Skip to main content

editorial

. 1994 Jul 16;309(6948):143–144. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6948.143

Promoting research into peer review.

PMCID: PMC2540709 PMID: 8044090

143

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

Altman D. G. The scandal of poor medical research. BMJ. 1994 Jan 29;308(6924):283–284. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6924.283. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Bailar J. C., 3rd, Patterson K. The need for a research agenda. N Engl J Med. 1985 Mar 7;312(10):654–657. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198503073121023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Fabiato A. Anonymity of reviewers. Cardiovasc Res. 1994 Aug;28(8):1134–1145. doi: 10.1093/cvr/28.8.1134. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Fisher M., Friedman S. B., Strauss B. The effects of blinding on acceptance of research papers by peer review. JAMA. 1994 Jul 13;272(2):143–146. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Fletcher S. W., Fletcher R. H. Peer review and medical journals: how to make a good thing better. Natl Med J India. 1994 May-Jun;7(3):103–105. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
McNutt R. A., Evans A. T., Fletcher R. H., Fletcher S. W. The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. A randomized trial. JAMA. 1990 Mar 9;263(10):1371–1376. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Rennie D., Flanagin A. The Second International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. JAMA. 1994 Jul 13;272(2):91–91. doi: 10.1001/jama.1994.03520020017003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Rennie D., Knoll E. Investigating peer review. Ann Intern Med. 1988 Aug 1;109(3):181–181. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-109-3-181. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Smith R. Problems with peer review and alternatives. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1988 Mar 12;296(6624):774–777. doi: 10.1136/bmj.296.6624.774. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

ACTIONS

RESOURCES