Cargando…

Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The peer review process is a cornerstone of biomedical research. We aimed to evaluate the impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review for biomedical publications. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Bruce, Rachel, Chauvin, Anthony, Trinquart, Ludovic, Ravaud, Philippe, Boutron, Isabelle
Formato:	Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:	English
Publicado:	BioMed Central 2016
Materias:	Research Article
Acceso en línea:	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4902984/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27287500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0631-5

Ejemplares similares

The Global Burden of Journal Peer Review in the Biomedical Literature: Strong Imbalance in the Collective Enterprise
por: Kovanis, Michail, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

The most important tasks for peer reviewers evaluating a randomized controlled trial are not congruent with the tasks most often requested by journal editors
por: Chauvin, Anthony, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Complex systems approach to scientific publication and peer-review system: development of an agent-based model calibrated with empirical journal data
por: Kovanis, Michail, et al.
Publicado: (2015)

Influence of trial sample size on treatment effect estimates: meta-epidemiological study
por: Dechartres, Agnes, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

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

Comparison of Treatment Effect Estimates for Pharmacological Randomized Controlled Trials Enrolling Older Adults Only and Those including Adults: A Meta-Epidemiological Study
por: Seegers, Valérie, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Impact of single centre status on estimates of intervention effects in trials with continuous outcomes: meta-epidemiological study
por: Bafeta, Aïda, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Designs of trials assessing interventions to improve the peer review process: a vignette-based survey
por: Heim, Amytis, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Best peer reviewers and the quality of peer review in biomedical journals
por: Gasparyan, Armen Yuri, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

A scoping review on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals
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)

Evaluating alternative systems of peer review: a large-scale agent-based modelling approach to scientific publication
por: Kovanis, Michail, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

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)

Analysis of the systematic reviews process in reports of network meta-analyses: methodological systematic review
por: Bafeta, Aïda, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Reporting of results from network meta-analyses: methodological systematic review
por: Bafeta, Aïda, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Underrepresentation of Elderly People in Randomised Controlled Trials. The Example of Trials of 4 Widely Prescribed Drugs
por: Konrat, Cécile, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Meta-Analysis of a Complex Network of Non-Pharmacological Interventions: The Example of Femoral Neck Fracture
por: Mosseri, Jonathan, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Accuracy in detecting inadequate research reporting by early career peer reviewers using an online CONSORT-based peer-review tool (COBPeer) versus the usual peer-review process: a cross-sectional diagnostic study
por: Chauvin, Anthony, 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)

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)

Adjustment for reporting bias in network meta-analysis of antidepressant trials
por: Trinquart, Ludovic, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Impact of Reporting Bias in Network Meta-Analysis of Antidepressant Placebo-Controlled Trials
por: Trinquart, Ludovic, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

A scoping review on biomedical journal peer review guides for reviewers
por: Song, Eunhye, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Live cumulative network meta-analysis: protocol for second-line treatments in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with wild-type or unknown status for epidermal growth factor receptor
por: Créquit, Perrine, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Impact of peer review on reports of randomised trials published in open peer review journals: retrospective before and after study
por: Hopewell, Sally, et al.
Publicado: (2014)

Journal editors’ perspectives on the communication practices in biomedical journals: a qualitative study
por: Glonti, Ketevan, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Wasted research when systematic reviews fail to provide a complete and up-to-date evidence synthesis: the example of lung cancer
por: Créquit, Perrine, et al.
Publicado: (2016)

Impact of searching clinical trial registries in systematic reviews of pharmaceutical treatments: methodological systematic review and reanalysis of meta-analyses
por: Baudard, Marie, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Effect of editors’ implementation of CONSORT guidelines on the reporting of abstracts in high impact medical journals: interrupted time series analysis
por: Hopewell, Sally, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Effects of Experimental Interventions to Improve the Biomedical Peer‐Review Process: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
por: Gaudino, Mario, et al.
Publicado: (2021)

Inadequate description of educational interventions in ongoing randomized controlled trials
por: Pino, Cécile, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

Changes in evidence for studies assessing interventions for COVID-19 reported in preprints: meta-research study
por: Oikonomidi, Theodora, et al.
Publicado: (2020)

Assessment of transparency and selective reporting of interventional trials studying colorectal cancer
por: Pellat, Anna, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Timing and Completeness of Trial Results Posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and Published in Journals
por: Riveros, Carolina, et al.
Publicado: (2013)

Availability of results of interventional studies assessing colorectal cancer from 2013 to 2020
por: Pellat, Anna, et al.
Publicado: (2022)

Avoidable waste related to inadequate methods and incomplete reporting of interventions: a systematic review of randomized trials performed in Sub-Saharan Africa
por: Ndounga Diakou, Lee Aymar, et al.
Publicado: (2017)

Peer Review Quality and Transparency of the Peer-Review Process in Open Access and Subscription Journals
por: Wicherts, Jelte M.
Publicado: (2016)

Correction to: Avoidable waste related to inadequate methods and incomplete reporting of interventions: a systematic review of randomized trials performed in Sub-Saharan Africa
por: Ndounga Diakou, Lee Aymar, et al.
Publicado: (2018)

Impact of evergreening on patients and health insurance: a meta analysis and reimbursement cost analysis of citalopram/escitalopram antidepressants
por: Alkhafaji, Ali A, et al.
Publicado: (2012)

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

Cannot write session to /tmp/vufind_sessions/sess_7b689e6q0rs20lct6ulova6h8i