376:
others in the class as they may be unwilling to offer suggestions or ask other writers for help. Peer review can impact a student's opinion of themselves as well as others as sometimes students feel a personal connection to the work they have produced, which can also make them feel reluctant to receive or offer criticism. Teachers using peer review as an assignment can lead to rushed-through feedback by peers, using incorrect praise or criticism, thus not allowing the writer or the editor to get much out of the activity. As a response to these concerns, instructors may provide examples, model peer review with the class, or focus on specific areas of feedback during the peer review process. Instructors may also experiment with in-class peer review vs. peer review as homework, or peer review using technologies afforded by learning management systems online. Students that are older can give better feedback to their peers, getting more out of peer review, but it is still a method used in classrooms to help students young and old learn how to revise. With evolving and changing technology, peer review will develop as well. New tools could help alter the process of peer review.
407:
often highly valued. Students can address various writing issues based on teacher feedback, such as grammar and structure. The effectiveness of feedback largely stems from its high authority. Benjamin
Keating, in his article "A Good Development Thing: A Longitudinal Analysis of Peer Review and Authority in Undergraduate Writing," conducted a longitudinal study comparing two groups of students (one majoring in writing and one not) to explore students' perceptions of authority. This research, involving extensive analysis of student texts, concludes that students majoring in non-writing fields tend to undervalue mandatory peer review in class, while those majoring in writing value classmates' comments more. This reflects that peer review feedback has a certain threshold, and effective peer review requires a certain level of expertise. For non-professional writers, peer review feedback may be overlooked, thereby affecting its effectiveness.
398:
participation, particularly in academic settings. It constitutes a fundamental process in academic and professional writing, serving as a systematic means to ensure the quality, effectiveness, and credibility of scholarly work. However, despite its widespread use, it is one of the most scattered, inconsistent, and ambiguous practices associated with writing instruction. Many scholars questioning its effectiveness and specific methodologies. Critics of peer review in classrooms express concerns about its ineffectiveness due to students' lack of practice in giving constructive criticism or their limited expertise in the writing craft overall.
213:, who are qualified and able to perform reasonably impartial review. Impartial review, especially of work in less narrowly defined or inter-disciplinary fields, may be difficult to accomplish, and the significance (good or bad) of an idea may never be widely appreciated among its contemporaries. Peer review is generally considered necessary to academic quality and is used in most major scholarly journals. However, peer review does not prevent publication of invalid research, and as experimentally controlled studies of this process are difficult to arrange, direct evidence that peer review improves the quality of published papers is scarce.
450:
methods commonly used in classrooms, the online peer review software offers a plethora of tools for editing articles, along with comprehensive guidance. For instance, it lists numerous questions peer reviewers can ask and allows for various comments to be added to the selected text. Based on observations over the course of a semester, students showed varying degrees of improvement in their writing skills and grades after using the online peer review software. Additionally, they highly praised the technology of online peer review.
442:
the self-assessment group. The author's analysis suggests that self-assessment allows individuals to clearly understand the revision goals at each stage, as the author is the most familiar with their own writing. Thus, self-checking naturally follows a systematic and planned approach to revision. In contrast, the effectiveness of peer review is often limited due to the lack of structured feedback, characterized by scattered, meaningless summaries and evaluations that fail to meet author's expectations for revising their work.
429:
emotions in peer review sessions, suggesting that both peer reviewers and authors cannot completely eliminate emotions when providing and receiving feedback. This can lead to peer reviewers and authors approaching the feedback with either positive or negative attitudes towards the text, resulting in selective or biased feedback and review, further impacting their ability to objectively evaluate the article. It implies that subjective emotions may also affect the effectiveness of peer review feedback.
433:
about helping authors achieve their writing vision." Feedback from the majority of non-professional writers during peer review sessions often tends to be superficial, such as simple grammar corrections and questions. This precisely reflects the implication in the conclusion that the focus is only on improving writing skills. Meaningful peer review involves understanding the author's writing intent, posing valuable questions and perspectives, and guiding the author to achieve their writing goals.
279:, technical peer review is a type of engineering review. Technical peer reviews are a well defined review process for finding and fixing defects, conducted by a team of peers with assigned roles. Technical peer reviews are carried out by peers representing areas of life cycle affected by material being reviewed (usually limited to 6 or fewer people). Technical peer reviews are held within development phases, between milestone reviews, on completed products or completed portions of products.
446:
confidence in their own writing. The authors further offer numerous improvement strategies across various dimensions, such as course content and specific implementation steps. For instance, the peer review process can be segmented into groups, where students present the papers to be reviewed, while other group members take notes and analyze them. Then, the review scope can be expanded to the entire class. This widens the review sources and further enhances the level of professionalism.
372:
audience members via their writing. It also gives students professional experience that they might draw on later when asked to review the work of a colleague prior to publication. The process can also bolster the confidence of students on both sides of the process. It has been found that students are more positive than negative when reviewing their classmates' writing. Peer review can help students not get discouraged but rather feel determined to improve their writing.
47:
2552:
121:(854â931). He stated that a visiting physician had to make duplicate notes of a patient's condition on every visit. When the patient was cured or had died, the notes of the physician were examined by a local medical council of other physicians, who would decide whether the treatment had met the required standards of medical care.
352:
collaborative learning tool involves groups of students reviewing each other's work and providing feedback and suggestions for revision. Rather than a means of critiquing each other's work, peer review is often framed as a way to build connection between students and help develop writers' identity. While widely used in
410:
Elizabeth Ellis Miller, Cameron
Mozafari, Justin Lohr and Jessica Enoch state, "While peer review is an integral part of writing classrooms, students often struggle to effectively engage in it." The authors illustrate some reasons for the inefficiency of peer review based on research conducted during
375:
Critics of peer review in classrooms say that it can be ineffective due to students' lack of practice giving constructive criticism, or lack of expertise in the writing craft at large. Peer review can be problematic for developmental writers, particularly if students view their writing as inferior to
406:
Academic peer review has faced considerable criticism, with many studies highlighting inherent issues in the peer review process. This is particularly evident in university classrooms, where the most common source of writing feedback during student years often comes from teachers, whose comments are
371:
Peer review in classrooms helps students become more invested in their work, and the classroom environment at large. Understanding how their work is read by a diverse readership before it is graded by the teacher may also help students clarify ideas and understand how to persuasively reach different
441:
Magda
Tigchelaar compares peer review with self-assessment through an experiment that divided students into three groups: self-assessment, peer review, and no review. Across four writing projects, she observed changes in each group, with surprisingly results showing significant improvement only in
384:
Peer seminar is a method that involves a speaker that presents ideas to an audience that also acts as a "contest". To further elaborate, there are multiple speakers that are called out one at a time and given an amount of time to present the topic that they have researched. Each speaker may or may
449:
With evolving and changing technology, peer review is also expected to evolve. New tools have the potential to transform the peer review process. Mimi Li discusses the effectiveness and feedback of an online peer review software used in their freshman writing class. Unlike traditional peer review
445:
Stephanie Conner and
Jennifer Gray highlight the value of most students' feedback during peer review. They argue that many peer review sessions fail to meet students' expectations, as students, even as reviewers themselves, feel uncertain about providing constructive feedback due to their lack of
428:
This research demonstrates that besides issues related to expertise, numerous objective factors contribute to students' poor performance in peer review sessions, resulting in feedback from peer reviewers that may not effectively assist authors. Additionally, this study highlights the influence of
351:
Peer review, or student peer assessment, is the method by which editors and writers work together in hopes of helping the author establish and further flesh out and develop their own writing. Peer review is widely used in secondary and post-secondary education as part of the writing process. This
432:
Pamela Bedore and Brian OâSullivan also hold a skeptical view of peer review in most writing contexts. The authors conclude, based on comparing different forms of peer review after systematic training at two universities, that "the crux is that peer review is not just about improving writing but
419:
Limited
Engagement: Students may participate in peer review sessions with minimal enthusiasm or involvement, viewing them as obligatory tasks rather than valuable learning opportunities. This lack of investment can result in superficial feedback that fails to address underlying issues in the
260:
to refer not only to the process of improving quality and safety in health care organizations, but also to the process of rating clinical behavior or compliance with professional society membership standards. The clinical network believes it to be the most ideal method of guaranteeing that
397:
Professional peer review focuses on the performance of professionals, with a view to improving quality, upholding standards, or providing certification. Peer review in writing is a pivotal component among various peer review mechanisms, often spearheaded by educators and involving student
388:
Peer seminars may be somewhat similar to what conference speakers do, however, there is more time to present their points, and speakers can be interrupted by audience members to provide questions and feedback upon the topic or how well the speaker did in presenting their topic.
