scholarly journals Data journals: types of peer review, review criteria, and editorial committee members’ positions

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 130-135
Author(s):  
Sunkyung Seo ◽  
Jihyun Kim
Keyword(s):  
Data Quality ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Editorial Committee ◽  
Advisory Boards ◽  
Current State ◽  
Metadata Quality ◽  
Data Production ◽  
Open Review ◽  
Review Criteria

Purpose: This study analyzed the peer review systems, criteria, and editorial committee structures of data journals, aiming to determine the current state of data peer review and to offer suggestions.Methods: We analyzed peer review systems and criteria for peer review in nine data journals indexed by Web of Science, as well as the positions of the editorial committee members of the journals. Each data journal’s website was initially surveyed, and the editors-in-chief were queried via email about any information not found on the websites. The peer review criteria of the journals were analyzed in terms of data quality, metadata quality, and general quality.Results: Seven of the nine data journals adopted single-blind and open review peer review methods. The remaining two implemented modified models, such as interactive and community review. In the peer review criteria, there was a shared emphasis on the appropriateness of data production methodology and detailed descriptions. The editorial committees of the journals tended to have subject editors or subject advisory boards, while a few journals included positions with the responsibility of evaluating the technical quality of data.Conclusion: Creating a community of subject experts and securing various editorial positions for peer review are necessary for data journals to achieve data quality assurance and to promote reuse. New practices will emerge in terms of data peer review models, criteria, and editorial positions, and further research needs to be conducted.

scholarly journals Criteria for Peer Reviewing the Original Articles Submitted to a Biomedical Journal: Intellectual Honesty is the Best Policy.

2004 ◽  
Vol 43 (152) ◽  
pp. 103-110
Author(s):  
Bishnu Hari Paudel
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Biomedical Science ◽  
Quality Review ◽  
Peer Reviewing ◽  
Biomedical Publication ◽  
Timely Review ◽  
Peer Reviewers ◽  
Biomedical Publications ◽  
Review Criteria

Peer review - a process of assessing the quality of manuscripts submitted to a journal – is an establishednorm in biomedical publications. It is viewed as an extension of scientific process. The peer-reviewed researcharticles are considered trustworthy because they are believed to be unbiased and independent. The processof reviewing is a privilege and prestige. It is highly responsible, intellectually honest, and difficult job.Being expert in certain area of biomedical science is a prerequisite for reviewers. Young peer reviewerstrained in epidemiology or statistics produce high-quality review. The International Congresses on PeerReview in Biomedical Publication have shown many unresolved issues related to preparation or handling ofmanuscripts by a journal. Therefore, it is vital to identify authentic peer reviewers to ensure qualitypublication, thus, a set of peer review criteria is proposed for peer reviewing original articles. It is useful inquantifying (scoring) the manuscript quality. The proposed scoring system yields three categories ofmanuscripts: the first category is considered acceptable for publication after minor modification by editorialboard and/or reviewers, the second – requires rewriting and resubmission, and the third – rejected. Thesecriteria are preliminary guidelines, and require timely review. They are expected to sensitise peer reviewers,editors, contributors, and readers to move towards greater honesty and responsibility while working withmanuscripts. In summary, if the criteria are used they will facilitate editorial management of manuscripts,render more justice to authors and biomedical science, and improve publication quality.Key Words: Biomedical publication, peer review, peer review criteria, scoring of manuscripts, categories of manuscripts, journal of Nepal Medical Association.

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2022 ◽  
Vol 2149 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Management System ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Acceptance Rate ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
Scientific Standards ◽  
Single Blind ◽  
Review Criteria ◽  
Submission Date

On the following page you will find the declaration form. • Please answer each question. • You should submit the form along with the rest of your submission files. • The deadline is the submission date written in your publishing agreement. All conference organisers/editors are required to declare details about their peer review. We will published the information you provide as part of your proceedings. All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind (please describe) Single-anonymous: authors’ identities are known to the reviewers, reviewers’ identities are hidden from authors • Conference submission management system: Via email messages between editor and authors and editor and reviewers. • Number of submissions received: 18 • Number of submissions sent for review: 18 • Number of submissions accepted:18 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100):100 • Average number of reviews per paper: 1.11 • Total number of reviewers involved:20 • Any additional info on review process: The following review criteria were suggested: • Are the scientific methods and assumptions valid and clearly outlined? • Are the results sufficient to support the interpretations and conclusions? • Is the overall presentation well structured and clear? • Is the description of experiments and calculations sufficiently complete and precise to allow their reproduction by fellow scientists (traceability of results)? • Are mathematical formulae, symbols, abbreviations, and units correctly defined and used? • Are the number and quality of references appropriate? • Contact person for queries: Name : Julian Gröbner Affiliation: Physikalisch-Meteorologisches Observatorium Davos, World Radiation Center (PMOD/WRC), Davos Dorf, Switzerland. Email :[email protected]

scholarly journals Peer Review Declaration Form Guidance

2021 ◽  
Vol 2138 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
High Standard ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Current State ◽  
Online Submission ◽  
Conference Theme ◽  
Adequate Quality ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Scientific Standards

