So what is a sham peer review?
نویسنده
چکیده
One of the first notable sham peer reviews took place in Oregon in the early 1980s. The physician who took it up with the courts was Dr. Patrick, and the Supreme Court ruled in his favor. As a result of the publicity surrounding this case, the Healthcare Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) was enacted in 1986. One of the concerns that arose from the Patrick case was a fear that no physician would want to participate in peer review if he or she could be potentially liable for a bad report. The HCQIA gave immunity to hospitals and reviewers participating in peer review.
منابع مشابه
The Viewpoints of Alborz University of Medical Sciences’ Faculty Members on Open Peer Review of Journal Articles
Background and Aim: The open peer review process, which is one of the peer-reviewed methods in journals, has been accepted in scientific forums. The aim of this study was to investigate the points of view of university faculty members about the open peer review process of journal articles. Materials and Methods: The study used a descriptive survey. The sample size was calculated using the Coch...
متن کاملA Review on the Editorial Peer Review
Background and Objectives: The editorial peer review has an important role in the publication of scientific articles. Peers or reviewers are those scholars who have the expertise regarding the topic of a given article. They critically appraise the articles without having any monetary incentives or conflicts of interest. The aim of this study was to determine the most important aspects of the ed...
متن کاملThe luck of the referee draw: the effect of exchanging reviews
I ntroduction In academic science today, peer review of contributions to the primary research literature is the principal social mechanism for quality control. 1 Since peer review is so central to what is published and where, and since so much hinges on peer review in and outside of science, it is essential that it is carried out well and professionally. 2 The authors carried out an extensive r...
متن کاملHow peer-review constrains cognition: on the frontline in the knowledge sector
Peer-review is neither reliable, fair, nor a valid basis for predicting 'impact': as quality control, peer-review is not fit for purpose. Endorsing the consensus, I offer a reframing: while a normative social process, peer-review also shapes the writing of a scientific paper. In so far as 'cognition' describes enabling conditions for flexible behavior, the practices of peer-review thus constrai...
متن کاملDevelopment and implementation of an external peer-review process.
development and implementation of an external peer review process fellow project What to say and what to do when mostly your friends love reading? Are you the one that don't have such hobby? So, it's important for you to start having that hobby. You know, reading is not the force. We're sure that reading will lead you to join in better concept of life. Reading will be a positive activity to do ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- MedGenMed : Medscape general medicine
دوره 7 4 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2005