130:. Further, since peer review activity is commonly segmented by clinical discipline, there is also physician peer review, nursing peer review, dentistry peer review, etc. Many other professional fields have some level of peer review process: accounting, law, engineering (e.g.,
415:
Lack of
Training: Students and even some faculty members may not have received sufficient training to provide constructive feedback. Without proper guidance on what to look for and how to provide helpful comments, peer reviewers may find it challenging to offer meaningful
332:
Board, Department, or Office adopts a final version of a rule-making, the scientific findings, conclusions, and assumptions on which the proposed rule are based must be submitted for independent external scientific peer review. This requirement is incorporated into the
423:
Time
Constraints: Instructors often allocate limited time for peer review activities during class sessions, which may not be adequate for thorough reviews of peers' work. Consequently, feedback may be rushed or superficial, lacking the depth required for meaningful
385:
not talk about the same topic but each speaker has something to gain or lose which can foster a competitive atmosphere. This approach allows speakers to present in a more personal tone while trying to appeal to the audience while explaining their topic.
107:
Professional peer review focuses on the performance of professionals, with a view to improving quality, upholding standards, or providing certification. In academia, peer review is used to inform decisions related to faculty advancement and tenure.
1928:
Kern, VinĂcius M.; Possamai, Osmar; Selig, Paulo M.; Pacheco, Roberto C. dos S.; de Souza, Gilberto C.; Rautenberg, Sandro; Lemos, Renata T. da S. (2009). "Growing a peer review culture among graduate students". In
Tatnall, A.; Jones, A. (eds.).
238:
is a procedure for assessing a patient's involvement with experiences of care. It is a piece of progressing proficient practice assessment and centered proficient practice assessmentâsignificant supporters of supplier credentialing and
261:
distributed exploration is dependable and that any clinical medicines that it advocates are protected and viable for individuals. Thus, the terminology has poor standardization and specificity, particularly as a database search term.
327:
The State of
California is the only U.S. state to mandate scientific peer review. In 1997, the Governor of California signed into law Senate Bill 1320 (Sher), Chapter 295, statutes of 1997, which mandates that, before any
305:. Each program sponsors about eight peer review meetings in each year, in which a "host country" lays a given policy or initiative open to examination by half a dozen other countries and the relevant European-level
2442:
1906:
1747:
577:
91:(1619â1677) was a German-born British philosopher who is seen as the 'father' of modern scientific peer review. It developed over the following centuries with, for example, the journal
141:
Peer review is used in education to achieve certain learning objectives, particularly as a tool to reach higher order processes in the affective and cognitive domains as defined by
950:
2063:
1088:
The review process was double-blind to provide anonymity for both authors and reviewers, but was otherwise handled in a fashion similar to that used by scientific journals
1231:
1450:
2049:
Gere, Anne
Ruggles; Silver, Naomi, eds. (2019). Developing Writers in Higher Education: A Longitudinal Study. University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0-472-13124-2.
2186:
Keating, Benjamin (2019), Gere, Anne Ruggles (ed.), "'A Good Development Thing': A Longitudinal Analysis of Peer Review and Authority in Undergraduate Writing",
1313:
309:. These usually meet over two days and include visits to local sites where the policy can be seen in operation. The meeting is preceded by the compilation of an
2218:
Miller, Elizabeth Ellis; Mozafari, Cameron; Lohr, Justin; Enoch, Jessica (February 2023). "Thinking about Feeling: The Roles of Emotion in Reflective Writing".
1898:
1503:
1424:
1072:
1023:
81:'s suitability for publication. Peer review can be categorized by the type of activity and by the field or profession in which the activity occurs, e.g.,
2028:
1337:
Ludwick R, Dieckman BC, Herdtner S, Dugan M, Roche M (NovemberâDecember 1998). "Documenting the scholarship of clinical teaching through peer review".
1806:
569:
601:
324:, uses peer review, referred to as "peer learning", to evaluate progress made by its member countries in improving their environmental policies.
3129:
1721:
95:
making it standard practice in 1973. The term "peer review" was first used in the early 1970s. Since 2017 a monument to peer review is at the
3114:
2957:
2606:
1633:
Söderlund, Lars; Wells, Jaclyn (2019). "A Study of the Practices and Responsibilities of Scholarly Peer Review in Rhetoric and Composition".
317:
1131:
972:
329:
3124:
942:
145:. This may take a variety of forms, including closely mimicking the scholarly peer review processes used in science and medicine.
321:
2059:
360:
classrooms, peer review has gained popularity in other disciplines that require writing as part of the curriculum including the
1611:
1256:
Deyo-Svendsen, Mark E.; Phillips, Michael R.; Albright, Jill K.; Schilling, Keith A.; Palmer, Karl B. (OctoberâDecember 2016).
191:) decide whether the work should be accepted, considered acceptable with revisions, or rejected for official publication in an
1481:
1220:
523:"Teachers as co-authors of student writing: How teachers' initiating texts influence response and revision in an online space"
2533:
2195:
2151:
Armstrong, Sonya L.; Paulson, Eric J. (1 May 2008). "Whither 'Peer Review'?: Terminology Matters for the Writing Classroom".
1958:
1549:
1458:
1185:
Couzin-Frankel J (September 2013). "Biomedical publishing. Secretive and subjective, peer review proves resistant to study".
