Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors

Conflicts of interest in biomedical publications: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors

(2014) Armen Yuri Gasparyan et al.   CROATIAN MEDICAL JOURNAL

Retraction Note to: Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency

(2014) Haruko Obokata et al.   NATURE

Views on the peer review system of biomedical journals: an online survey of academics from high-ranking universities

(2013) Roger Chun-Man Ho et al.   BMC Medical Research Methodology

Modelling the effects of subjective and objective decision making in scientific peer review

(2013) In-Uck Park et al.   NATURE

Substantial Agreement of Referee Recommendations at a General Medical Journal – A Peer Review Evaluation at Deutsches Ärzteblatt International

(2013) Christopher Baethge et al.   PLoS One

Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias — An Updated Review

(2013) Kerry Dwan et al.   PLoS One

Letting the daylight in: Reviewing the reviewers and other ways to maximize transparency in science

(2012) Jelte M. Wicherts et al.   Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience

Does mentoring new peer reviewers improve review quality? A randomized trial

(2012) Debra Houry et al.   BMC Medical Education

Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science

(2011) S. J. Ceci et al.   PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Exploring Why and How Journal Editors Retract Articles: Findings From a Qualitative Study

(2011) Peter Williams et al.   SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS

Quality and Peer Review of Research: An Adjudicating Role for Editors

(2010) Douglas P. Newton   Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance

Differences in Editorial Board Reviewer Behavior Based on Gender

(2010) Deborah A. Wing et al.   JOURNAL OF WOMENS HEALTH

Journals step up plagiarism policing

(2010) Declan Butler   NATURE

Editorial Peer Reviewers' Recommendations at a General Medical Journal: Are They Reliable and Do Editors Care?

(2010) Richard L. Kravitz et al.   PLoS One

A Reliability-Generalization Study of Journal Peer Reviews: A Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Inter-Rater Reliability and Its Determinants

(2010) Lutz Bornmann et al.   PLoS One

To Name or Not to Name: The Effect of Changing Author Gender on Peer Review

(2009) Robyn M. Borsuk et al.   BIOSCIENCE

Is There Gender Bias in the Peer Review Process at Journal of Neurophysiology?

(2009) John A. Lane et al.   JOURNAL OF NEUROPHYSIOLOGY

How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data

(2009) Daniele Fanelli   PLoS One

Blinding in peer review: the preferences of reviewers for nursing journals

(2008) Judith Gedney Baggs et al.   JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING

What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them?

(2008) Sara Schroter et al.   JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF MEDICINE

Systematic Variation in Reviewer Practice According to Country and Gender in the Field of Ecology and Evolution

(2008) Olyana N. Grod et al.   PLoS One

Perceptions of Ethical Problems with Scientific Journal Peer Review: An Exploratory Study

(2008) David B. Resnik et al.   SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS

Journal review and gender equality: a critical comment on Budden et al.

(2008) R WHITTAKER   TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION

Pharmaceutical company funding and its consequences: A qualitative systematic review

(2007) Sergio Sismondo   Contemporary Clinical Trials

Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors

(2007) A BUDDEN et al.   TRENDS IN ECOLOGY & EVOLUTION