Peer Review

• 

  Subject Areas on Research

  • A Few Words of Introduction From Your New Diabetes Editorial Board. 
  • A new template for referees and guidance on writing high quality papers. 
  • ACC/AHA 2007 methodology for the development of clinical data standards: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Data Standards. 
  • ACCF/AHA clinical practice guideline methodology summit report: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. 
  • An investigation into nonscientist involvement in peer review: the National Institutes of Health example. 
  • Antitrust and hospital peer review. 
  • Avoiding predatory journals: Quick peer review processes too good to be true. 
  • Clinical trial Data and Safety Monitoring Boards. The search for a constitution. 
  • Comparing classifications of death in the Mode Selection Trial: agreement and disagreement among site investigators and a clinical events committee. 
  • Conducting a Peer Review: Novice or Expert. 
  • Design and Implementation of a Peer-Reviewed Medical Education Video Competition: The Best of American Thoracic Society Video Lecture Series. 
  • Editorial independence for CMAJ: signposts along the road. 
  • Educating the Next Generation of Peer Reviewers. 
  • Effect of acceptance or rejection on the author's evaluation of peer review of medical manuscripts. 
  • Evaluation and use of epidemiological evidence for environmental health risk assessment: WHO guideline document. 
  • Experience, time investment, and motivators of nursing journal peer reviewers. 
  • Great expectations. 
  • How does PLoS medicine manage competing interests? 
  • Impact of peer review in reduction of permanent pacemaker implantations. 
  • Implementation of remote 3-dimensional image guided radiation therapy quality assurance for radiation therapy oncology group clinical trials. 
  • Introducing The Wiley Transplant Peer Review Network. 
  • Introducing the Wiley Transplant Peer Review Network. 
  • Managing the science in the presence of financial conflict of interest. 
  • Medicaid and CHIP Child Health Beneficiary Incentives: Program Landscape and Stakeholder Insights. 
  • Medical appropriateness of coronary angiograms. 
  • Medical student perspective: working toward specific and actionable clinical clerkship feedback. 
  • Nonscientist participation in the peer review process: is it desirable? Is it implementable? Who are the nonscientists who should become involved? A panel discussion. 
  • Open access publishing: a disruptive innovation. 
  • Peer Review at the American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry-An Appeal to the Better Angels of Our Nature. 
  • Peer Review of Peer Review: Somewhere Over the Rainbow. 
  • Peer Review of Scholarly Work. 
  • Peer assessment of pediatric surgeons for potential risks of radiation exposure from computed tomography scans. 
  • Peer recommendations on how to improve clinical research, and Conference wrap-up. 
  • Peer review in ambulatory care: use of explicit criteria and implicit judgments. 
  • Practice patterns for peer review in radiation oncology. 
  • Problems identified by secondary review of accepted manuscripts. 
  • Promoting patient safety through peer review. 
  • Regarding Mohan, Kuplian, and Willoughby, IJROBP 2000;46:575-580. 
  • Strategies for Addressing a Broader Definition of Conflicts of Interest. 
  • Study of Predatory Open Access Nursing Journals. 
  • Successful use of education and cost-based feedback strategies to reduce physician utilization of low-osmolality contrast agents in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. 
  • The (R)Evolution is here! 
  • The Evolution of the Journal Club: From Osler to Twitter. 
  • The Working Group report on Science-Based Categories for Abstracts: submitted to the annual scientific sessions. The Committee on Scientific Sessions Program (CSSP), American Heart Association. 
  • The changing face of peer review at the National Institutes of Health. 
  • The irony of biased editors who write editorials. GUSTO Investigators. 
  • The unintended consequences of portfolios in graduate medical education. 
  • Towards ubiquitous peer review strategies to sustain and enhance a clinical knowledge management framework. 
  • Understanding errors in diagnostic radiology: proposal of a classification scheme and application to emergency radiology. 
  • Unjustified restrictions on letters to the editor.