enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Conflicts of interest in academic publishing - Wikipedia

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

    It also says; "All participants in the peer-review and publication process—not only authors but also peer reviewers, editors, and editorial board members of journals—must consider their conflicts of interest when fulfilling their roles in the process of article review and publication and must disclose all relationships that could be viewed ...

  3. 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 ...

  4. Predatory publishing - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_publishing

    More transparent peer review, such as open peer review and post-publication peer review, has been advocated to combat predatory journals. [ 123 ] [ 124 ] Others have argued instead that the discussion on predatory journals should not be turned "into a debate over the shortcomings of peer review—it is nothing of the sort.

  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. Sternberg peer review controversy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sternberg_peer_review...

    The Sternberg peer review controversy concerns the conflict arising from the publication of an article supporting pseudoscientific intelligent design creationism in a scientific journal, and the subsequent questions of whether proper editorial procedures had been followed and whether it was properly peer reviewed.

  7. Peer review - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review

    Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work . [1] It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.

  8. What we know about Jose Antonio Ibarra, the man who ... - AOL

    www.aol.com/know-jose-antonio-ibarra-man...

    In fact, between 2012 and 2018, undocumented migrants in Texas were less than half as likely to commit violent crimes than those born in the US, according to a widely cited, peer-reviewed study ...

  9. Scholarly peer review - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholarly_peer_review

    Peer review in scientific journals assumes that the article reviewed has been honestly prepared. The process occasionally detects fraud, but is not designed to do so. [204] When peer review fails and a paper is published with fraudulent or otherwise irreproducible data, the paper may be retracted. A 1998 experiment on peer review with a ...