994:
836:
660:
288:
1563:
677:
493:
2884:
1748:""What Can You Possibly Know About My Experience?": Toward a Practice of Self-Reflection and Multicultural Competence"
1320:
2947:
2599:
894:
334:
1516:
207:. If the identities of authors are not revealed to each other, the procedure is called dual-anonymous peer review.
1433:
1049:
1016:
2894:
1126:
69:. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility. In
2303:"Resisting the Deficit Model: Embedding Writing Center Tutors during Peer Review in Writing-Intensive Courses"
167:
or academic peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of having a draft version of a researcher's
3144:
2020:
1589:
306:
179:(or "peers") in the same field. Peer review is widely used for helping the academic publisher (that is, the
1871:
Wigglesworth, Gillian; Storch, Neomy (2012). "What role for collaboration in writing and writing feedback".
3139:
3109:
2592:
2087:"Contemporary Peer Review: Construct Modeling, Measurement Foundations, and the Future of Digital Learning"
1828:
Baker, Kimberly M. (1 November 2016). "Peer review as a strategy for improving students' writing process".
257:
38:
2567:
1770:
3104:
2657:
841:
298:
17:
61:
is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work (
3119:
3099:
946:
96:
522:
65:). It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant
739:"The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future"
3134:
459:
1677:
3036:
2980:
1104:
800:
644:
3076:
2792:
2748:
313:
on which participating "peer countries" submit comments. The results are published on the web.
31:
1979:"Affective Language in Student Peer Reviews: Exploring Data from Three Institutional Contexts"
976:
297:
has been using peer review in the "Open Method of Co-ordination" of policies in the fields of
248:
A secondary round of peer review for the clinical value of articles concurrently published in
3066:
3041:
2818:
2727:
2639:
2235:
2168:
573:
469:
270:
209:
Academic peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined)
200:
164:
155:
135:
74:
854:
3165:
3056:
3021:
2975:
2863:
2823:
2808:
2525:
2451:
1689:
648:
235:
223:
131:
126:
124:
Professional peer review is common in the field of health care, where it is usually called
27:
Evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work
2522:
Peer Review and Manuscript Management in Scientific Journals: Guidelines for Good Practice
1564:"Peer Review in Social Protection and Social Inclusion and Assessment in Social Inclusion"
8:
2615:
2578:
464:
357:
204:
188:
142:
2557:
2455:
2371:
2333:
2302:
2271:
1693:
1678:"Collaborative learning through formative peer review: pedagogy, programs and potential"
874:
652:
3026:
2662:
2634:
2474:
2437:
2420:
2201:
1853:
1713:
1658:
1650:
1403:
1290:
1257:
916:
889:
866:
775:
738:
618:
550:
85:. It can also be used as a teaching tool to help students improve writing assignments.
2137:
1158:"Researcher at the center of an epic fraud remains an enigma to those who exposed him"
813:
62:
3082:
2970:
2937:
2758:
2679:
2529:
2497:
2479:
2424:
2412:
2395:
Bazi, Toni (2020). "Peer Review: Single-blind, Double-blind, or All the Way-blind?".
2345:
2314:
2283:
2253:
2191:
2085:
Reese, Ashley; Rachamalla, Rajeev; Rudniy, Alex; Aull, Laura; Eubanks, David (2018).
1954:
1949:
1845:
1798:
1790:
1705:
1662:
1583:
1395:
1354:
1350:
1295:
1277:
1202:
921:
858:
817:
780:
762:
719:
656:
622:
542:
2086:
1857:
1717:
1603:
1408:
870:
703:
554:
3071:
2985:
2707:
2629:
2506:
2469:
2459:
2404:
2383:
2367:
2227:
2160:
2133:
2101:
2000:
1990:
1944:
1934:
1880:
1837:
1786:
1782:
1697:
1642:
1473:
1385:
1346:
1285:
1269:
1194:
1165:
1121:
1064:
911:
903:
850:
809:
770:
757:
752:
711:
610:
534:
302:
192:
168:
92:
2272:"The Impact of Peer Review on Writing Development in French as a Foreign Language"
1976:
1198:
990:
538:
3046:
2843:
2833:
2780:
2763:
2689:
2239:
1939:
1701:
1273:
636:
365:
353:
249:
184:
180:
88:
2172:
2995:
2965:
2901:
2868:
2838:
2787:
2674:
2669:
2443:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
2433:
2408:
2105:
1884:
1374:"Second-order peer review of the medical literature for clinical practitioners"
361:
294:
210:
78:
66:
715:
3159:
3051:
2858:
2828:
2712:
2697:
2511:
2492:
2349:
2318:
2287:
2205:
1977:
Anna WĂ€rnsby; Asko Kauppinen; Laura Aull; Djuddah Leijen; Joe Moxley (2018).
1849:
1841:
1794:
1709:
1390:
1373:
1281:
1258:"A Systematic Approach to Clinical Peer Review in a Critical Access Hospital"
890:"Dental Examinations for Quality Control: Peer Review versus Self-Assessment"
766:
743:
723:
546:
474:
346:
310:
113:
51:
2464:
2124:
Aguilar, Marta (2004). "The peer seminar, a spoken research process genre".
1170:
1157:
2493:"How Double-blind Peer Review Works and What It Takes To Be A Good Referee"
2483:
2416:
2164:
1995:
1978:
1802:
1399:
1299:
1206:
821:
784:
614:
521:
Magnifico, Alecia Marie; Woodard, Rebecca; McCarthey, Sarah (1 June 2019).
242:
Peer evaluation of clinical teaching skills for both physicians and nurses.
2231:
1646:
1358:
907:
862:
2889:
2848:
2702:
1100:
1068:
925:
276:
1654:
1542:"Mutual Learning Programme â Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion"
2911:
2813:
1112:
2584:
2387:
2376:
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
2190:, A Longitudinal Study, University of Michigan Press, pp. 56â80,
2005:
1255:
50:
A reviewer at the American National Institutes of Health evaluating a
2932:
2775:
196:
118:
887:
111:
A prototype professional peer review process was recommended in the
3005:
3000:
2927:
2717:
1050:"Student Peer Review in the Classroom: A Teaching and Grading Tool"
172:
70:
46:
30:"Independent review" redirects here. For the academic journal, see
2942:
2906:
2853:
1541:
2990:
2753:
2743:
1228:
A Guide for Professional, Clinical and Administrative Processes
888:
Milgrom P; Weinstein P; Ratener P; Read WA; Morrison K (1978).
678:"The History of Peer Review Is More Interesting Than You Think"
176:
2021:"What Are the Disadvantages of Student Peer Review? | Synonym"
3061:
2722:
2254:"Writing centers go to class: Peer review (of our) workshops"
1178:
798:
Spier, Ray (2002). "The history of the peer-review process".
1771:"Teaching peer review and the process of scientific writing"
1336:
1099:
975:. UK Legal Services Commission. 12 July 2007. Archived from
2770:
1512:
1432:. American Medical Association. p. 131. Archived from
2438:"Reviewer Bias in Single- Versus Double-blind Peer Review"
2432:
Tomkins, Andrew; Zhang, Min; Heavlin, William D. (2017) .
