Is it truly a value-adding process? I personally find that pubmed is the most powerful website for finding articles. Similarly, scientists rely on a team of other scientists, each with his or her own specialty, to review and comment on before it is published, funded by grant agencies, presented at scientific meetings, or otherwise disseminated to the scientific community. Science now gives the opportunity for cross-review. The history of the peer-review process. In an effort to guide future research, we have added mention of more recent personal communication regarding chamber turnover rate, to our knowledge new data regarding turnover rate is not published. However, whether it can be trusted or not is a key issue at present.
For the article by Mauclair and colleagues, the reviewers had a number of recommendations for improving the article, as the excerpts provided below detail. Double-blind peer review In a double-blind review both the author and peer reviewers are not aware of each other. Although not peer reviewed in the traditional sense of most medical journals, Wikipedia is an example of vast knowledge being documented and shared by harnessing the collective power of individuals with common interests and where only a loose editorial authority is needed to discipline the process. If we do not receive comments we will proceed based on the reviews in hand. We believe discussing the limitations of the method is therefore sufficient in this context. By employing the scientific method, the hypotheses underlying this new type of peer review can be empirically tested.
Review articles, unlike the previous types, do not cover original research but instead accumulate results of multiple articles on a particular field or topic into a coherent narrative about the state of the art in the said field. The risk here is that it may sometimes allow reviewers to give inaccurate or irresponsible feedback to authors. Retraction of Schön et al. This provides greater flexibility and degree of transparency at each level, with respect to the authors, editors, and reviewers respectively. Keywords: Crowd sourcing, medical journals, peer review, scientific journals Peer review is grounded primarily in the premise that acceptance by one's colleagues, and especially one's intellectual counterparts and rivals, is needed to validate the science being reported.
Both reviewers raise some important issues that need to be clearly addressed in your revised paper. In order to gain new insights into the field of science and benefit from the ongoing research activities, it is absolutely imperative that all research publications in Science must be made available online, preferably through Open Access system. What is the best method of peer review? A key aspect of science is that results must be reproducible and well-documented. Let us examine the differences among the editorial peer review systems in detail. Scientific Journals represent the collaborative efforts of many scientists and scholars from various disciplines. However, even after two centuries of success, an important question arises.
In most cases the reviewers do not know who the author of the article is, so that the article succeeds or fails on its own merit, not the reputation of the expert. If events will prevent a timely review, it is your responsibility to inform the editor at the time of the request. The editor sometimes enlisted other scientists to provide opinions as necessary, but it was at his sole discretion whether works were reviewed by others or not. When the Royal Society of London see our module began publishing its journal Philosophical Transactions in 1665 Figure 2 , the review was solely the responsibility of the editor at the time, Henry Oldenburg. The review itself will be shared only with the author, and possibly with other reviewers and our Board. Figure 2: Cover of the first issue of Philosophical Transactions published by the Royal Society.
Retraction of Schön et al. We greatly appreciate the time spent in preparing a review, and will consult you on a revision of a manuscript only if we believe the paper has been significantly improved but still requires input. Is it possible that the world of internet search engines and communication tools can enable a new peer review process that more readily reflects the realities of modern medical specialization? If you cannot limit your initial search to peer-reviewed journals, you will need to check to see if the source of an article is a peer-reviewed journal. It is the peer reviewers that make recommendations as to what research is published in what journals. Second, given the capacity of the internet to publish and identify a near limitless amount of published content, reviewers of new articles have the opportunity to redirect their energies away from rationing journal space to simply improving the manuscripts they review. We maintain the highest standards of peer review process with the support of International recognized editors who serve editorial board of Scient Open Access Journals. The terrestrial mercury cycle and climate: Measuring and modeling the impact of global change.
Reviewers can often choose whether they wish to remain anonymous to the authors or not. If you cannot judge a paper impartially, you should not accept it for review or you should notify the editor as soon as you appreciate the situation. Such inefficiencies seem antiquated and socially unproductive in a modern world impatient for answers to our medical afflictions. And how can new technology be used to improve traditional models? This journal, named Cureus pronounced Curious , has been designed to incorporate the new concepts espoused in the present dialogue. What are the limits of using synthetic soils and mixtures of inorganic Hg + humic acids? Instead peer assessments include the usage of a variety of assessments and exercises intended to determine student mastery in an effort to guide instruction. Are the articles written by scholarly researchers in the field that the periodical pertains to? For example, while the journal Applied Geochemistry focuses on research articles that discuss chemical transformations and that take place in the , the journal Cell publishes articles focused on biological process related to function. Peer reviewers are knowledgeable scientists who are not directly involved with the being evaluated but who are familiar with the field of study or the research used.
These pieces are often directed at explaining science in more common language to non-scientists and thus serve a crucial role in describing the impact of science to the general public. The spread sporadically through the sciences in the nineteenth century, but became a standard for scientific review in the mid-twentieth century. The truth is that retractions are rare, and retractions due to scientific are even rarer. Self-assembled monolayer organic field-effect transistors. This combination of forces has resulted in an increasingly balkanized universe with content spread across more than 6000 and growing individual journals.
This allows the findings to be described and debated with colleagues prior to publication. From the initial submission to the final printing, the described article took 14 months, which does not even include the time spent doing the initial work that led to the publication. Unfortunately, the only practical counterbalance to safeguard the validly of scientific publishing, at least in the short term, relies on the intrinsic honesty of authors; even the most diligent of peer review processes cannot discern fraud without access to raw data, and probably also the ability to audit the collection of such data. In 1752, the Society itself took over the editorial responsibilities for the journal and instituted a review policy wherein each was sent to a small group of experts in the field before being published Spier, 2002. Quantifying the effect of humic matter on the suppression of mercury emissions from soil. In fact, these graphs could even be transformed in time series line graphs instead of histograms.