On the following page you will find the declaration form. • Please answer each question. • You should submit the form along with the rest of your submission files. • The deadline is the submission date written in your publishing agreement. All conference organisers/editors are required to declare details about their peer review. We will published the information you provide as part of your proceedings. Peer review declaration All papers published in this volume of Journal of Physics: Conference Series have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. • Type of peer review: Single-blind / Double-blind / Triple-blind / Open / Other (please describe) Each submission is anonymously reviewed by an average of three independent reviewers, to ensure the final high standard and quality of each accepted submission. • Conference submission management system: Online submission • Number of submissions received: 75 papers • Number of submissions sent for review: 75 papers • Number of submissions accepted: 52 papers • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 69% • Average number of reviews per paper: 3 reviews per paper • Total number of reviewers involved: 40 reviewers • Any additional info on review process: We developed the strict peer review procedures and invite relevant experts to serve as editors in order to control the quality of the papers. First, all articles will be subjected to peer review administered by editors. Then, reviews will be conducted by expert referees, who have been requested to provide unbiased and constructive comments aimed, whenever possible, at improving the work. Final, editors will take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the materials they publish and their decision to accept or reject a paper for publication will be based only on the merits of the work and the relevance to the conference theme. The following criteria will be considered by the editors and referees in their evaluation: (1) Is the subject matter within the scope of the conference? (2) Does the paper contain enough original results to warrant publication? (3) Is the paper technically sound and free of errors? (4) Is the work clearly and concisely presented? Is it well organized? (5) Does the title clearly and sufficiently reflect its con tents? (6) Is the abstract informative? Are the main results and conclusions mentioned? (7) Are the illustrations of adequate quality, relevant and understandable? (8) Does the bibliography give a clear view of the current state-of-the-art in the domain? (9) Is the quality of the language satisfactory? • Contact person for queries: Name : Guosong Jiang Affiliation: Huanggang Normal University Email : [email protected]

The Development of Agritourism in the Podkarpackie Voivodeship in the Light of International and National Conditions

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 244-261
Author(s):  
Mariola Tracz ◽  
Małgorzata Bajgier-Kowalska ◽  
Radosław Uliszak
Keyword(s):  
Development Strategy ◽  
Current State ◽  
Central Statistical ◽  
Central Statistical Office ◽  
Tourism Resources ◽  
The One ◽  
The Impact ◽  
District Offices ◽  
Socio Economic Factors

Podkarpackie Voivodeship is one of the regions of Poland in which the number of agritourism entities is very high. Therefore tourism plays a significant role in its development strategy. The aim of the paper is to identify the current state of agritourism and the changes that have occurred in the region in the years 2000–2016. Specific objectives are to determine the distribution of agritourism farms and their offer, together with a comprehensive analysis of the environmental and socio-economic factors, as well as the impact of the Slovak-Ukrainian border. The report was developed on the statistical materials from the Polish Central Statistical Office, Podkarpackie Agricultural Advisory Centre in Boguchwała and data collected from municipalities and district offices that is published on their websites, as well as through interviews with 100 owners of agritourism farms in the Podkarpackie Voivodeship. The research has shown, on the one hand, the decline in the number of farms in the region and, on the other hand, the increase in the diversity of the tourist offer of these entities. Distribution of agritourism farms is closely linked to the attractiveness of natural environment and quality of secondary tourism resources. Traditional agritourism has not yet fully used its countryside, as well as cross-border advantages of its location.

PROFESSIONAL TRAINING OF ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS: APPLYING US EXPERICENCE TO UKRAINAN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS

2020 ◽  
pp. 80-85
Author(s):  
Olha Pavlenko
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Education Research ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Cost Reduction ◽  
Professional Training ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Academic Staff ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Current State

The article discusses the current state of professional training of engineers, in particular, electronics engineers in Ukrainian higher education institutions (HEIs) and explores best practices from US HEIs. The research outlines the features of professional training of electronics engineers and recent changes in Ukrainian HEIs. Such challenges for Ukrainian HEIs as lack of collaboration between higher education and science with industry, R&D cost reduction for HEIs, and downsizing the research and academic staff, the disparity between the available quality of human capital training and the demanded are addressed. The study attempts to identify successful practices of US HEIs professional training of engineers in order to suggest potential improvements in education, research, and innovation for training electronics engineers in Ukraine.

