logo BDSP

Base documentaire


Votre avis nous intéresse

Le réseau BDSP met en oeuvre un projet d'innovation et d'amélioration de ses services, dans le souci constant de proposer des contenus de qualité adaptés aux besoins des utilisateurs.

Identifier de nouvelles sources de financements est la condition nécessaire pour assurer la poursuite et la pérennité de cet outil unique qu'est la BDSP, tout en le faisant évoluer.

Pour définir un nouveau modèle économique, nous avons besoin de votre avis : merci de répondre à notre enquête (temps estimé : 5 minutes).

Participer maintenant
Participer plus tard J'ai déjà participé

  1. Does masking author identity improve peer review quality ? A randomized controlled trial.

    Article, Communication - En anglais

    International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Prague, CZE, 1997/09.

    Context.

    All authors may not be equal in the eyes of reviewers.

    Specifically, well-known authors may receive less objective (poorer quality) reviews.

    One study at a single journal found a small improvement in review quality when reviewers were masked to author identity.

    Objectives

    To determine whether masking reviewers to author identity is generally associated with higher quality of review at biomedical journals, and to determine the success of routine masking techniques.

    Design and Setting

    A randomized controlled trial performed on external reviews of manuscripts submitted to Annals of Emergency Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA, Obstetrics & Gynecology, and Ophthalmology.

    Interventions

    Two peers reviewed each manuscript.

    In one study arm, both peer reviewers received the manuscript according to usual masking practice.

    In the other arm, one reviewer was randomized to receive a manuscript with author identity masked, and the other reviewer received an unmasked manuscript.

    Main Outcome Measure

    Review quality on a 5-point Likert scale as judged by manuscript author and editor.

    A difference of 0.5 or greater was considered important.

    Results

    A total of 118 manuscripts were randomized, 26 to usual practice and 92 to intervention.

    In the intervention arm, editor quality assessment was complete for 77 (84%) of 92 manuscripts.

    Author quality assessment was complete on 40 (54%) of 74 manuscripts. (...)

    Mots-clés Pascal : Article, Médecine, Qualité, Influence, Auteur, Sélection, Exploration, Homme, Littérature scientifique, Revue médicale, Identité

    Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Article, Medicine, Quality, Influence, Author, Selection, Exploration, Human, Scientific literature

    Logo du centre Notice produite par :
    Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique

    Cote : 98-0443497

    Code Inist : 002B30A09. Création : 25/01/1999.