enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Peer review - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review

    Peer review in writing is a pivotal component among various peer review mechanisms, often spearheaded by educators and involving student participation, particularly in academic settings. It constitutes a fundamental process in academic and professional writing, serving as a systematic means to ensure the quality, effectiveness, and credibility ...

  3. Scholarly peer review - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholarly_peer_review

    Scholarly peer review or academic peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of having a draft version of a researcher's methods and findings reviewed (usually anonymously) by experts (or "peers") in the same field.

  4. Conflicts of interest in academic publishing - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflicts_of_interest_in...

    The duties of peer review may conflict with social interests or institutional loyalties; to avoid such COIs, reviewers may be excluded if they have some forms of COI, such as having collaborated with the author. [41] Readers of academic papers may spot errors, informally or as part of formal post-publication peer review.

  5. Who's Afraid of Peer Review? - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who's_Afraid_of_Peer_Review?

    There are deep problems with science publishing. But the way to fix this is not to curtail open-access publishing. It is to fix peer review." [24] Eisen pointed out the irony of a subscription-based journal like Science publishing this report when its own peer review has failed so badly before, as in the 2010 publication of the arsenic DNA paper.

  6. Academic publishing - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_publishing

    Peer review is a central concept for most academic publishing; other scholars in a field must find a work sufficiently high in quality for it to merit publication. A secondary benefit of the process is an indirect guard against plagiarism since reviewers are usually familiar with the sources consulted by the author(s).

  7. Sham peer review - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sham_peer_review

    Sham peer review or malicious peer review is a name given to the abuse of a medical peer review process to attack a doctor for personal or other non-medical reasons. [1] The American Medical Association conducted an investigation of medical peer review in 2007 and concluded that while it is easy to allege misconduct and 15% of surveyed physicians indicated that they were aware of peer review ...

  8. Clinical peer review - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_peer_review

    Clinical peer review, also known as medical peer review is the process by which health care professionals, including those in nursing and pharmacy, evaluate each other's clinical performance. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] A discipline-specific process may be referenced accordingly (e.g., physician peer review , nursing peer review ).

  9. Grievance studies affair - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grievance_studies_affair

    Since "[w]e know from long experience that expert peer review offers close to no protection against outright data fraud", Engber asserted that "one could have run this sting on almost any empirical discipline and returned the same result" even if such disciplines' journals were peer-reviewed, [9] echoing Tim Smith-Laing's The Daily Telegraph ...