peer review

James Galipeau, David Moher, Craig Campbell, et al. A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2015;68(3):257-265. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.09.024

Hidde Ploegh. End the wasteful tyranny of reviewer experiments. Nature. 2011;472(7344):391-391. doi:10.1038/472391a

Liv Langfeldt, Svein Kyvik. Researchers as evaluators: tasks, tensions and politics. Higher Education. 2011;62:199-212. doi:10.1007/s10734-010-9382-y

S. N. Goodman, J. Berlin, S. W. Fletcher, R. H. Fletcher. Manuscript quality before and after peer review and editing at Annals of Internal Medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1994;121(1):11-21. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-121-1-199407010-00003

Hendy Abdoul, Christophe Perrey, Philippe Amiel, et al. Peer Review of Grant Applications: Criteria Used and Qualitative Study of Reviewer Practices. PLOS ONE. 7(9):e46054. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0046054

Cecilia A. Sánchez, Collin J. Schwantes, Shannon Ball, et al. Gendered male and high-income country authors dominate publication at a One Health research organization. PLOS ONE. 21(6):e0352401. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0352401

Peter Kolarz. The time has come for big changes to improve research funding. PLOS Biology. 24(4):e3003754. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3003754

Carl T. Bergstrom, Kevin Gross. Screening, sorting, and the feedback cycles that imperil peer review. PLOS Biology. 24(2):e3003650. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3003650

Hendy Abdoul, Christophe Perrey, Florence Tubach, Philippe Amiel, Isabelle Durand-Zaleski, Corinne Alberti. Non-Financial Conflicts of Interest in Academic Grant Evaluation: A Qualitative Study of Multiple Stakeholders in France. PLOS ONE. 7(4):e35247. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035247

Kelly D. Cobey, Sanam Ebrahimzadeh, Matthew J. Page, et al. Biomedical researchers’ perspectives on the reproducibility of research. PLOS Biology. 22(11):e3002870. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002870