医学
致盲
同行评审
危害
质量(理念)
过程(计算)
科学文献
2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)
医学教育
互联网隐私
公共关系
临床试验
法学
社会心理学
心理学
病理
哲学
疾病
认识论
政治学
计算机科学
传染病(医学专业)
操作系统
古生物学
生物
作者
Fred Kusumoto,John A. Bittl,Mark A. Creager,Harold L. Dauerman,Anuradha Lala,Mary Mcdermott,Justine Varieur Turco,Viviany R. Taqueti,Valentín Fuster
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2023.08.056
摘要
The process of peer review has been the gold standard for evaluating medical science, but significant pressures from the recent COVID-19 pandemic, new methods of communication, larger amounts of research, and an evolving publication landscape have placed significant pressures on this system. A task force convened by the American College of Cardiology identified the 5 most significant controversies associated with the current peer-review process: the effect of preprints, reviewer blinding, reviewer selection, reviewer incentivization, and publication of peer reviewer comments. Although specific solutions to these issues will vary, regardless of how scientific communication evolves, peer review must remain an essential process for ensuring scientific integrity, timely dissemination of information, and better patient care. In medicine, the peer-review process is crucial because harm can occur if poor-quality data or incorrect conclusions are published. With the dramatic increase in scientific publications and new methods of communication, high-quality peer review is more important now than ever.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI