Journal Information
Vol. 15. Issue 5.
Pages 378-379 (August - October 2001)
Vol. 15. Issue 5.
Pages 378-379 (August - October 2001)
Open Access
La revisión por pares: ¿buena, mala o todo contrario?
Peer-review: good, bad or quite the reverse?
Visits
6627
A. Plasència, A. García, E. Fernández, por el Equipo Editorial
This item has received
Article information
Full text is only aviable in PDF
Biblografía
[1.]
García AM, Plasència A, Fernández E, on behalf of the Editorial Board of Gaceta Sanitaria. Reviewing peer reviews: the experience of a Public Health journal. Fourth International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Barcelona, 14-15 de septiembre de 2001; 38. Disponible en http://www.jama-peer.org/.
[2.]
Peer review in health sciences,
[3.]
Arnau C, Cobo E, Cardellach F, Ribera JM, Selva A, Urrutia A et al. Effect of statistical review on manuscript quality in Medicina Clínica. Fourth International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Barcelona, 14-15 de septiembre de 2001; 6. Disponible en http://www.jama-peer.org/
[4.]
Historial prepublicación de: Strauss B, King W, Ley A, Hoey J. A prospective study of rural drinking water quality and acute gastrointestinal illness. BMC Public Health 2001; 1: 8 (29 de agosto de 2001). Disponible en http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/backmatter/1471-2458-1-6-b1.pdf
[5.]
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals. Disponible en http://www.icmje.org/
[6.]
F. Davidoff, C.D. DeAngelis, J.M. Drazen, J. Hoey, L. Højgaard, R. Horton, et al.
Sponsorship, authorship, and accountability.
N Engl J Med, 345 (2001), pp. 825-827
[7.]
A. Plasència.
Gigantes y enanos en el mercado de las revistas biomédicas: en la diversidad está el conocimiento.
Quark, 16 (1999), pp. 64-68
[8.]
M. Susser.
Authors and authorship—reform or abolition.
Am J Public Health, 87 (1997), pp. 1091-1092
Copyright © 2001. Sociedad Española de Salud Pública y Administración Sanitaria