2017
DOI: 10.1097/acm.0000000000001224
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Coached Peer Review: Developing the Next Generation of Authors

Abstract: CanadiEM aims to inspire continued participation in, exposure to, and high-quality production of academic writing by promoting the adoption of coached peer review for online educational resources produced by learners.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

6
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The students were not aware of the learning topics when signing up for the study, only that the topics would be commonly encountered problems in medicine. The blog post group was provided with two website links to blog posts on the same topics, written by a medical student investigator (KL) and placed through the CanadiEM coached peer review process [ 22 ]. Blog posts were created based on the podcast content.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The students were not aware of the learning topics when signing up for the study, only that the topics would be commonly encountered problems in medicine. The blog post group was provided with two website links to blog posts on the same topics, written by a medical student investigator (KL) and placed through the CanadiEM coached peer review process [ 22 ]. Blog posts were created based on the podcast content.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These databases were chosen because they are known to publish a large percentage of peer reviewed papers. It is believed that peer reviewed papers are of high quality, because a lot of rigor is involved in reviewing them (Sidalak et al, 2017;Caputo, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7 Some blogs incorporate variants of editorial supervision and prepublication peer review into their practice to increase their scholarly credibility, 8,9 but these practices are far from standard. Even if online resources improve their pre-publication processes, traditional peer review still has many limitations 10 and has not been sufficient to safeguard against the propagation of bad science or even outright fraud.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%