Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work . [1] It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.
Peer review in scientific journals assumes that the article reviewed has been honestly prepared. The process occasionally detects fraud, but is not designed to do so. [204] When peer review fails and a paper is published with fraudulent or otherwise irreproducible data, the paper may be retracted. A 1998 experiment on peer review with a ...
The annual performance review is a managerial process and does not meet the definition or outcomes needed related to peer review. Other organizational practices may violate the peer review guidelines set forth 1988 by the ANA 1988. [11] The most frequent violation is the performance of direct care peer review by managers.
The peer review Bulletin's specific guidelines differ in several respects from traditional peer review practices at most journals. For example, the Bulletin requires public disclosure of peer reviewers' identities when they are reviewing highly influential scientific assessments.
Account for variation by field in publication and citation practices. Peer-review and citation rate can vary wildly across differing disciplines, for example, "top-ranked journals in mathematics have impact factors of around 3; top-ranked journals in cell biology have impact factors of about 30". [12]
Wikipedia's peer review is a way to receive ideas on how to improve articles that are already decent. It may be used for potential good article nominations, potential featured article candidates, or an article of any "grade" (but if the article isn't well-developed, please read here before asking for a peer review).
Code review (sometimes referred to as peer review) is a software quality assurance activity in which one or more people examine the source code of a computer program, either after implementation or during the development process. The persons performing the checking, excluding the author, are called "reviewers".
It is characterized by misleading information, deviates from the standard peer-review process, is highly non-transparent, and often utilizes aggressive solicitation practices. [ 4 ] The phenomenon of "open-access predatory publishers" was first noticed by Jeffrey Beall around 2012, when he described "publishers that are ready to publish any ...