Articles tagged with Peer Review
A 2013 survey of radiation oncologists found that peer review is a common practice in medicine, but there is wide variation in its performance. Seventy-eight percent of respondents reported being involved in peer review, and 74% expressed interest in formal guidelines to improve the process.
An AIBS analysis of peer review found correlations between scores and citation impact, but not funding amounts. This study offers insights into increasing research productivity through peer review models.
Crohn's and Colitis Canada funds 9 promising research projects exploring genetic, environmental causes, symptoms, and treatment options for these debilitating diseases. The organization aims to improve patient care and quality of life for over 233,000 Canadians affected by Crohn's and colitis.
A study found that peer review research in biomedicine lacks dedicated funding, resulting in underrepresented studies and poor publication rates. The analysis included 614 abstracts and revealed a significant gap in the development of methods to improve peer review.
A study published in BMJ Open finds that the UK tobacco industry's claims that plain packaging won't work are based on weak evidence. The research analyzed submissions made by four major tobacco companies and found that most of the cited evidence lacked policy relevance and was of poor quality.
The Optical Society (OSA) has announced the launch of a new open-access journal, Optica, which will publish original research articles and letters in all areas of optics and photonics. The first issue is set to be published in July, with a renowned editorial board led by professor Alex Gaeta.
Researchers propose an alternative way to allocate science funding by distributing funds collectively among the scientific community. This approach could save time, money, and encourage innovation, while also allowing for more flexible funding and potentially changing publication practices.
Researchers will analyze reviews and manipulate demographic factors on grant proposals to determine if biases exist in the NIH's peer review system. They aim to understand mechanisms behind proposal decisions and identify potential causes of disparities in funding rates among different groups.
A collaboration between NIST and 5 technical journals found that one-third of papers contained erroneous or incomplete chemical property data. A new online tool was developed to identify and eliminate errors in experimental data, using expert software system for data evaluation.
A new study published in PLOS ONE found that the setting of scientific peer review panels, such as using teleconferencing technology, has little effect on the outcome of the review process. The researchers reviewed over 1,600 grant applications and found that panelists engaged less discussion during teleconference reviews.
A new article in PLOS Medicine highlights the importance of routine systematic reviews and meta-analyses of animal studies. The authors argue that funding agencies should subsidize these reviews to reduce waste and duplication of animal studies, while an international register for animal studies is also recommended.
A recent review conducted by Oregon Health & Science University found that a bone growth product used in spinal surgeries offers no real benefit over traditional bone grafts and comes with potential harms. The review also identified reporting bias in studies funded by the product's manufacturer, Medtronic.
Two independent reviews of rhBMP-2 trial data found no significant benefits and potential increased risks of cancer associated with its use. The studies suggest that patients should be counseled on the relative benefits and harms of each option, as the role of rhBMP-2 in spinal surgery is still being defined.
The ASTRO white paper emphasizes the vital role of patient-specific peer review in improving patient safety and quality of care. The report details suggested targets for peer review throughout various areas within radiation therapy, prioritizing those most likely to impact patient outcomes.
The Calgary Stroke Program and Toronto Rehabilitation Institute have achieved Distinction status for their exceptional stroke care, demonstrating a commitment to best practices, leadership, and innovation. The awards recognize the organizations' rigorous accreditation process and dedication to improving patient outcomes.
The authors recommend establishing a system of independent regulation and peer review for countries involved in nuclear energy and weapons development. They also urge adoption of U.S.-style independent peer review and improved dialogue between the military and nuclear energy communities to reduce risks and promote international trust.
A recent study published in the European Heart Journal found that factors predicting publication success in scientific research differed from those predicting later scientific impact. Accepted abstracts were more likely to be based on basic research, have a large patient number, and be prospective study designs, while full-text publica...
A new study by University College London found that targeted policing can lead to a reduction in crime not only in the targeted area but also in surrounding locations, known as 'diffusion of benefits'. Problem-oriented policing was shown to have the greatest positive effect on crime in nearby areas.
A recent study in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that avoidable hospital readmissions are relatively uncommon and do not accurately reflect hospital care quality. Only 2.2% of discharged patients were deemed avoidably readmitted, suggesting that urgent readmission rates may be an overestimated measure of quality.
A recent NIH-commissioned study found that black applicants were 10 percentage points less likely than white applicants to receive research project grants after controlling for factors such as education and affiliation. The study highlights the need for action to address racial disparities in the biomedical workforce.
