Bias, peer review, and publishing

1.
Rebecca Abma-Schouten, Joey Gijbels, Wendy Reijmerink, Ingeborg Meijer. Evaluation of research proposals by peer review panels: broader panels for broader assessments? Science and Public Policy. 2023;50(4):619-632. doi:10.1093/scipol/scad009
View Full Reference
1.
Sara Khan, Faraz Eshaghi, Aruba Sohail, et al. A 10 Year Analysis of Gender Distribution in National Institutes of Health Funding for Non-Malignant Hematology. Blood. 2023;142(S1):5113. doi:10.1182/blood-2023-180317
View Full Reference
1.
Eva Barlösius, Laura Paruschke, Axel Philipps. Peer review’s irremediable flaws: Scientists’ perspectives on grant evaluation in Germany. Research Evaluation. 2023;32(4):623-634. doi:10.1093/reseval/rvad032
View Full Reference
1.
Review of peer review: June 2023. https://www.ukri.org/publications/review-of-peer-review/review-of-peer-review-june-2023/. Published 2023.
View Full Reference
1.
Mytien Nguyen, Sarwat I. Chaudhry, Mayur M. Desai, Kafui Dzirasa, Jose E. Cavazos, Dowin Boatright. Gender, Racial, and Ethnic Inequities in Receipt of Multiple National Institutes of Health Research Project Grants. JAMA Network Open. 2023;6(2):e230855. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.0855
View Full Reference
1.
Cory J. Clark, Lee Jussim, Komi Frey, et al. Prosocial motives underlie scientific censorship by scientists: A perspective and research agenda. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2023;120(48):e2301642120. doi:10.1073/pnas.2301642120
View Full Reference
1.
Liv Langfeldt, Ingvild Reymert, Silje Marie Svartefoss. Distrust in grant peer review—reasons and remedies. Science and Public Policy. 2023;51(1):28-41. doi:10.1093/scipol/scad051
View Full Reference
1.
Richard Van Noorden. More than 10,000 research papers were retracted in 2023 — a new record. Nature. 2023;624:479-481. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03974-8.
View Full Reference
1.
Dana Strauss, Sophia Gran-Ruaz, Muna Osman, Monnica T. Williams, Sonya C. Faber. Racism and censorship in the editorial and peer review process. Frontiers in Psychology. 2023;14. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1120938
View Full Reference
1.
Jessie V. Willis, Kelly D. Cobey, Janina Ramos, et al. Limited online training opportunities exist for scholarly peer reviewers. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2023;161:65-73. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.06.023
View Full Reference