The Peer Review Process (aka Peer Reviewology)

Abstract

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Black N , van Rooyan S , Godies F , Smith R , Evans S . 1998. What makes a good reviewer and a good reviewfor a general medical journal? JAMA 280(3):231-233.

Callaham ML , Wears RL , Waeckerle JF . 1998. Effect of attendance at a training session of peer reviewer quality and performance. Ann Emerg Med 32:318-322.

Callaham ML , Knopp RK , Gallagher EJ . 2002. Effect of written feedback by editors on quality of reviews: two randomized trials. JAMA 287(21):2781-2783.

Feurer ID , Becker GJ , Picus D , Ramirez E , Darcy MD , Hicks ME . 1994. Evaluating peer review: pilot testing of a grading instrument. JAMA 272:98-100.

JAMA [entire issue]. 2002. 287(21).

Jefferson T , Alderson P , Wager E , Davidoff F . 2002. Effect of editorial peer review: a systematic review. JAMA 287(21):2784-2786.

Rennie, D . 2002. Editorial: Fourth International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. JAMA 287(21):2759-2759.

Weber EJ , Katz PP , Waeckerle JF , Callaham ML . 2002. Author perception of peer review: impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction. JAMA 287(21):2790-2793.