The European Peer Review Guide identifies five pillars for supporting good practices of peer review, including core principles, quality assurance, process integrity, governance structure, and methodology. The guide aims to minimize variability in peer review outcomes and foster harmonization in international peer review.
A special issue of Technology & Innovation explores the history, process, and practice of scientific peer review. Key findings include a need for qualified, independent reviewers, transparent processes, and avoiding conflicts of interest to ensure integrity in federal policy formation.
The federal peer review system is under scrutiny for being overwhelmed by an increasing number of funding proposals, leaving room for errors. Experts recommend a calibration system to mitigate these errors, which can occur due to biased reviewers or overconfident assessments.
Elsevier has launched a new pilot program called PeerChoice, which allows reviewers to choose articles they want to review based on their expertise and interest. This approach aims to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the peer review process, while maintaining high-quality reviews.
A study published in PLoS One investigates the reliability of peer review and its influence on journal editors' decisions to publish or reject research. The results suggest that reviewers agree on manuscript disposition rates barely exceeding chance, while editor decisions are significantly influenced by reviewer recommendations.
A new University of California, Berkeley web site called Understanding Science clarifies what science is and how it works, showcasing its creative and unpredictable nature. The site provides a Science Checklist to determine the level of scientific activity in various activities.
The Journal of Biology is introducing a new policy to reduce review time and improve the publication process. Authors will have more control over the review process, with an option to opt out of re-review after initial screening by editorial board members.
A recent review found that Montana Meth Project's graphic anti-methamphetamine ads were associated with negative outcomes, including increased meth use among teenagers. The study suggests that the campaign's focus on exaggerating risks may have had unintended consequences.
The American Pain Society has expanded its low back guideline to include recommendations on surgery and interventional treatments for chronic pain. The new guidelines suggest that epidural stenosis injections may be an option for short-term pain relief, while other procedures have limited evidence supporting their benefits.
A recent court ruling supported JAMA and Archives of Internal Medicine in their opposition to Pfizer's subpoena for confidential information regarding COX-2 inhibitors. The subpoenas sought documents related to the decision-making process, but the court ruled that this information was irrelevant to the pending claims.
Sukhishvili will support national biomedical research efforts with her expertise in biomaterials and biointerfaces. She will review grant applications, make recommendations, and contribute to the quality of peer review at the NIH.
The ASCE panel's report confirms the city's vulnerability to hurricanes and recommends steps to reduce damage. The panel estimates that New Orleans residents' pre-Katrina risk was 1,000-fold higher than considered minimally acceptable.
A recent survey found that there are no easily identifiable types of formal training and experience that predict reviewer performance. The study suggests that journal editors have difficulty predicting which individuals will make good reviewers, highlighting the challenges of peer review quality.
The Genetic Association Information Network (GAIN) has selected six studies to undergo whole genome analysis to identify genetic contributions to common illnesses. The studies focus on disorders of the brain, skin, and kidney, including depression, bipolar disorder, and diabetes.
Elsevier celebrates its 1,000th journal with the adoption of online submission and peer-review tool EES. The rollout has significantly reduced refereeing times and completed editorial processes by an average of 9 weeks. This development enhances the work of editors and reviewers, improving service for authors and readers.
Experts from the American Institute of Biological Sciences assess dredge-and-fill programs to protect coastlines, highlighting flaws in current practices. The studies aim to identify areas for improvement and promote more effective ecological monitoring.
A Rutgers University-led consortium found Amchitka seafood to be safe for now due to low levels of radionuclides. The study provides a baseline for future testing and aims to reassure subsistence fishermen and commercial fishing interests in the region.
A recent study by Leonidas Koniaris and colleagues found that lethal injection methods in the US are often inadequate, leading to unnecessary suffering. The study analysed data from executions in Texas and Virginia, as well as autopsy toxicology reports, revealing low concentrations of thiopental in the blood of executed inmates.
The Lancet discusses the conflict between scientific openness and global security concerns, highlighting the need for defensive biological research to prevent the spread of knowledge and dangerous materials. Pneumococcal vaccines are also reviewed, showing varying effectiveness in developed countries.
A study by University of Virginia researchers reveals that journals and authors are protected by various measures, including court rulings, state shield laws, and constitutional provisions. This protection helps prevent corporate power and pressure from tainting peer review.