Skip to main content
PMC home page
British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.) logoLink to British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.)
. 1988 Mar 12;296(6624):774–777. doi: 10.1136/bmj.296.6624.774

Research Policy: Problems with peer review and alternatives

Richard Smith
PMCID: PMC2545379  PMID: 3126969

Full text

PDF
775

Selected References

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

  1. Altman L., Melcher L. Fraud in science. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1983 Jun 25;286(6383):2003–2006. doi: 10.1136/bmj.286.6383.2003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson J., Evered D. C. Why do research on research? Lancet. 1986 Oct 4;2(8510):799–802. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90312-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cole S., Cole J. R., Simon G. A. Chance and consensus in peer review. Science. 1981 Nov 20;214(4523):881–886. doi: 10.1126/science.7302566. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Jost D. T., Gäggeler H. W., Baltensperger U., Zinder B., Haller P. Chernobyl fallout in size-fractionated aerosol. Nature. 1986 Nov 6;324(6092):22–23. doi: 10.1038/324022a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Lock S. Fraud in medicine. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1988 Feb 6;296(6619):376–377. doi: 10.1136/bmj.296.6619.376. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Roy R. An alternative funding mechanism. Science. 1981 Mar 27;211(4489):1377–1377. doi: 10.1126/science.211.4489.1377. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from British Medical Journal (Clinical research ed.) are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES