Manuscript Quality before and after Peer Review and Editing at Annals of Internal Medicine

  title={Manuscript Quality before and after Peer Review and Editing at Annals of Internal Medicine},
  author={S. Goodman and J. Berlin and S. W. Fletcher and R. Fletcher},
  journal={Annals of Internal Medicine},
  • S. Goodman, J. Berlin, +1 author R. Fletcher
  • Published 1994
  • Medicine
  • Annals of Internal Medicine
  • Publication of medical research has high stakes: the communication and legitimization of medical research, the advancement of authors' careers, priorities in funding decisions, the direction of future research, and the visibility and prestige of journals themselves. Peer review and editing play central roles in the publication process, affecting the acceptance of a manuscript and the form in which it appears. The most commonly heard justification of peer review is that it is an indispensable… CONTINUE READING
    Effects of editorial peer review: a systematic review.
    • 265
    • PDF
    Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping
    • 115
    • PDF


    Publications referenced by this paper.
    The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation
    • 366
    • Highly Influential
    Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again
    • 877
    • PDF
    The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation.
    • 383
    • PDF
    Guarding the guardians: a conference on editorial peer review.
    • 126
    A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial.
    • 1,325
    Statistical problems in the reporting of clinical trials. A survey of three medical journals.
    • 612
    • PDF
    The Risk of Determining Risk with Multivariable Models
    • 1,016
    • PDF
    How good is peer review?
    • 53