Reasons Reviewers Reject and Accept Manuscripts

卓越 优势和劣势 语句(逻辑) 稳健性 心理学 质量(理念) 医学教育 医学 计算机科学 社会心理学 法学 政治学 认识论 哲学 程序设计语言
作者
Georges Bordage
出处
期刊:Academic Medicine [Lippincott Williams & Wilkins]
卷期号:76 (9): 889-896 被引量:192
标识
DOI:10.1097/00001888-200109000-00010
摘要

Scientific journals rely on peer review to maintain the high quality and standards of papers accepted for publication. The purpose of this study was to explore the strengths and weaknesses of medical education reports by analyzing the ratings and written comments given by external reviewers.The author conducted a content analysis of reviewers' comments on 151 research manuscripts submitted to the 1997 and 1998 Research in Medical Education conference proceedings. The negative comments on 123 manuscripts that received "questionable, probably exclude" or "definitely exclude" overall ratings from at least one reviewer were evaluated. A similar analysis was performed on reviewers' positive comments for 28 manuscripts recommended unanimously for acceptance.On average, four peers (4.1, SD = 0.97, range = 2-6) reviewed each manuscript. Of those recommended for exclusion, a mean of 2.3 reviewers recommended exclusion and each reviewer wrote a mean of 8.1 (SD = 5.7) reasons. The top ten reasons for rejection were: inappropriate or incomplete statistics; overinterpretation of results; inappropriate or suboptimal instrumentation; sample too small or biased; text difficult to follow; insufficient problem statement; inaccurate or inconsistent data reported; incomplete, inaccurate, or outdated review of the literature; insufficient data presented; and defective tables or figures. The main strengths noted in accepted manuscripts were the importance or timeliness of the problem studies, excellence of writing, and soundness of study design.While overstating the results and applying the wrong statistics can be fixed, other problems that the reviewers identified (ignoring the literature, designing poor studies, choosing inappropriate instruments, and writing poor manuscripts) are likely to be fatal flaws warranting rejection.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
魂梦与君同完成签到 ,获得积分10
3秒前
ccccchen完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
timeless完成签到 ,获得积分10
8秒前
rayqiang完成签到,获得积分0
8秒前
9秒前
9秒前
9秒前
酷波er应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
9秒前
9秒前
大个应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
9秒前
英俊的铭应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
9秒前
Hello应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
9秒前
上官若男应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
9秒前
机灵的安柏完成签到 ,获得积分10
10秒前
小男孩完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
省级中药饮片完成签到 ,获得积分10
10秒前
star完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
leilei完成签到 ,获得积分10
11秒前
世上僅有的榮光之路完成签到,获得积分0
12秒前
Aisileyi完成签到 ,获得积分10
12秒前
忽远忽近的她完成签到 ,获得积分10
13秒前
凤凰院凶真完成签到,获得积分10
13秒前
1096完成签到,获得积分10
20秒前
悦耳的城完成签到 ,获得积分10
22秒前
LRR完成签到 ,获得积分10
24秒前
carly完成签到 ,获得积分10
26秒前
科研通AI2S应助suzy采纳,获得10
26秒前
28秒前
医研完成签到 ,获得积分10
30秒前
乐安完成签到,获得积分10
31秒前
晨鸟发布了新的文献求助10
32秒前
33秒前
公子渔发布了新的文献求助10
33秒前
Andy发布了新的文献求助10
33秒前
甘sir完成签到 ,获得积分0
42秒前
科研通AI2S应助公子渔采纳,获得10
42秒前
科研通AI2S应助公子渔采纳,获得10
42秒前
小帅完成签到,获得积分0
44秒前
45秒前
简化为完成签到,获得积分10
45秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Applied Min-Max Approach to Missile Guidance and Control 5000
Metallurgy at high pressures and high temperatures 2000
Inorganic Chemistry Eighth Edition 1200
Anionic polymerization of acenaphthylene: identification of impurity species formed as by-products 1000
The Psychological Quest for Meaning 800
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 610
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 物理 内科学 复合材料 催化作用 物理化学 光电子学 电极 细胞生物学 基因 无机化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 6325951
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8142021
关于积分的说明 17071784
捐赠科研通 5378470
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2854190
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1831847
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1683076