that discredit various aspects of the model. To fill the void, this manuscript is a comprehensive review of the scientific foundation and claims put forth by laboratories selling urinary monoamine assays under the spot baseline urinary neurotransmitter testing marketing model. PMID:21912487

Publication rates of the abstracts presented at the annual meeting of International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery.

PubMed

Ekşi, Murat Şakir; Özcan-Ekşi, Emel Ece

2018-01-19

Publication of a study is the end point of the process to contribute to the literature and confirm the scientific value of the study. Publication rates of the abstracts presented at the annual meetings of neurosurgery have been studied, previously. However, publication rates of the abstracts presented at the annual meetings of pediatric neurosurgery have not been reported, yet. We evaluated abstracts presented at the 38th annual meeting of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery (ISPN) held in South Korea, 2010. We conducted this cross-sectional study by reviewing the abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the ISPN, 2010. Titles and authors of the abstracts were surveyed using Google Scholar and PubMed/MEDLINE. Time to publication, origin of the study, journal name in which the study has been accepted and published, and type of study has been analyzed for each abstract. The abstract booklet included 235 abstracts, consisted of 128 oral presentations (54%) and 107 electronic posters (46%). Fifty-nine (46%) of the oral presentations were published in a peer-reviewed journal. Laboratory studies were more likely to be published when compared to the clinical studies (72 vs. 39%). Thirty-two (30%) of the electronic posters were published in peer-reviewed journals. Most of the published abstracts were from Asia and Europe. Most of the abstracts were published in Child's Nervous System and Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics. Publication rates of the abstracts presented at annual meeting of the ISPN were comparable to the other similar congresses. Oral presentations were more likely to be published. High publication rates of the abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the ISPN suggested that the meeting had a high scientific value.

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