Cargando…

Review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts

INTRODUCTION: Reviewing articles are one of the most important methods for maintaining and improving the scientific quality of research outputs, especially in the field of health and medicine, and are often accompanied with various challenges. AIM: The current study was carried out to Health Promoti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ashrafi-Rizi, Hasan, Samouei, Rahele
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6796311/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31867372
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_162_19
_version_ 1783459555146989568
author Ashrafi-Rizi, Hasan
Samouei, Rahele
author_facet Ashrafi-Rizi, Hasan
Samouei, Rahele
author_sort Ashrafi-Rizi, Hasan
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Reviewing articles are one of the most important methods for maintaining and improving the scientific quality of research outputs, especially in the field of health and medicine, and are often accompanied with various challenges. AIM: The current study was carried out to Health Promotion in the Review Process of the Health Scientific Journals according to Explanation of Experts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study has a qualitative approach and was carried out using the content analysis method. Data were gathered through semi-structured interviews with experts with direct and related experiences with health scientific journals including editors in chief, internal managers, editorial boards, authors’ council and members of national journal commission with at least 2 years of continuous related work experience in journals and review of at least 10 articles. Sampling was carried out using purposeful snowball sampling, and data were analyzed using content analysis method. Lincoln and Guba tests were used to determine the validity and reliability of the analysis based on the following four criteria – credibility, transferability, certainty, and verifiability. RESULTS: Experts’ opinions were categorized based on criteria for reviewer selection with three dimensions of technical expertise, ethical behavior, and orientation and order; reviewer selection methods including emphasis on others and emphasis on self; and review problems in the Iranian Health Science and Research Journals including incentive system, reviewer characteristics, and structural problems. CONCLUSION: Findings of the current study are usable for all Iranian Health Scientific Journals, editors, editors in chief, and internal managers as well as lawmakers in the area of scientific research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6796311
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67963112019-12-20 Review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts Ashrafi-Rizi, Hasan Samouei, Rahele J Educ Health Promot Original Article INTRODUCTION: Reviewing articles are one of the most important methods for maintaining and improving the scientific quality of research outputs, especially in the field of health and medicine, and are often accompanied with various challenges. AIM: The current study was carried out to Health Promotion in the Review Process of the Health Scientific Journals according to Explanation of Experts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study has a qualitative approach and was carried out using the content analysis method. Data were gathered through semi-structured interviews with experts with direct and related experiences with health scientific journals including editors in chief, internal managers, editorial boards, authors’ council and members of national journal commission with at least 2 years of continuous related work experience in journals and review of at least 10 articles. Sampling was carried out using purposeful snowball sampling, and data were analyzed using content analysis method. Lincoln and Guba tests were used to determine the validity and reliability of the analysis based on the following four criteria – credibility, transferability, certainty, and verifiability. RESULTS: Experts’ opinions were categorized based on criteria for reviewer selection with three dimensions of technical expertise, ethical behavior, and orientation and order; reviewer selection methods including emphasis on others and emphasis on self; and review problems in the Iranian Health Science and Research Journals including incentive system, reviewer characteristics, and structural problems. CONCLUSION: Findings of the current study are usable for all Iranian Health Scientific Journals, editors, editors in chief, and internal managers as well as lawmakers in the area of scientific research. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2019-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6796311/ /pubmed/31867372 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_162_19 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Journal of Education and Health Promotion http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ashrafi-Rizi, Hasan
Samouei, Rahele
Review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts
title Review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts
title_full Review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts
title_fullStr Review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts
title_full_unstemmed Review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts
title_short Review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts
title_sort review process of the health scientific journals according to explanation of experts
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6796311/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31867372
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_162_19
work_keys_str_mv AT ashrafirizihasan reviewprocessofthehealthscientificjournalsaccordingtoexplanationofexperts
AT samoueirahele reviewprocessofthehealthscientificjournalsaccordingtoexplanationofexperts