Cargando…

A retrospective analysis of the effect of discussion in teleconference and face-to-face scientific peer-review panels

OBJECTIVE: With the use of teleconferencing for grant peer-review panels increasing, further studies are necessary to determine the efficacy of the teleconference setting compared to the traditional onsite/face-to-face setting. The objective of this analysis was to examine the effects of discussion,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Carpenter, Afton S, Sullivan, Joanne H, Deshmukh, Arati, Glisson, Scott R, Gallo, Stephen A
Formato:	Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:	English
Publicado:	BMJ Publishing Group 2015
Materias:	Medical Publishing and Peer Review
Acceso en línea:	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4563222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26351194 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009138

Ejemplares similares

Teleconference versus Face-to-Face Scientific Peer Review of Grant Application: Effects on Review Outcomes
por: Gallo, Stephen A., et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Supporting patient and public partners in writing lay summaries of scientific evidence in healthcare: a scoping review protocol
por: Zarshenas, Sareh, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Influence of external peer reviewer scores for funding applications on funding board decisions: a retrospective analysis of 1561 reviews
por: Sorrell, Lexy, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Performance curves of medical researchers during their career: analysis of scientific production from a retrospective cohort
por: Duclos, Antoine, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Peer review comments on drug trials submitted to medical journals differ depending on sponsorship, results and acceptance: a retrospective cohort study
por: van Lent, Marlies, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Using simplified peer review processes to fund research: a prospective study
por: Herbert, Danielle L, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Editors’ perspectives on the peer-review process in biomedical journals: protocol for a qualitative study
por: Glonti, Ketevan, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Development of ARCADIA: a tool for assessing the quality of peer-review reports in biomedical research
por: Superchi, Cecilia, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Journal editors’ perspectives on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in biomedical journals: a qualitative study
por: Glonti, Ketevan, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

A scoping review protocol on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals
por: Glonti, Ketevan, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Training patients to review scientific reports for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: an observational study
por: Ivlev, Ilya, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Cross-sectional study of the relationship between women’s representation among editors and peer reviewers in journals of the British Medical Journal Publishing Group
por: Pinho-Gomes, Ana-Catarina, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Peer Reviewed Evaluation of Registered End-Points of Randomised Trials (the PRE-REPORT study): a stepped wedge, cluster-randomised trial
por: Jones, Christopher W, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

A protocol of a cross-sectional study evaluating an online tool for early career peer reviewers assessing reports of randomised controlled trials
por: Chauvin, Anthony, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Peer reviewed evaluation of registered end-points of randomised trials (the PRE-REPORT study): protocol for a stepped-wedge, cluster-randomised trial
por: Jones, Christopher W, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Scientific research output in orthopaedics from China and other top-ranking countries: a 10-year survey of the literature
por: Zou, Yuming, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Gender parity in scientific authorship in a National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre: a bibliometric analysis
por: Shah, Syed Ghulam Sarwar, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Does knowledge have a half-life? An observational study analyzing the use of older citations in medical and scientific publications
por: Chow, Natalie L.Y., et al.
Publicado: (2023)

Bibliometric analysis of scientific publications in transplantation journals from Mainland China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan between 2006 and 2015
por: Pu, Qiang-Hong, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Impact of a short version of the CONSORT checklist for peer reviewers to improve the reporting of randomised controlled trials published in biomedical journals: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
por: Speich, Benjamin, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Non-inferiority trials: are they inferior? A systematic review of reporting in major medical journals
por: Rehal, Sunita, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Grant reviewer perceptions of the quality, effectiveness, and influence of panel discussion
por: Gallo, Stephen A., et al.
Publicado: (2020)

The Influence of Peer Reviewer Expertise on the Evaluation of Research Funding Applications
por: Gallo, Stephen A., et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Peer reviewers
por: Wauson, Stephanie D.
Publicado: (2021)

Reporting of retrospective registration in clinical trial publications: a cross-sectional study of German trials
por: Haslberger, Martin, et al.
Publicado: (2023)

The Validation of Peer Review through Research Impact Measures and the Implications for Funding Strategies
por: Gallo, Stephen A., et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Characteristics and publication fate of unregistered and retrospectively registered clinical trials submitted to The BMJ over 4 years
por: Loder, Elizabeth, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Fate of manuscripts rejected by a non-English-language general medical journal: a retrospective cohort study
por: Vinther, Siri, et al.
Publicado: (2011)

Relationship between maternal hypoglycaemia and small-for-gestational-age infants according to maternal weight status: a retrospective cohort study in two hospitals
por: Shinohara, Satoshi, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Interpretation of CIs in clinical trials with non-significant results: systematic review and recommendations
por: Gewandter, Jennifer S, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Peer reviewers for JACEP Open
Publicado: (2020)

Peer Reviewers for 2021–2022
por: Wauson, Stephanie
Publicado: (2022)

How often do US-based human subjects research studies register on time, and how often do they post their results? A statistical analysis of the Clinicaltrials.gov database
por: Gill, Christopher J
Publicado: (2012)

Haphazard reporting of deaths in clinical trials: a review of cases of ClinicalTrials.gov records and matched publications–a cross-sectional study
por: Earley, Amy, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Systematic review on the primary and secondary reporting of the prevalence of ghostwriting in the medical literature
por: Stretton, Serina
Publicado: (2014)

How does under-reporting of negative and inconclusive results affect the false-positive rate in meta-analysis? A simulation study
por: Kicinski, Michal
Publicado: (2014)

Poor adherence of randomised trials in surgery to CONSORT guidelines for non-pharmacological treatments (NPT): a cross-sectional study
por: Nagendran, Myura, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Quality of descriptions of treatments: a review of published randomised controlled trials
por: Schroter, Sara, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Awareness and enforcement of guidelines for publishing industry-sponsored medical research among publication professionals: the Global Publication Survey
por: Wager, Elizabeth, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Occurrence and determinants of selective reporting of clinical drug trials: design of an inception cohort study
por: van den Bogert, Cornelis A, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Cannot write session to /tmp/vufind_sessions/sess_8h2komqsqmf618lclun1osgjvr