Proposing a manuscript peer-review checklist
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND In the Internet-able era, reviewers are faced with an increased number of manuscripts and decreased time to review. In order to maintain the same, if not higher level of quality in the peer-review process, a net gain in productivity is required. Our goal is to present a manuscript peer-review checklist to help reviewers achieve this secondary yet critical task in a more systematic fashion. METHODS To this end, we have compiled, structured and processed information from six reference standards and guidelines as well as directives from 21 peer-reviewed journals and conferences, resulting in a 71 criteria checklist. We ensured that criteria were assessable based on the verification, validation and evaluation paradigm. RESULTS The checklist is presented in the manuscript, along with a description of a review workflow. FINDINGS It is hoped that the checklist will be widely disseminated, and we are looking for feedback on validation and improvements in order to perform a quantitative study on productivity gains using this tool.
منابع مشابه
Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND 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. METHODS 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 ...
متن کاملارزیابی میزان دقت داوران یکی از مجلات علمی پژوهشی فارسی زبان در تشخیص اصلاحات مورد نیاز یک مقاله علمی ارسالی؛ سال 1389
Background and Objectives: Final corrections on a manuscript sent for publication in a scientific journal are suggested by reviewers. So this qualifies the paper with the least errors for publication. The present study aimed to assess the Persian language peer reviewers' comments on a manuscript sent to an Iranian Scientific Journal (journal of Rafsanjan university of medical sciences), 2010....
متن کاملManuscript peer review: a helpful checklist for students and novice referees.
The ability to contribute consistent, fundamentally sound critiques is an essential element of the scientific peer review process and an important professional skill for investigators. Despite its importance, many students and junior scientists do not have an adequate working knowledge of how to effectively critique research manuscripts. Part of the problem, in our view, is that novice referees...
متن کاملStatistical Reviewers Improve Reporting in Biomedical Articles: A Randomized Trial
BACKGROUND Although peer review is widely considered to be the most credible way of selecting manuscripts and improving the quality of accepted papers in scientific journals, there is little evidence to support its use. Our aim was to estimate the effects on manuscript quality of either adding a statistical peer reviewer or suggesting the use of checklists such as CONSORT or STARD to clinical r...
متن کاملSubmitting manuscripts to biomedical journals: common errors and helpful solutions.
This article reviews common, but avoidable, errors that authors may make when submitting to a health care–focused, biomedical journal (eg, chiropractic, medicine, nursing, and physical therapy). As editors, we offer suggestions for improving the quality of manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals, provide suggestions for how to avoid making errors, and recommend effective writing and submis...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- NeuroImage
دوره 39 4 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2008