What are the Characteristics of an Excellent Review of Scientific Articles?

Rochitte, Carlos Eduardo; Mesquita, Cláudio Tinoco

doi:10.5935/abc.20180032

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…4 Também aumentamos nossos requisitos de excelência para artigos e revisões. 5 As diretrizes e declarações se tornaram uma fonte educacional de atualização de conhecimentos para profissionais da área médica. O ABC Cardiol implementou uma linha contínua de publicações científicas de diretrizes de alta qualidade que vão desde prevenção e estilo de vida até a cardiologia avançada.…”

Section: (Figura 2)unclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

ABC Cardiol — O Lar da Pesquisa Científica Cardiovascular

Rochitte

2020

Arquivos Brasileiros De Cardiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: (Figura 2)unclassified

“…We have also increased our requirements for excellent articles and reviews. 5 Guidelines and statements have become an educational source of updating knowledge for medical professionals. ABC Cardiol has implemented a continuous line of scientific publications of high-quality guidelines ranging from prevention, and lifestyle to advanced cardiology.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

ABC Cardiol — O Lar da Pesquisa Científica Cardiovascular

Rochitte

2020

Arquivos Brasileiros De Cardiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The style and tone of the feedback must be respectful and developmental; a patronising tone will not encourage authors to enhance their article. Reviewers act as consultants and coaches who put their own expertise into practice and advise authors professionally as to On peer-reviewing: how to nourish Howell-Richardson an author's mind and win a JLDHE editor's heart Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, Issue 19: December 2020 11 how their article qualifies for publication (Rochitte and Mesquita, 2018). Participants agreed that a good review provides authors with expert advice and they rely on the reviewer to critically assess an article, identify the areas of improvement, and provide the author with professional suggestions as to how to advance the manuscript.…”

Section: The Value Of Reviews To Authorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On peer reviewing: how to nourish an author’s mind and win a JLDHE editor’s heart

Loughlin

Syska

Sedghi

et al. 2020

jldhe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Editors and publishers of scholarly journals rarely agree on what makes for a good publication; they do, however, agree on the need for a robust peer review process as a crucial means to judge the merits of potential publications. While fraught with issues and inefficiencies, a critical and supportive peer review is not only what editors rely on when assessing scholarship presented for publication but also what authors hope for in order to improve their work. Understanding how peer review may best serve all parties involved: authors, editors, and reviewers, is thus at the heart of this article. The analysis offered here is based on a session the Journal for Learning Development in Higher Education editors gave at the 2020 LD@3 seminar series, entitled ‘The Art of Reviewing’. It explores the different aspects of the peer review process while formulating recommendations regarding best practices and outlining JLDHE initiatives for supporting reviewers’ vital work.

show abstract