Laura Cruz-Castro, Luis Sanz-Menendez. What should be rewarded? Gender and evaluation criteria for tenure and promotion. Journal of Informetrics. 2021;15(3):101196. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2021.101196
Marissa M. Shams-White, Rolando Barajas, Roxanne E. Jensen, et al. Systems epidemiology and cancer: A review of the National Institutes of Health extramural grant portfolio 2013-2018. PloS One. 2021;16(4):e0250061. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0250061
Michael S. Lauer, Jamie Doyle, Joy Wang, Deepshikha Roychowdhury. Associations of topic-specific peer review outcomes and institute and center award rates with funding disparities at the National Institutes of Health. eLife. 2021;10:e67173. doi:10.7554/eLife.67173
Leonardo Ferreira Fontenelle, Thiago Dias Sarti. Attitudes toward open peer review among stakeholders of a scholar-led journal in Brazil. Transinformação. 2021;33:e200072. doi:10.1590/2318-0889202133e200072
Natalie Parletta. How to respond to difficult or negative peer-reviewer feedback. Nature Index. 2021. https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news/how-to-respond-difficult-negative-peer-reviewer-feedback.
Helen Le Sueur, Arianna Dagliati, Iain Buchan, et al. Pride and prejudice – What can we learn from peer review? Medical Teacher. 2020;42(9):1012-1018. doi:10.1080/0142159X.2020.1774527
Simon Lohse, Martin S. Wasmer, Thomas A. C. Reydon. Integrating Philosophy of Science into Research on Ethical, Legal and Social Issues in the Life Sciences. Perspectives on Science. 2020;28(6):700-736. doi:10.1162/posc_a_00357
Mike Thelwall, Liz Allen, Eleanor-Rose Papas, Zena Nyakoojo, Verena Weigert. Does the use of open, non-anonymous peer review in scholarly publishing introduce bias? Evidence from the F1000Research post-publication open peer review publishing model. Journal of Information Science. 2020;47(6):809-820. doi:10.1177/0165551520938678