Cargando…

Peer review comments on drug trials submitted to medical journals differ depending on sponsorship, results and acceptance: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE: During peer review, submitted manuscripts are scrutinised by independent experts to assist journal editors in their decision-making and to help improve the quality of articles. In this retrospective cohort study, peer review comments for drug trials submitted to medical journals were anal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	van Lent, Marlies, IntHout, Joanna, Out, Henk Jan
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/PMC4593154/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26423849 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007961

Ejemplares similares

Role of Editorial and Peer Review Processes in Publication Bias: Analysis of Drug Trials Submitted to Eight Medical Journals
por: van Lent, Marlies, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Shortcomings of protocols of drug trials in relation to sponsorship as identified by Research Ethics Committees: analysis of comments raised during ethical review
por: van Lent, Marlies, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

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

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

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)

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)

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)

A retrospective analysis of the effect of discussion in teleconference and face-to-face scientific peer-review panels
por: Carpenter, Afton S, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

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)

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)

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

Conflict-of-interest disclosure at medical journals in Japan: a nationwide survey of the practices of journal secretariats
por: Kojima, Takako, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Data-sharing recommendations in biomedical journals and randomised controlled trials: an audit of journals following the ICMJE recommendations
por: Siebert, Maximilian, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Editors’ and authors’ individual conflicts of interest disclosure and journal transparency. A cross-sectional study of high-impact medical specialty journals
por: Dal-Ré, Rafael, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Plagiarism in research: a survey of African medical journals
por: Rohwer, Anke, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

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

Knowledge and motivations of researchers publishing in presumed predatory journals: a survey
por: Cobey, Kelly D, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

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

Has open data arrived at the British Medical Journal (BMJ)? An observational study
por: Rowhani-Farid, Anisa, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Role of supplementary material in biomedical journal articles: surveys of authors, reviewers and readers
por: Price, Amy, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Open access policies of leading medical journals: a cross-sectional study
por: Ellison, Tim S, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

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

Assessing the impact of predatory journals on policy and guidance documents: a cross-sectional study protocol
por: Brandts-Longtin, Olivier, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Reporting quality of abstracts of trials published in top five pain journals: a protocol for a systematic survey
por: Sriganesh, Kamath, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Characteristics of scholars who review for predatory and legitimate journals: linkage study of Cabells Scholarly Analytics and Publons data
por: Severin, Anna, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Reporting of data on participant ethnicity and socioeconomic status in high-impact medical journals: a targeted literature review
por: Buttery, Sara C, 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)

Reporting quality of randomised controlled trial abstracts among high-impact general medical journals: a review and analysis
por: Hays, Meredith, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

How are risk ratios reported in orthopaedic surgery journals? A descriptive study of formats used to report absolute risks
por: Petrova, Dafina, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Quantifying gender disparity in physician authorship among commentary articles in three high-impact medical journals: an observational study
por: Mamtani, Mira, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Gender disparity between authors in leading medical journals during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional review
por: Misra, Vaidehi, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

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)

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)

Cross-sectional study of preprints and final journal publications from COVID-19 studies: discrepancies in results reporting and spin in interpretation
por: Bero, Lisa, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Survey of quality and clarity of methods and results reporting in 1 year of intervention studies published in high-impact medical and psychiatric journals
por: Ravichandran, Caitlin, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Authorship inequality: a bibliometric study of the concentration of authorship among a diminishing number of individuals in high-impact medical journals, 2008–2019
por: Hart, Kamber L, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Differences in reporting serious adverse events in industry sponsored clinical trial registries and journal articles on antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs: a cross-sectional study
por: Hughes, Shannon, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Perception of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement of authors publishing reviews in nursing journals: a cross-sectional online survey
por: Tam, Wilson W S, et al.
Publicado: (2019)

Protocol for a meta-research study of protocols for diet or nutrition-related trials published in indexed journals: general aspects of study design, rationale and reporting limitations
por: Silva, Flávia Moraes, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Cannot write session to /tmp/vufind_sessions/sess_c19e7jg82rsi1n4mk00ukdbfqh