A Study of Medical Board Peer Reviews in Nevada

2010 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-29
Author(s):  
Jerry C. Calvanese
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Study Objective ◽  
Clark County ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Medical Examiners ◽  
Washoe County ◽  
Total Average Cost ◽  
Total Average

ABSTRACT Study Objective: The purpose of this study was to obtain data on various characteristics of peer reviews. These reviews were performed for the Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners (NSBME) to assess physician licensees' negligence and/or incompetence. It was hoped that this data could help identify and define certain characteristics of peer reviews. Methods: This study examined two years of data collected on peer reviews. The complaints were initially screened by a medical reviewer and/or a committee composed of Board members to assess the need for a peer review. Data was then collected from the peer reviews performed. The data included costs, specialty of the peer reviewer, location of the peer reviewer, and timeliness of the peer reviews. Results: During the two-year study, 102 peer reviews were evaluated. Sixty-nine percent of the peer-reviewed complaints originated from civil malpractice cases and 15% originated from complaints made by patients. Eighty percent of the complaint physicians were located in Clark County and 12% were located in Washoe County. Sixty-one percent of the physicians who performed the peer reviews were located in Washoe County and 24% were located in Clark County. Twelve percent of the complaint physicians were in practice in the state for 5 years or less, 40% from 6 to 10 years, 20% from 11 to 15 years, 16% from 16 to 20 years, and 13% were in practice 21 years or more. Forty-seven percent of the complaint physicians had three or less total complaints filed with the Board, 10% had four to six complaints, 17% had 7 to 10 complaints, and 26% had 11 or more complaints. The overall quality of peer reviews was judged to be good or excellent in 96% of the reviews. A finding of malpractice was found in 42% of the reviews ordered by the medical reviewer and in 15% ordered by the Investigative Committees. There was a finding of malpractice in 38% of the overall total of peer reviews. The total average cost of a peer review was $791. In 47% of the peer reviews requested, materials were sent from the Board to the peer reviewer within 60 days of the original request and 33% took more than 120 days for the request to be sent. In 48% of the reviews, the total time for the peer review to be performed by the peer reviewer was less than 60 days. Twenty seven percent of the peer reviews took more than 120 days to be returned. Conclusion: Further data is needed to draw meaningful conclusions from certain peer review characteristics reported in this study. However, useful data was obtained regarding timeliness in sending out peer review materials, total times for the peer reviews, and costs.

Designing Information Product (IP) Maps On the Process of Data Processing and Academic Information

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Effendi
Keyword(s):  
Data Quality ◽  
Data Management ◽  
Information Management ◽  
Information Quality ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Quality Of Data ◽  
Information Product ◽  
Academic Activities

Information Product Approach (IP Approach) is an information management approach. It can be used to manage product information and data quality analysis. IP-Map can be used by organizations to facilitate the management of knowledge in collecting, storing, maintaining, and using the data in an organized. The  process of data management of academic activities in X University has not yet used the IP approach. X University has not given attention to the management of information quality of its. During this time X University just concern to system applications used to support the automation of data management in the process of academic activities. IP-Map that made in this paper can be used as a basis for analyzing the quality of data and information. By the IP-MAP, X University is expected to know which parts of the process that need improvement in the quality of data and information management.   Index term: IP Approach, IP-Map, information quality, data quality. REFERENCES[1] H. Zhu, S. Madnick, Y. Lee, and R. Wang, “Data and Information Quality Research: Its Evolution and Future,” Working Paper, MIT, USA, 2012.[2] Lee, Yang W; at al, Journey To Data Quality, MIT Press: Cambridge, 2006.[3] L. Al-Hakim, Information Quality Management: Theory and Applications. Idea Group Inc (IGI), 2007.[4] “Access : A semiotic information quality framework: development and comparative analysis : Journal ofInformation Technology.” [Online]. Available: http://www.palgravejournals.com/jit/journal/v20/n2/full/2000038a.html. [Accessed: 18-Sep-2015].[5] Effendi, Diana, Pengukuran Dan Perbaikan Kualitas Data Dan Informasi Di Perguruan Tinggi MenggunakanCALDEA Dan EVAMECAL (Studi Kasus X University), Proceeding Seminar Nasional RESASTEK, 2012, pp.TIG.1-TI-G.6.

Drug Utilization Studies – An Overview

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 803-810 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shalini S ◽  
Ravichandran V ◽  
Saraswathi R ◽  
BK Mohanty ◽  
Dhanaraj S K
Keyword(s):  
Drug Utilization ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Future Trends ◽  
Medical Prescription ◽  
Drug Usage ◽  
Current State ◽  
Patterns Of Use ◽  
Drug Utilization Studies ◽  
Drug Expenditures

 Aspire of the Drug Utilization Studies (DUS) is to appraise factors related to the prescribing, dispensing, administering and taking of medication, and it’s associated. Since the middle of twentieth century, interest in DUS has been escalating, first for market-only purposes, then for appraising the quality of medical prescription and comparing patterns of use of specific drugs. The scope of DUS is to evaluate the current state and future trends of drug usage, to estimate roughly disease pervasiveness, drug expenditures, aptness of prescriptions and adherence to evidence-based recommendations. The increasing magnitude of DUS as a valuable investigation resource in pharmacoepidemiology has been bridging it with other health allied areas, such as public health, rational use of drug, evidence based drug use, pharmacovigilance, pharmacoeconomics, eco-pharmacovigilance and pharmacogenetics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document