Bias, peer review, and publishing

Susan Guthrie, Ioana Ghiga, Steven Wooding. What do we know about grant peer review in the health sciences?. F1000Research. 2018;6:1335. doi:10.12688/f1000research.11917.2

Jeffrey Beck, Kathryn Funk, Melissa Harrison, et al. Publishing peer review materials. F1000Research. 2018;7:1655. doi:10.12688/f1000research.16460.1

Stephen Gallo, Lisa Thompson, Karen Schmaling, Scott Glisson. Risk evaluation in peer review of grant applications. Environment Systems and Decisions. 2018;38:216-229. doi:10.1007/s10669-018-9677-6

Robyn Tamblyn, Nadyne Girard, Christina J. Qian, James Hanley. Assessment of potential bias in research grant peer review in Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 2018;190(16):E489-E499. doi:10.1503/cmaj.170901

Delphine R. Boulbes, Tracy Costello, Keith Baggerly, et al. A survey on data reproducibility and the effect of publication process on the ethical reporting of laboratory research. Clinical Cancer Research. 2018;24(14):3447-3455. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0227

Andrew Tomkins, Min Zhang, William D. Heavlin. Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017;114(48):12708-12713. doi:10.1073/pnas.1707323114

Danielle Li. Expertise versus Bias in Evaluation: Evidence from the NIH. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. 2017;9(2):60-92. doi:10.1257/app.20150421

Markus Helmer, Manuel Schottdorf, Andreas Neef, Demian Battaglia. Gender bias in scholarly peer review. eLife. 2017;6:e21718. doi:10.7554/eLife.21718

Björn Hammarfelt. Recognition and reward in the academy: Valuing publication oeuvres in biomedicine, economics and history. Aslib Journal of Information Management. 2017;69(5):607-623. doi:10.1108/AJIM-01-2017-0006

Tony Ross-Hellauer. What is open peer review? A systematic review. F1000Research. 2017;6:588. doi:10.12688/f1000research.11369.2