1127:
10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0824:PRITC]2.0.CO;2
301:
since 1999. In 2004, a program of peer reviews started in
2084:
520:
256:
Additionally, "medical peer review" has been used by the
1927:
1103:; Thorndike Pysarchik, Dawn; Taylor, William W. (2002).
2217:
2365:
1426:
Physician's Guide to Medical Staff Organization Bylaws
837:"Clinical peer review: burnishing a tarnished image"
570:"The Scientific Revolution: Correspondence Networks"
498:
National Cancer Institute Dictionary of Cancer Terms
2431:
2301:Conner, Stephanie; Gray, Jennifer (15 April 2023).
1372:Haynes RB, Cotoi C, Holland J, et al. (2006).
737:Schimanski, Lesley A.; Alperin, Juan Pablo (2018).
1870:
1371:
1675:
991:"Martindale-Hubbell Attorney Reviews and Ratings"
736:
3157:
2150:
602:Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society
599:Oldenburg, Henry (1665). "Epistle Dedicatory".
411:peer review sessions in university classrooms:
1676:SĂžndergaard, Harald; Mulder, Raoul A. (2012).
1632:
1474:"Peer review: What is it and why do we do it?"
1184:
231:may be distinguished in four classifications:
138:), aviation, and even forest fire management.
2600:
2450:(48) (published November 2017): 12708â12713.
1746:Mundy, Robert; Sugerman, Rachel (Fall 2017).
1745:
1155:
436:
318:United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
2334:"Online Peer Review Using Turnitin PeerMark"
1570:. Archived from the original on 18 July 2012
704:"Monument to peer review unveiled in Moscow"
2060:"Conducting Peer Review â Writers Workshop"
1931:Education and Technology for a Better World
701:
401:
245:Scientific peer review of journal articles.
2607:
2593:
2403:(3) (published 9 December 2019): 481â483.
2300:
2269:
1017:"Peer Review Panels â Purpose and Process"
641:Henry Oldenburg: shaping the Royal Society
2510:
2473:
2463:
2004:
1994:
1948:
1938:
1769:Guilford, William H. (1 September 2001).
1496:
1407:
1389:
1289:
1169:
1125:
915:
774:
756:
635:
598:
392:
2153:Teaching English in the Two-Year College
2126:Journal of English for Academic Purposes
1768:
1515:. December 2007. SP-610S. Archived from
1022:. USDA Forest Service. 6 February 2006.
45:
2614:
2185:
2123:
1422:
855:10.7326/0003-4819-118-7-199304010-00014
322:UNECE Environmental Performance Reviews
14:
3158:
2490:
2188:Developing Writers in Higher Education
2119:
2117:
2115:
2031:from the original on 30 September 2021
1471:
3115:Academic databases and search engines
2588:
2519:
2370:; Zhang, Guo; Cronin, Blaise (2013).
2220:College Composition and Communication
1972:
1970:
1827:
1741:
1739:
1635:College Composition and Communication
1156:Kupferschmidt, Kai (14 August 2018).
1137:from the original on 22 December 2012
1078:from the original on 22 December 2012
937:
935:
797:
675:
567:
2394:
2270:Tigchelaar, Magda (1 January 2016).
1237:from the original on 30 October 2020
1047:
1041:
1009:
997:from the original on 18 January 2020
953:from the original on 28 October 2012
834:
580:from the original on 16 January 2009
516:
514:
289:U.S. Government peer review policies
282:
2397:International Urogynecology Journal
2112:
2066:from the original on 20 August 2021
1909:from the original on 19 August 2021
1864:
1830:Active Learning in Higher Education
1809:from the original on 18 August 2021
1552:from the original on 28 March 2023.
1484:from the original on 28 August 2020
1093:
702:Schiermeier, Quirin (26 May 2017).
24:
2885:Academic journal publishing reform
2359:
2331:
2078:
2043:
1967:
1873:Journal of Second Language Writing
1736:
1626:
1614:from the original on 30 March 2017
943:"AICPA Peer Review Program Manual"
932:
881:
568:Hatch, Robert A. (February 1998).
175:reviewed (usually anonymously) by
25:
3177:
2543:
1604:"What is Scientific Peer Review?"
1505:NASA Systems Engineering Handbook
895:American Journal of Public Health
561:
511:
335:California Health and Safety Code
2550:
2094:The Journal of Writing Analytics
1775:Advances in Physiology Education
1351:10.1097/00006223-199811000-00008
1262:Quality Management in Healthcare
1029:from the original on 5 June 2011
154:This section is an excerpt from
2325:
2294:
2263:
2246:
2211:
2179:
2144:
2052:
2013:
1921:
1891:
1821:
1762:
1724:from the original on 5 May 2021
1669:
1596:
1568:peer-review-social-inclusion.eu
1556:
1534:
1465:
1443:
1416:
1365:
1330:
1306:
1249:
1213:
1149:
983:
965:
828:
676:Wills, Matthew (21 July 2024).
379:
102:
2338:Journal of Response to Writing
2307:Journal of Response to Writing
2276:Journal of Response to Writing
1787:10.1152/advances.2001.25.3.167
1472:Felman, Adam (29 March 2019).
1423:Snelson, Elizabeth A. (2010).
1105:"Peer Review in the Classroom"
1057:Journal of Agronomic Education
791:
758:10.12688/f1000research.16493.1
730:
695:
669:
629:
592:
486:
340:
77:is often used to determine an
13:
1:
3145:Category:Scientific documents
2138:10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00043-2
1199:10.1126/science.341.6152.1331
814:10.1016/S0167-7799(02)01985-6
539:10.1016/j.compcom.2019.01.005
480:
3140:Category:Academic publishing
1940:10.1007/978-3-642-03115-1_41
1702:10.1080/08993408.2012.728041
1455:American Medical Association
1274:10.1097/QMH.0000000000000113
264:
258:American Medical Association
148:
82:
39:Peer review (disambiguation)
7:
2332:Li, Mimi (1 January 2018).
1983:Journal of Academic Writing
842:Annals of Internal Medicine
453:
299:active labour market policy
10:
3182:
2958:Indexes and search engines
2409:10.1007/s00192-019-04187-2
2106:10.37514/JWA-J.2018.2.1.05
1885:10.1016/j.jslw.2012.09.005
1682:Computer Science Education
947:American Institute of CPAs
437:Comparison and improvement
344:
286:
268:
221:
217:
153:
97:Higher School of Economics
36:
29:
3092:
3014:
2956:
2920:
2877:
2801:
2736:
2688:
2650:
2622:
1899:"Benefits of Peer Review"
1588:: CS1 maint: unfit URL (
716:10.1038/nature.2017.22060
527:Computers and Composition
2512:10.1177/0011392116656711
1842:10.1177/1469787416654794
1391:10.1001/jama.295.15.1801
1048:Sims, Gerald K. (1989).
