|
|
||||||||
American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 164, 1007-1009, Copyright © 1995 by American Roentgen Ray Society
ARTICLES |
DP Friedman
Department of Radiology, Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, PA 19107, USA.
Concern by the government, funding institutions, and the public for quality assurance in all aspects of medical endeavors mandates critical examination of various professional activities. Although peer review is generally regarded as the best system for selecting and improving scientific papers for publication, the efficacy of this process has never been proved. Moreover, the administrative functions of the editorial staff are often poorly understood. The purpose of this article is to make peer review a the AJR less esoteric and more understandable by quantifying some of its activities. This information is then assessed as it relates to the quality of this important step in scientific publication.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. A. Kliewer, K. S. Freed, D. M. DeLong, P. J. Pickhardt, and J. M. Provenzale Reviewing the Reviewers: Comparison of Review Quality and Reviewer Characteristics at the American Journal of Roentgenology Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2005; 184(6): 1731 - 1735. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Kliewer, D. M. DeLong, K. Freed, C. B. Jenkins, E. K. Paulson, and J. M. Provenzale Peer Review at the American Journal of Roentgenology: How Reviewer and Manuscript Characteristics Affected Editorial Decisions on 196 Major Papers Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2004; 183(6): 1545 - 1550. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |