[1] |
刘红, 胡新和. 学术期刊同行评审的发展、方式及挑战[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2005, 16(5):605-608.
|
[2] |
刘春丽, 何钦成. 开放同行评审的产生、发展、成效与可行性[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2013, 24(1):40-44.
|
[3] |
姚占雷, 李美玉, 许鑫. 开放同行评议发展现状与问题辨析[J]. 编辑学报, 2022, 34(2):142-148.
|
[4] |
张彤. 学术期刊开放同行评议多层次模块化[J]. 编辑学报, 2019, 31(5):490-497.
|
[5] |
王嘉昀. 面向科技出版的开放评审综述[J]. 出版科学, 2020, 28(4):95-104.
|
[6] |
van Noorden R. Company offers portable peer review[J]. Nature, 2013, 494(7436):161.
doi: 10.1038/494161a
URL
|
[7] |
Bell G P, Kvajo M. Tackling waste in publishing through portable peer review[J]. BMC Biology, 2018, 16(1):146.
doi: 10.1186/s12915-018-0619-z
pmid: 30558673
|
[8] |
Cals J W L, Mallen C D, Glynn L G, et al. Should authors submit previous peer-review reports when submitting research papers? Views of general medical journal editors[J]. Annals of Family Medicine, 2013, 11(2):179-181.
doi: 10.1370/afm.1448
pmid: 23508606
|
[9] |
Boldt A. Extending arXiv.org to achieve open peer review and publishing[J]. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 2011, 42(2):238-242.
doi: 10.3138/jsp.42.2.238
URL
|
[10] |
Ren X. Beyond online preprints:Formalization of open initiatives in China[J]. Learned Publishing, 2013, 26(3):197-205.
doi: 10.1087/20130308
URL
|
[11] |
Lemberger T, Pulverer B. Review commons-pre-journal peer review[J]. EMBO Reports, 2019, 20(12):e49663.
|
[12] |
解贺嘉, 刘筱敏. 预印本平台开放评议运行模式实证研究[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2021, 32(10):1227-1233.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.202107050535
|
[13] |
黄历. 第三方审稿平台及其在国内科技期刊领域实施的可行性[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2019, 30(1):29-33.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201807150622
|
[14] |
王凌峰, 韩子晴. 知识创新加速器“预印本2.0”:概念、设计与实现路径[J]. 情报杂志, 2021, 40(6):171-177.
|
[15] |
杨硕. JMIR平台创新出版实践及其启示[J]. 编辑学报, 2019, 31(S2):113-119.
|
[16] |
贺颖, 付江阳. 透明性同行评议:产生、内涵与建构[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2021, 32(3):332-336.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.202007160665
|
[17] |
Justman Q. A necessary complement to transparent peer review:Editorial transparency[J]. Cell Systems, 2019, 9(1):1-2.
doi: 10.1016/j.cels.2019.07.002
URL
|
[18] |
Anonymous. Transparent peer review:The value is clear[J]. Communications Physics, 2022, 5:108.
doi: 10.1038/s42005-022-00891-6
URL
|
[19] |
Gleicher N. Avoiding currently unavoidable conflicts of interest in medical publishing by transparent peer review[J]. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 2013, 26(5):411-415.
doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.01.015
pmid: 23507135
|
[20] |
Cosgrove A, Cheifet B. Transparent peer review trial:The results[J]. Genome Biology, 2018, 19(1):206.
doi: 10.1186/s13059-018-1584-0
pmid: 30482224
|
[21] |
Strolger L, Natarajan P. Doling out Hubble time with dual-anonymous evaluation[J]. Physics Today, 2019:20190301 a.
|
[22] |
da Silva J A T. Challenges to open peer review[J]. Online Information Review, 2019, 43(2):197-200.
doi: 10.1108/OIR-04-2018-0139
|
[23] |
Segado-Boj F, Martín-Quevedo J, Prieto-Gutiérrez J J. Attitudes toward open access,open peer review,and altmetrics among contributors to Spanish scholarly journals[J]. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 2018, 50(1):48-70.