460:Objectivity (philosophy)
402:Critiques of peer review
119:IshÄq ibn Ê»AlÄ« al-RuhÄwÄ«
3135:Style/formatting guides
3037:Scholarly communication
2737:Other publication types
2491:MartĂn, Eloisa (2016).
2465:10.1073/pnas.1707323114
1171:10.1126/science.aav1079
801:Trends in Biotechnology
645:Oxford University Press
114:Ethics of the Physician
3077:Least publishable unit
2749:Collection of articles
2165:10.58680/tetyc20086557
1996:10.18552/joaw.v8i1.429
615:10.1098/rstl.1665.0001
393:Peer review in writing
55:
32:The Independent Review
3067:Electronic publishing
3042:Scientific literature
2819:Article-level metrics
2520:Hames, Irene (2007).
2372:"Bias in peer review"
2232:10.58680/ccc202332364
2025:classroom.synonym.com
1950:10536/DRO/DU:30082218
1647:10.58680/ccc201930297
1451:"Medical Peer Review"
908:10.2105/AJPH.68.4.394
574:University of Florida
494:"peer review process"
470:Scientific literature
287:Further information:
271:Technical peer review
165:Scholarly peer review
156:Scholarly peer review
136:technical peer review
75:scholarly peer review
49:
3110:Open-access journals
3057:Open scientific data
2864:SCImago Journal Rank
2824:Author-level metrics
2809:Acknowledgment index
2579:What is Peer review?
2526:Blackwell Publishing
2368:Sugimoto, Cassidy R.
1933:. pp. 388â397.
1903:www.southwestern.edu
1608:ceparev.berkeley.edu
1314:"Medschool.ucsf.edu"
1069:10.2134/jae1989.0105
236:Clinical peer review
224:Clinical peer review
132:software peer review
127:clinical peer review
37:For other uses, see
3105:Scientific journals
2616:Academic publishing
2456:2017PNAS..11412708T
1694:2012CSEd...22..343S
1546:European Commission
979:on 14 October 2010.
653:2002heol.book.....B
465:Academic publishing
229:Medical peer review
205:academic conference
83:medical peer review
3125:Copyright policies
3120:University presses
3027:Scientific writing
2895:Citation advantage
2802:Impact and ranking
2635:Scientific journal
1522:on 19 October 2013
1478:Medical News Today
1326:on 14 August 2010.
56:
3153:
3152:
3130:Preprint policies
3100:Academic journals
3083:Publish or perish
2938:Version of record
2878:Reform and access
2680:Literature review
2535:978-1-4051-3159-9
2498:Current Sociology
2388:10.1002/asi.22784
2197:978-0-472-13124-2
1960:978-3-642-03114-4
1439:on 6 August 2011.
1221:"Review by Peers"
835:Dans, PE (1993).
662:978-0-19-851053-6
283:Government policy
189:program committee
16:(Redirected from
3173:
3072:Ingelfinger rule
2986:Semantic Scholar
2708:Technical report
2630:Academic journal
2609:
2602:
2595:
2586:
2585:
2554:
2553:
2539:
2516:
2514:
2487:
2477:
2467:
2428:
2391:
2366:Lee, Carole J.;
2354:
2353:
2329:
2323:
2322:
2298:
2292:
2291:
2267:
2261:
2260:
2258:
2250:
2244:
2243:
2215:
2209:
2208:
2183:
2177:
2176:
2148:
2142:
2141:
2121:
2110:
2109:
2091:
2082:
2076:
2075:
2073:
2071:
2056:
2050:
2047:
2041:
2040:
2038:
2036:
2017:
2011:
2010:
2008:
1998:
1974:
1965:
1964:
1952:
1942:
1925:
1919:
1918:
1916:
1914:
1895:
1889:
1888:
1868:
1862:
1861:
1825:
1819:
1818:
1816:
1814:
1766:
1760:
1759:
1743:
1734:
1733:
1731:
1729:
1673:
1667:
1666:
1630:
1624:
1623:
1621:
1619:
1600:
1594:
1593:
1587:
1579:
1577:
1575:
1560:
1554:
1553:
1538:
1532:
1531:
1529:
1527:
1521:
1510:
1500:
1494:
1493:
1491:
1489:
1469:
1463:
1462:
1461:on 6 March 2010.
1457:. Archived from
1447:
1441:
1440:
1438:
1431:
1420:
1414:
1413:
1411:
1393:
1369:
1363:
1362:
1334:
1328:
1327:
1325:
1319:. Archived from
1318:
1310:
1304:
1303:
1293:
1253:
1247:
1246:
1244:
1242:
1236:
1225:
1217:
1211:
1210:
1182:
1176:
1175:
1173:
1153:
1147:
1146:
1144:
1142:
1136:
1129:
1109:
1097:
1091:
1090:
1085:
1083:
1077:
1054:
1045:
1039:
1038:
1036:
1034:
1028:
1021:
1013:
1007:
1006:
1004:
1002:
987:
981:
980:
969:
963:
962:
960:
958:
939:
930:
929:
919:
885:
879:
878:
877:on 21 July 2012.
873:. Archived from
832:
826:
825:
795:
789:
788:
778:
760:
734:
728:
727:
699:
693:
692:
690:
688:
673:
667:
666:
637:Boas Hall, Marie
633:
627:
626:
596:
590:
589:
587:
585:
565:
559:
558:
518:
509:
508:
506:
504:
490:
366:natural sciences
303:social inclusion
250:medical journals
193:academic journal
143:Bloom's taxonomy
21:
3181:
3180:
3176:
3175:
3174:
3172:
3171:
3170:
3156:
3155:
3154:
3149:
3088:
3047:Learned society
3010:
2952:
2916:
2873:
2844:Journal ranking
2834:Citation impact
2797:
2732:
2690:Grey literature
2684:
2646:
2618:
2613:
2575:
2574:
2573:
2555:
2551:
2546:
2536:
2434:Fiske, Susan T.
2362:
2360:Further reading
2357:
2330:
2326:
2299:
2295:
2268:
2264:
2256:
2252:
2251:
2247:
2216:
2212:
2198:
2184:
2180:
2149:
2145:
2122:
2113:
2089:
2083:
2079:
2069:
2067:
2058:
2057:
2053:
2048:
2044:
2034:
2032:
2019:
2018:
2014:
1975:
1968:
1961:
1926:
1922:
1912:
1910:
1897:
1896:
1892:
1869:
1865:
1826:
1822:
1812:
1810:
1767:
1763:
1752:The Peer Review
1744:
1737:
1727:
1725:
1674:
1670:
1631:
1627:
1617:
1615:
1602:
1601:
1597:
1581:
1580:
1573:
1571:
1562:
1561:
1557:
1540:
1539:
1535:
1525:
1523:
1519:
1508:
1502:
1501:
1497:
1487:
1485:
1470:
1466:
1449:
1448:
1444:
1436:
1429:
1421:
1417:
1370:
1366:
1335:
1331:
1323:
1316:
1312:
1311:
1307:
1254:
1250:
1240:
1238:
1234:
1223:
1219:
1218:
1214:
1183:
1179:
1154:
1150:
1140:
1138:
1134:
1107:
1098:
1094:
1081:
1079:
1075:
1052:
1046:
1042:
1032:
1030:
1026:
1019:
1015:
1014:
1010:
1000:
998:
989:
988:
984:
971:
970:
966:
956:
954:
941:
940:
933:
886:
882:
833:
829:
796:
792:
735:
731:
700:
696:
686:
684:
674:
670:
663:
634:
630:
597:
593:
583:
581:
566:
562:
519:
512:
502:
500:
492:
491:
487:
483:
456:
439:
404:
395:
382:
349:
343:
337:Section 57004.
