共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 171 毫秒
1.
学术论文的发表极其依赖于高质量的同行评议,尽管同行评议不尽善尽美,但能帮助作者提高论文的写作水平以及编辑人员的编辑水平。研究发现,对审稿质量做出最佳贡献的预测因素包括是否为大学附属医院工作的审稿人或研究生毕业10年内的年轻人。目前进一步改善审稿方法的效果很有限,因此有专家建议对审稿人进行正规培训。期刊及其编辑在选择审稿人时,要考虑他们具备何种知识和技能,是否有丰富的审稿经验。这有助于期刊编辑出版单位选择到合适的审稿人,并提高审稿质量。 相似文献
2.
审稿是期刊筛选论文、确保刊发论文质量的重要手段,审稿过程可能会受到审稿人、编辑和作者有意或无意的偏倚的影响而导致审稿结果失实。本文总结了医学论文常见审稿偏倚,如内容偏倚、保守偏倚、利益冲突、作者身份或地域偏倚等问题,对目前国内外期刊现有的审稿模式进行讨论并提出建议。各期刊可结合自身实际情况,采取一种或多种审稿模式;谨慎选择审稿人,既要“对口”送审,又要避免利益冲突;避免审稿一票否决,严格落实三审制度;尊重作者的科研成果,建立作者申诉机制。基于此,确保论文的优势得到承认,弱点得到剖析,为作者提供具有建设性的修改意见,帮助作者提高科学研究及论文撰写的水平,最大限度地减少审稿过程中出现偏倚。 相似文献
3.
不同文种"一稿两投"的国际规范及我国应采取的编辑政策 总被引：8，自引：0，他引：8
就生物医学论文以不同的文种、在不同的国家再次发表的行业国际规范进行调研,认定同一论文以不同的文种在国内外生物医学期刊上相继发表不属于国际生物医学期刊界违反版权法和科学道德的一稿多投行为.提出为了既有利于扩大我国高水平的生物医学科研成果在国际上的影响,又能使这些成果在国内学术期刊上有所反映,满足国内广大读者的需要, 可以将在国际生物医学期刊上发表的英文论文以中文全文再次发表在国内生物医学期刊上, 或以"述评""摘要"等多种形式在国内生物医学期刊上予以介绍.然而中文全文的再次发表必须是有选择的、有比例的,同时必须满足国际规范的各项规定和要求. 相似文献
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
从稿件本身入手准确遴选审稿人 总被引：9，自引：3，他引：6
阐述综合性科技期刊编辑针对一篇具体的来稿选择审稿人的方法。从稿件的题名或关键词、作者信息、参考文献等方面入手,分析利用网络选择审稿人的特点及注意事项,以期解决"送审"这一编辑工作中的难点问题,提高审稿质量。 相似文献
14.
Should authors suggest reviewers? A comparative study of the performance of author‐suggested and editor‐selected reviewers at a biological journal 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Yan Liang 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(3):216-221
To evaluate peer review of author‐suggested reviewers (Ra), this research compared them with editor‐selected reviewers (Re) using 1‐year data collected from Journal of Systematics and Evolution. The results indicated that (1) Ra responded more positively than Re, that is, accepted invitations to review more often, more likely to suggest alternative reviewers, and less likely to neglect a review invitation; (2) there was no statistically significant difference in timeliness between Ra and Re; (3) editors rated Re reviews of higher quality than Ra reviews, but the word count length of these reviews did not differ statistically; (4) Ra made more favourable publication recommendations than Re; and (5) Ra were more often based in the country of the authors than Re, and this correlated with the location effect on reviewer response and publication recommendations. These results suggest that authors should be encouraged to suggest reviewers. However, in terms of policy or procedure based on the results of this study, journals/editors should collect and consult at least one review from other sources than author suggested, and when reviewers nominated by authors are considered, priority should be given to those with different locations from the authors. 相似文献
15.
针对目前学术期刊普遍存在的待发表稿件储备量大、发表时滞长的问题,认为应着眼于从源头上加以控制,建议通过严格审稿解决这一问题。提出在科学共同体的关系脉络中"宁选竞争对手,勿择合作伙伴"的审稿专家遴选方法,并论述了该方法的必要性、可行性、具体做法、应用实例及制度保障。 相似文献
16.
17.
18.
Jonathan J. Mallett 《Learned Publishing》2021,34(1):49-56
- Scientific publication has been a key part of the scientific method since the inception of Philosophical Transactions in 1665.
- The scientific publications industry has grown exponentially along with science, incorporating technological innovations along the way, and adapting journal processes and practices to changing needs of science as it matured.
- Of all the technological innovations over more than 300 years, the move to online journals may be the most significant, making open access to content practical for the first time.
- The open‐access movement is disrupting the economics of journal publishing, which is hoped will make the industry more competitive: the ability of the publications industry to adapt to open access will be a measure of its resilience.
- The demand for articles published in reputable journals continues to grow as readers trust the credibility of peer reviewed journal articles, and good authors value the prestige of publishing in the best journals.
- It is difficult to predict what new functionalities may be included in articles of the future or what additional services publishers and editors will provide, but there is every reason to believe that scientific journal articles are here to stay.
19.
This study examines the role of learned societies as publishers in Finland based on bibliographic information from two Finnish databases. We studied the share of learned societies' peer‐reviewed publication channels (serials with ISSNs and book publishers with distinct ISBN roots) and outputs (journal articles, conference articles, book articles, and monographs) in Finland. We also studied the share of learned societies' open access (OA) publications. In 2018, there were 402 peer‐reviewed publication channels in Finland. In 2011–2017, the number of peer‐reviewed publications from scholars working in Finnish universities and published in Finland was 17,724. Learned societies publish around 70% of these channels and publications, mostly in the fields of humanities and social sciences. Learned societies in Finland focus on journal publishing, whereas university presses and commercial publishers focus on book publishing. In 2016–2017, 38.4% of the learned societies' outputs were OA. This study concludes that Finnish learned societies play an integral part in national scholarly publishing. They play an especially important role in journal publishing, as commercial publishers produce only 2.6% of Finnish journals and book series, and only 1.4% of the journal articles from scholars working in Finnish universities. 相似文献
20.
中华妇产科杂志审稿现状及对策 总被引：18，自引：6，他引：12
为探讨科技期刊审稿中存在的关键问题及解决对策,抽取200份中华妇产科杂志2000年审稿单及60篇论著类文稿的144份专家审稿意见,分别对审稿时间和审稿质量进行分析.除去初审退稿外,外审时间最短7 d,最长206 d,平均42.7 d,一篇文稿从来稿到刊出平均最快要7个月;60篇论著类文稿的专家审稿单144份,共提出审稿意见263条,最少1条,最多7条,平均1.83条(两审意见重叠时,按1条计算).建议:1)根据来稿总量调整初审退稿比率;2)建立标准化审稿程序;3)完善和扩大审稿队伍;4)建立专业副总编评审制度;5)提高编辑自身素质. 相似文献