Trainees in Peer Review: Our Experience

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Lee K,
   2. Bero L

   . What authors, editors and reviewers should do to improve peer review. Nature (2006), http://www.nature.com/nature/peerreview/debate/nature05007.html. Accessed May 13, 2013
2. 2.↵
   1. Bauerlein M,
   2. Gad-el-Hak M,
   3. Grody H,
   4. et al

   . We must stop the avalanche of low-quality research. The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 13, 2010, http://chronicle.com/article/We-Must-Stop-the-Avalanche-of/65890. Accessed May 13, 2013
3. 3.↵
   1. Mainguy G,
   2. Motamedi MR,
   3. Mietchen D

   . Peer review: the newcomers' perspective. PLoS Biol 2005;3:e326

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Proto AV

   . Radiology 2007: reviewing for Radiology. Radiology 2007;244:7–11

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Provenzale JM,
   2. Stanley RJ

   . A systematic guide to reviewing a manuscript. J Nuclear Med Technol 2006;34:92–99
6. 6.↵
   1. Callaham ML,
   2. Knopp RK,
   3. Gallagher EJ

   . Effect of written feedback by editors on quality of reviews: two randomized trials. JAMA 2002;287:2781–83

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Rothwell PM,
   2. Martyn CN

   . Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience: is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? Brain 2000;123 (pt 9):1964–69

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Armstrong JS

   . Peer review for journals: evidence on quality control, fairness, and innovation. Sci Eng Ethics 1997;3:63–84

   CrossRef