This site needs JavaScript to work properly. Please enable it to take advantage of the complete set of features!

Skip to main page content

Email citation

Add to Collections

Your saved search

Name of saved search:

Search terms:

Test search terms

Would you like email updates of new search results?

Yes
No

Email: (change)

Frequency:

Which day?

Which day?

Report format:

Send at most:

Send even when there aren't any new results

Optional text in email:

Your RSS Feed

Review

. 2006 Apr;99(4):178-82.

doi: 10.1177/014107680609900414.

Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Richard Smith¹

Affiliations

PMID: 16574968
PMCID: PMC1420798
DOI: 10.1177/014107680609900414

Review

Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals

Richard Smith. J R Soc Med. 2006 Apr.

. 2006 Apr;99(4):178-82.

doi: 10.1177/014107680609900414.

Author

Richard Smith¹

Affiliation

¹ UnitedHealth Europe. richardswsmith@yahoo.co.uk

PMID: 16574968
PMCID: PMC1420798
DOI: 10.1177/014107680609900414

No abstract available

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Peer review. Peerless review.
Carpenter RH. Carpenter RH. J R Soc Med. 2006 Aug;99(8):384-5. doi: 10.1177/014107680609900805. J R Soc Med. 2006. PMID: 16893928 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Peer review. Unreliable reviewers.
Lush B. Lush B. J R Soc Med. 2006 Aug;99(8):385. doi: 10.1177/014107680609900806. J R Soc Med. 2006. PMID: 16893932 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Similar articles

Registered reports: prospective peer review emphasizes science over spin.
Wilkinson J, Pellicer A, Niederberger C. Wilkinson J, et al. Fertil Steril. 2019 May;111(5):831-832. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.03.010. Epub 2019 Apr 5. Fertil Steril. 2019. PMID: 30955845 No abstract available.
The peer review process: a primer for JNIS readers.
Hirsch JA, Manchikanti L, Albuquerque FC, Leslie-Mazwi TM, Lev MH, Linfante I, Mocco J, Rai AT, Schaefer PW, Tarr RW. Hirsch JA, et al. J Neurointerv Surg. 2017 Jul;9(e1):e3-e6. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-011781. Epub 2015 Apr 17. J Neurointerv Surg. 2017. PMID: 25888447 Review.
Writing a narrative biomedical review: considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors.
Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Blackmore H, Kitas GD. Gasparyan AY, et al. Rheumatol Int. 2011 Nov;31(11):1409-17. doi: 10.1007/s00296-011-1999-3. Epub 2011 Jul 29. Rheumatol Int. 2011. PMID: 21800117 Review.
Perfecting peer review?
[No authors listed] [No authors listed] Nat Med. 2011 Jan;17(1):1-2. doi: 10.1038/nm0111-1. Nat Med. 2011. PMID: 21217648 No abstract available.
The multiple faces of journal peer review.
Thatje S. Thatje S. Naturwissenschaften. 2010 Mar;97(3):237-9. doi: 10.1007/s00114-010-0652-4. Naturwissenschaften. 2010. PMID: 20127306 No abstract available.

See all similar articles

Cited by

The importance of peer review skills: Value and necessity of training residents to ensure continued scientific excellence.
Mayer D, Eastin C, Kane B, Lee S, Davis J, Chan TM. Mayer D, et al. AEM Educ Train. 2024 May 19;8(Suppl 1):S76-S79. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10940. eCollection 2024 May. AEM Educ Train. 2024. PMID: 38774827 No abstract available.
Identifying and Minimizing Incentives for Competing Interests in Sports Medicine Publications.
Shrier I, Impellizzeri FM, Stovitz SD. Shrier I, et al. Sports Med. 2024 May 7. doi: 10.1007/s40279-024-02037-w. Online ahead of print. Sports Med. 2024. PMID: 38714641
Quality of reporting inflammatory bowel disease randomised controlled trials: a systematic review.
Gordon M, Khudr J, Sinopoulou V, Lakunina S, Rane A, Akobeng A. Gordon M, et al. BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2024 Apr 17;11(1):e001337. doi: 10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001337. BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2024. PMID: 38631808 Free PMC article.
Development and Validation of a Scoring Rubric for Editorial Evaluation of Peer-review Quality: A Pilot Study.
Love JN, Messman AM, Ilgen JS, Merritt C, Coates WC, Ander DS, Way DP. Love JN, et al. West J Emerg Med. 2024 Mar;25(2):254-263. doi: 10.5811/westjem.18432. West J Emerg Med. 2024. PMID: 38596927 Free PMC article.
How to improve scientific peer review: Four schools of thought.
Waltman L, Kaltenbrunner W, Pinfield S, Woods HB. Waltman L, et al. Learn Publ. 2023 Jul;36(3):334-347. doi: 10.1002/leap.1544. Epub 2023 Apr 27. Learn Publ. 2023. PMID: 38504796 Free PMC article.

See all "Cited by" articles

References

1. Lock S. A Difficult Balance: Editorial Peer Review In Medicine. London: Nuffield Provincials Hospital Trust, 1985
1. Jefferson T, Alderson P, Wager E, Davidoff F. Effects of editorial peer review: a systematic review. JAMA 2002;287: 2784-6 - PubMed
1. Godlee F, Gale CR, Martyn CN. Effect on the quality of peer review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their reports: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 1998;280: 237-40 - PubMed
1. Schroter S, Black N, Evans S, Carpenter J, Godlee F, Smith R. Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2004;328: 673. - PMC - PubMed
1. Wennerås C, Wold A. Sexism and nepotism in peer-review. Nature 1997;387: 341-3 - PubMed

Publication types

Actions

MeSH terms

Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions
Actions

LinkOut - more resources

Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
- The Lens - Patent Citations

-