291:
285:
273:
267:
226:
220:
215:
214:
185:editorial board
181:editor-in-chief
159:
151:
105:
89:Henry Oldenburg
42:
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
3179:
3169:
3168:
3151:
3150:
3148:
3147:
3142:
3137:
3132:
3127:
3122:
3117:
3112:
3107:
3102:
3096:
3094:
3090:
3089:
3087:
3086:
3079:
3074:
3069:
3064:
3059:
3054:
3049:
3044:
3039:
3034:
3029:
3024:
3018:
3016:
3015:Related topics
3012:
3011:
3009:
3008:
3003:
2998:
2996:Web of Science
2993:
2988:
2983:
2978:
2973:
2968:
2966:Google Scholar
2962:
2960:
2954:
2953:
2951:
2950:
2945:
2940:
2935:
2930:
2924:
2922:
2918:
2917:
2915:
2914:
2909:
2904:
2902:Serials crisis
2899:
2898:
2897:
2887:
2881:
2879:
2875:
2874:
2872:
2871:
2869:Scientometrics
2866:
2861:
2856:
2851:
2846:
2841:
2839:Citation index
2836:
2831:
2826:
2821:
2816:
2811:
2805:
2803:
2799:
2798:
2796:
2795:
2790:
2788:Poster session
2785:
2784:
2783:
2778:
2768:
2767:
2766:
2761:
2751:
2746:
2740:
2738:
2734:
2733:
2731:
2730:
2725:
2720:
2715:
2710:
2705:
2700:
2694:
2692:
2686:
2685:
2683:
2682:
2677:
2675:Position paper
2672:
2670:Review article
2667:
2666:
2665:
2654:
2652:
2648:
2647:
2645:
2644:
2643:
2642:
2632:
2626:
2624:
2620:
2619:
2612:
2611:
2604:
2597:
2589:
2583:
2582:
2556:
2549:
2548:
2547:
2545:
2544:External links
2542:
2541:
2540:
2534:
2524:. Oxford, UK:
2517:
2505:(5): 691â698.
2488:
2429:
2392:
2361:
2358:
2356:
2355:
2324:
2293:
2262:
2245:
2226:(3): 485â521.
2210:
2196:
2178:
2159:(4): 398â407.
2143:
2111:
2077:
2051:
2042:
2012:
1966:
1959:
1920:
1890:
1879:(4): 364â374.
1863:
1836:(3): 179â192.
1820:
1781:(3): 167â175.
1761:
1735:
1688:(4): 343â367.
1668:
1641:(1): 117â144.
1625:
1595:
1555:
1533:
1495:
1464:
1442:
1415:
1384:(15): 1801â8.
1364:
1339:Nurse Educator
1329:
1305:
1268:(4): 213â218.
1248:
1212:
1193:(6152): 1331.
1177:
1148:
1120:(9): 824â829.
1092:
1063:(2): 105â108.
1040:
1008:
993:. Martindale.
982:
964:
931:
902:(4): 394â401.
880:
827:
790:
729:
694:
668:
661:
628:
591:
560:
510:
484:
482:
479:
478:
477:
472:
467:
462:
455:
452:
438:
435:
426:
425:
421:
417:
403:
400:
394:
391:
381:
378:
345:Main article:
342:
339:
295:European Union
284:
281:
269:Main article:
266:
263:
254:
253:
246:
243:
240:
222:Main article:
219:
216:
211:academic field
160:
152:
150:
147:
104:
101:
79:academic paper
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3178:
3167:
3164:
3163:
3161:
3146:
3143:
3141:
3138:
3136:
3133:
3131:
3128:
3126:
3123:
3121:
3118:
3116:
3113:
3111:
3108:
3106:
3103:
3101:
3098:
3097:
3095:
3091:
3084:
3080:
3078:
3075:
3073:
3070:
3068:
3065:
3063:
3060:
3058:
3055:
3053:
3052:Open research
3050:
3048:
3045:
3043:
3040:
3038:
3035:
3033:
3030:
3028:
3025:
3023:
3020:
3019:
3017:
3013:
3007:
3004:
3002:
2999:
2997:
2994:
2992:
2989:
2987:
2984:
2982:
2979:
2977:
2974:
2972:
2969:
2967:
2964:
2963:
2961:
2959:
2955:
2949:
2946:
2944:
2941:
2939:
2936:
2934:
2931:
2929:
2926:
2925:
2923:
2919:
2913:
2910:
2908:
2905:
2903:
2900:
2896:
2893:
2892:
2891:
2888:
2886:
2883:
2882:
2880:
2876:
2870:
2867:
2865:
2862:
2860:
2859:Impact factor
2857:
2855:
2852:
2850:
2847:
2845:
2842:
2840:
2837:
2835:
2832:
2830:
2829:Bibliometrics
2827:
2825:
2822:
2820:
2817:
2815:
2812:
2810:
2807:
2806:
2804:
2800:
2794:
2791:
2789:
2786:
2782:
2779:
2777:
2774:
2773:
2772:
2769:
2765:
2762:
2760:
2757:
2756:
2755:
2752:
2750:
2747:
2745:
2742:
2741:
2739:
2735:
2729:
2726:
2724:
2721:
2719:
2716:
2714:
2713:Annual report
2711:
2709:
2706:
2704:
2701:
2699:
2698:Working paper
2696:
2695:
2693:
2691:
2687:
2681:
2678:
2676:
2673:
2671:
2668:
2664:
2661:
2660:
2659:
2656:
2655:
2653:
2649:
2641:
2640:Public health
2638:
2637:
2636:
2633:
2631:
2628:
2627:
2625:
2621:
2617:
2610:
2605:
2603:
2598:
2596:
2591:
2590:
2587:
2580:
2577:
2576:
2571:
2570:
2569:
2563:
2559:
2537:
2531:
2527:
2523:
2518:
2513:
2508:
2504:
2500:
2499:
2494:
2489:
2485:
2481:
2476:
2471:
2466:
2461:
2457:
2453:
2449:
2445:
2444:
2439:
2435:
2430:
2426:
2422:
2418:
2414:
2410:
2406:
2402:
2398:
2393:
2389:
2385:
2381:
2377:
2373:
2369:
2364:
2363:
2351:
2347:
2343:
2339:
2335:
2328:
2320:
2316:
2312:
2308:
2304:
2297:
2289:
2285:
2281:
2277:
2273:
2266:
2255:
2249:
2241:
2237:
2233:
2229:
2225:
2221:
2214:
2207:
2206:j.ctvdjrpt3.7
2203:
2199:
2193:
2189:
2182:
2174:
2170:
2166:
2162:
2158:
2154:
2147:
2139:
2135:
2131:
2127:
2120:
2118:
2116:
2107:
2103:
2099:
2095:
2088:
2081:
2065:
2061:
2055:
2046:
2030:
2026:
2022:
2016:
2007:
2002:
1997:
1992:
1988:
1984:
1980:
1973:
1971:
1962:
1956:
1951:
1946:
1941:
1936:
1932:
1924:
1908:
1904:
1900:
1894:
1886:
1882:
1878:
1874:
1867:
1859:
1855:
1851:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1835:
