Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Centrality of Peer Review

  • Editorial
  • Published:
Academic Psychiatry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Task Force of Academic Medicine and the GEA-RIME Committee: Appendix 1: checklist of review criteria. Acad Med 2001; 76: 958–959

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bland C, Caelleigh A, Steinecke A: Reviewer’s etiquette. Acad Med 2001; 76: 954–955

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bordage G: Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Acad Med 2001; 76: 889–896

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Additional Resources

  • Black N, Van Rooyen GF, et al: What makes a good reviewer and a good review for a general medical journal? JAMA 1998; 280: 1041–1067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bligh J: What happens to manuscripts submitted to the journal? Med Educ 1998; 32: 567–570

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bordage G, Caelleigh AS: A tool for reviewers: “Review Criteria for Research Manuscripts.” Acad Med 2001; 904–908

  • Committee on Publication Ethics: The COPE Report 2000. www.publicationethics.org.uk/cope2000/pages2000/contents/phtml

  • Creswell JW: Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 1994, pp 1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein AR: Clinical Epidemiology: The Architecture of Clinical Research. Philadelphia, WB Saunders, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall GM: How to Write a Paper. London, BMJ Publishing Group, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoll E: The communities of scientists and journal peer review. JAMA 1990; 263: 1330–1332

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan P: How the editor works! In: An Insider’s Guide for Medical Authors and Editors. Philadelphia, ISI Press, 1986, pp 67–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea JA: Reviewer’s recommendation. Acad Med 2001; 76: 952–953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Third International Congress on Peer Review. JAMA 1998; 280: 203–306

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Laura Weiss Roberts M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Roberts, L.W. On the Centrality of Peer Review. Acad Psychiatry 26, 221–222 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ap.26.4.221

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ap.26.4.221

Search

Navigation