Advertisement
Survey Series
Institutions
For Advertisers
|
|
||||
|
How to Fix Peer Review
Separating its two functions – improving manuscripts and judging their scientific merit – would help Professor of pathology at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in ClevelandEmail: David Kaplan - david.kaplan@case.edu The Scientist 2005, 19(11):10
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
Despite its importance as the ultimate gatekeeper of scientific publication and funding, peer review is known to engender bias, incompetence, excessive expense, ineffectiveness, and corruption. A surfeit of publications has documented the deficiencies of this system.[1-4]
In September, the fifth in a series of international congresses concerned with how peer review can be improved will convene in Chicago. Yet so far, in spite of the teeth gnashing, nothing is being chewed.
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