1831:
1824:
1808:
1804:
1800:
1796:
1792:
1788:
1784:
1780:
1776:
1772:
1765:
1757:
1753:
1749:
1742:
1740:
1723:
1719:
1715:
1711:
1707:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1691:
1687:
1683:
1679:
1672:
1664:
1660:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1629:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1599:
1591:
1585:
1569:
1565:
1559:
1551:
1547:
1543:
1537:
1518:
1514:
1507:
1506:
1499:
1483:
1479:
1475:
1468:
1460:
1456:
1452:
1446:
1435:
1428:
1427:
1419:
1410:
1405:
1401:
1397:
1392:
1387:
1383:
1379:
1375:
1368:
1360:
1356:
1352:
1348:
1344:
1340:
1333:
1322:
1315:
1309:
1301:
1297:
1292:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1252:
1233:
1229:
1222:
1216:
1208:
1204:
1200:
1196:
1192:
1188:
1181:
1172:
1167:
1163:
1159:
1152:
1133:
1128:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1114:
1106:
1102:
1096:
1089:
1074:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1051:
1044:
1025:
1018:
1012:
996:
992:
986:
978:
974:
973:"Peer Review"
968:
952:
948:
944:
938:
936:
927:
923:
918:
913:
909:
905:
901:
897:
896:
891:
884:
876:
872:
868:
864:
860:
856:
852:
848:
844:
843:
838:
831:
823:
819:
815:
811:
807:
803:
802:
794:
786:
782:
777:
772:
768:
764:
759:
754:
750:
746:
745:
744:F1000Research
740:
733:
725:
721:
717:
713:
709:
705:
698:
683:
679:
672:
664:
658:
654:
650:
646:
642:
638:
632:
624:
620:
616:
612:
608:
604:
603:
595:
579:
575:
571:
564:
556:
552:
548:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
524:
517:
515:
499:
495:
489:
485:
476:
475:Peer critique
473:
471:
468:
466:
463:
461:
458:
457:
451:
447:
443:
434:
430:
422:
418:
414:
413:
412:
408:
399:
390:
386:
377:
373:
369:
367:
363:
359:
355:
348:
347:Peer feedback
338:
336:
331:
325:
323:
319:
314:
312:
311:expert report
308:
304:
300:
296:
290:
280:
278:
272:
262:
259:
251:
247:
244:
241:
237:
234:
233:
232:
230:
225:
212:
208:
206:
202:
198:
194:
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
170:
166:
162:
157:
146:
144:
139:
137:
133:
129:
128:
122:
120:
116:
115:
109:
100:
98:
94:
90:
86:
84:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
60:
53:
48:
44:
40:
33:
19:
3031:
2566:
2565:
2564:profile for
2561:
2521:
2502:
2496:
2447:
2441:
2400:
2396:
2379:
2375:
2341:
2337:
2327:
2310:
2306:
2296:
2279:
2275:
2265:
2248:
2223:
2219:
2213:
2187:
2181:
2156:
2152:
2146:
2129:
2125:
2097:
2093:
2080:
2068:. Retrieved
2054:
2045:
2033:. Retrieved
2024:
2015:
1989:(1): 28â53.
1986:
1982:
1930:
1923:
1911:. Retrieved
1902:
1893:
1876:
1872:
1866:
1833:
1829:
1823:
1811:. Retrieved
1778:
1774:
1764:
1755:
1751:
1726:. Retrieved
1685:
1681:
1671:
1638:
1634:
1628:
1616:. Retrieved
1607:
1598:
1574:30 September
1572:. Retrieved
1567:
1558:
1545:
1536:
1524:. Retrieved
1517:the original
1504:
1498:
1486:. Retrieved
1477:
1467:
1459:the original
1454:
1445:
1434:the original
1425:
1418:
1381:
1377:
1367:
1345:(6): 17â20.
1342:
1338:
1332:
1321:the original
1308:
1265:
1261:
1251:
1239:. Retrieved
1227:
1215:
1190:
1186:
1180:
1161:
1151:
1139:. Retrieved
1117:
1111:
1101:Liu, Jianguo
1095:
1087:
1080:. Retrieved
1060:
1056:
1043:
1031:. Retrieved
1011:
999:. Retrieved
985:
977:the original
967:
955:. Retrieved
899:
893:
883:
875:the original
849:(7): 566â8.
846:
840:
830:
808:(8): 357â8.
805:
799:
793:
748:
742:
732:
707:
697:
685:. Retrieved
681:
671:
640:
631:
606:
600:
594:
582:. Retrieved
563:
530:
526:
501:. Retrieved
497:
488:
448:
444:
440:
431:
427:
424:improvement.
409:
405:
396:
387:
383:
380:Peer seminar
374:
370:
350:
326:
315:
292:
274:
255:
239:privileging.
228:
227:
163:
161:
140:
125:
123:
112:
110:
106:
103:Professional
99:in Moscow.
87:
58:
57:
43:
3166:Peer review
3032:Peer review
2912:#ICanHazPDF
2890:Open access
2849:Eigenfactor
2793:Proceedings
2703:White paper
2581:at Elsevier
2568:Peer review
2382:(1): 2â17.
1141:4 September
1082:4 September
957:4 September
682:JSTOR Daily
533:: 107â131.
358:composition
341:Pedagogical
277:engineering
201:proceedings
117:written by
59:Peer review
18:Peer-review
2948:Retraction
2921:Versioning
2814:Altmetrics
2759:Biological
2240:2802085546
2100:: 96â137.
2006:2043/26718
1113:BioScience
1001:27 January
643:. Oxford:
481:References
320:, through
199:or in the
2933:Postprint
2776:Monograph
2728:Lab notes
2425:208869313
2350:2575-9809
2319:2575-9809
2288:2575-9809
2173:220963655
2132:: 55â72.
2070:20 August
2035:20 August
1913:19 August
1850:1469-7874
1813:18 August
1795:1043-4046
1728:18 August
1710:0899-3408
1663:219259301
1282:1063-8628
1033:4 October
767:2046-1402
724:1476-4687
623:186211404
584:21 August
547:8755-4615
416:insights.
265:Technical
197:monograph
149:Scholarly
3160:Category
3006:OpenAlex
3001:Paperity
2928:Preprint
2764:Chemical
2718:Pamphlet
2663:Abstract
2623:Journals
2484:29138317
2417:31820012
2236:ProQuest
2169:ProQuest
2064:Archived
2029:Archived
1907:Archived
1858:49527249
1807:Archived
1803:11824193
1722:Archived
1718:40784250
1655:26821317
1618:30 March
1612:Archived
1584:cite web
1550:Archived
1488:6 August
1482:Archived
1409:42567486
1400:16622142
1300:27749718
1241:6 August
1232:Archived
1207:24052283
1132:Archived
1073:Archived
1024:Archived
995:Archived
951:Archived
871:45863865
822:12127284
785:30647909
751:: 1605.
639:(2002).
578:Archived
555:86438229
454:See also
420:writing.
173:findings
71:academia
54:proposal
3022:Imprint
2943:Erratum
2907:Sci-Hub
2854:h-index
2781:Chapter
2558:Scholia
2475:5715744
2452:Bibcode
2436:(ed.).
1690:Bibcode
1526:19 July
1359:9934106
1291:5054974
1187:Science
1162:Science
917:1653950
863:8442628
776:6325612
687:29 July
649:Bibcode
354:English
218:Medical
187:or the
177:experts
169:methods
2991:Scopus
2971:AMiner
2754:Patent
2744:Thesis
2651:Papers
2560:has a
2532:
2482:
2472:
2423:
2415:
2348:
2317:
2286:
2238:
2204:
2194:
2171:
1957:
1856:
1848:
1801:
1793:
1716:
1708:
1661:
1653:
1406:
1398:
1357:
1298:
1288:
1280:
1205:
926:645987
924:
914:
869:
861:
820:
783:
773:
765:
722:
708:Nature
659:
621:
553:
545:
503:5 July
362:social
330:CalEPA
203:of an
183:, the
93:Nature
3093:Lists
3062:ORCID
2723:Essay
2658:Paper
2562:topic
2421:S2CID
2344:(2).
2313:(1).
2282:(2).
2257:(PDF)
2202:JSTOR
2090:(PDF)
1854:S2CID
1714:S2CID
1659:S2CID
1651:JSTOR
1520:(PDF)
1509:(PDF)
1437:(PDF)
1430:(PDF)
1404:S2CID
1324:(PDF)
1317:(PDF)
1235:(PDF)
1224:(PDF)
1135:(PDF)
1108:(PDF)
1076:(PDF)
1053:(PDF)
1027:(PDF)
1020:(PDF)
867:S2CID
619:S2CID
609:: 0.
551:S2CID
67:field
63:peers
52:grant
2981:CORE
2976:BASE
2771:Book
2530:ISBN
2480:PMID
2413:PMID
2346:ISSN
2315:ISSN
2284:ISSN
2192:ISBN
2072:2021
2037:2021
1955:ISBN
1915:2021
1846:ISSN
1815:2021
1799:PMID
1791:ISSN
1758:(2).
1730:2021
1706:ISSN
1620:2017
1590:link
1576:2021
1528:2019
1513:NASA
1490:2020
1396:PMID
1378:JAMA
1355:PMID
1296:PMID
1278:ISSN
1243:2020
1203:PMID
1143:2012
1084:2012
1035:2010
1003:2020
959:2012
922:PMID
859:PMID
818:PMID
781:PMID
763:ISSN
720:ISSN
689:2024
657:ISBN
586:2016
543:ISSN
505:2022
364:and
356:and
316:The
307:NGOs
293:The
195:, a
171:and
2507:doi
2470:PMC
2460:doi
2448:114
2405:doi
2384:doi
2228:doi
2161:doi
2134:doi
2102:doi
2001:hdl
1991:doi
1945:hdl
1935:doi
1881:doi
1838:doi
1783:doi
1698:doi
1643:doi
1386:doi
1382:295
1347:doi
1286:PMC
1270:doi
1195:doi
1191:341
1166:doi
1122:doi
1065:doi
912:PMC
904:doi
851:doi
847:118
810:doi
771:PMC
753:doi
712:doi
611:doi
535:doi
368:.
275:In
3162::
2528:.
2503:64
2501:.
2495:.
2478:.
2468:.
2458:.
2446:.
2440:.
2419:.
2411:.
2401:31
2399:.
2380:64
2378:.
2374:.
2340:.
2336:.
2309:.
2305:.
2278:.
2274:.
2234:.
2224:74
2222:.
2200:,
2167:.
2157:35
2155:.
2128:.
2114:^
2096:.
2092:.
2062:.
2027:.
2023:.
1999:.
1985:.
1981:.
1969:^
1953:.
1943:.
1905:.
1901:.
1877:21
1875:.
1852:.
1844:.
1834:17
1832:.
1805:.
1797:.
1789:.
1779:25
1777:.
1773:.
1754:.
1750:.
1738:^
1720:.
1712:.
1704:.
1696:.
1686:22
1684:.
1680:.
1657:.
1649:.
1639:71
1637:.
1610:.
1606:.
1586:}}
1582:{{
1566:.
1548:.
1544:.
1511:.
1480:.
1476:.
1453:.
1402:.
1394:.
1380:.
1376:.
1353:.
1343:23
1341:.
1294:.
1284:.
1276:.
1266:25
1264:.
1260:.
1230:.
1226:.
1201:.
1189:.
1164:.
1160:.
1130:.
1118:52
1116:.
1110:.
1086:.
1071:.
1061:18
1059:.
1055:.
949:.
945:.
934:^
920:.
910:.
900:68
898:.
892:.
865:.
857:.
845:.
839:.
816:.
806:20
804:.
779:.
769:.
761:.
747:.
741:.
718:.
710:.
706:.
680:.
655:.
647:.
617:.
605:.
576:.
572:.
549:.
541:.
531:52
529:.
525:.
513:^
496:.
134:,
73:,
3085:"
3081:"
2608:e
2601:t
2594:v
2572:.
2538:.
2515:.
2509::
2486:.
2462::
2454::
2427:.
2407::
2390:.
2386::
2352:.
2342:4
2321:.
2311:9
2290:.
2280:2
2259:.
2242:.
2230::
2175:.
2163::
2140:.
2136::
2130:3
2108:.
2104::
2098:2
2074:.
2039:.
2009:.
2003::
1993::
1987:8
1963:.
1947::
1937::
1917:.
1887:.
1883::
1860:.
1840::
1817:.
1785::
1756:1
1732:.
1700::
1692::
1665:.
1645::
1622:.
1592:)
1578:.
1530:.
1492:.
1412:.
1388::
1361:.
1349::
1302:.
1272::
1245:.
1209:.
1197::
1174:.
1168::
1145:.
1124::
1067::
1037:.
1005:.
961:.
928:.
906::
853::
824:.
812::
787:.
755::
749:7
726:.
714::
691:.
665:.
651::
625:.
613::
607:1
588:.
557:.
537::
507:.
252:.
158:.
41:.
34:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