doi: 10.3138/jsp.50.1.08
URL
|
[24] |
Thelwall M, Allen L, Papas E R, et al. Does the use of open,non-anonymous peer review in scholarly publishing introduce bias? Evidence from the F1000Research post-publication open peer review publishing model[J]. Journal of Information Science, 2021, 47(6):809-820.
doi: 10.1177/0165551520938678
URL
|
[25] |
Bromham L, Dinnage R, Hua X. Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success[J]. Nature, 2016, 534(7609):684-687.
doi: 10.1038/nature18315
URL
|
[26] |
Moylan E C, Harold S, O'Neill C, et al. Open,single-blind,double-blind:Which peer review process do you prefer?[J]. BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology, 2014, 15:55.
|
[27] |
Hunter J. Post-publication peer review:Opening up scientific conversation[J]. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 2012, 6:63.
doi: 10.3389/fncom.2012.00063
pmid: 22969719
|
[28] |
Stebbing J, Sanders D A. The importance of being earnest in post-publication review:Scientific fraud and the scourges of anonymity and excuses[J]. Oncogene, 2018, 37(6):695-696.
doi: 10.1038/onc.2017.390
pmid: 29035386
|
[29] |
Galbraith D W. Redrawing the frontiers in the age of post-publication review[J]. Frontiers in Genetics, 2015, 6:198.
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2015.00198
pmid: 26097488
|
[30] |
Herron D M. Is expert peer review obsolete? A model suggests that post-publication reader review may exceed the accuracy of traditional peer review[J]. Surgical Endoscopy, 2012, 26(8):2275-2280.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2171-1
URL
|
[31] |
Markie M. Post-publication peer review,in all its guises,is here to stay[J]. Insights, 2015, 28(2):107-110.
|
[32] |
于淼, 赵金环. 出版后同行评议及其对国内学术出版的启示[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2020, 31(1):45-50.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201905220383
|
[33] |
Richards B F, Cardell E M, Chow C J, et al. Discovering the benefits of group peer review of submitted manuscripts[J]. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 2020, 32(1):104-109.
doi: 10.1080/10401334.2019.1657870
pmid: 31545096
|
[34] |
刘丽萍, 刘春丽. eLife开放同行评审模式研究[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2019, 30(9):949-955.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201904040230
|
[35] |
Ilgen J S, Artino A R,Jr, Simpson D, et al. Group peer review:The breakfast of champions[J]. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 2016, 8(5):646-649.
doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-16-00531.1
URL
|
[36] |
Teachman G, Lévesque M C, Keboa M T, et al. Group peer review:Reflections on a model for teaching and learning qualitative inquiry[J]. International Review of Qualitative Research, 2018, 11(4):452-466.
doi: 10.1525/irqr.2018.11.4.452
URL
|
[37] |
Koshy K, Fowler A J, Gundogan B, et al. Peer review in scholarly publishing part A:Why do it?[J]. International Journal of Surgery: Oncology, 2018, 3(2):56.
|
[38] |
王瑞, 曾广翘. 国外期刊小组同行评议与协作同行评议模式研究[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2021, 32(3):353-359.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.202008280773
|
[39] |
Kovanis M, Trinquart L, Ravaud P, et al. Evaluating alternative systems of peer review:A large-scale agent-based modelling approach to scientific publication[J]. Scientometrics, 2017, 113(1):651-671.
doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2375-1
URL
|
[40] |
周京艳, 黄裕荣, 刘如, 等. 智能集体评审的缘起和特征[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2018, 29(3):231-236.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201709180788
|
[41] |
索传军, 于淼. 国外期刊论文同行评议创新态势述评[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(1):128-139.
doi: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2021.01.018
|
[42] |
Pöschl U. Multi-stage open peer review:Scientific evaluation integrating the strengths of traditional peer review with the virtues of transparency and self-regulation[J]. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 2012, 6:33.
|
[43] |
Gipp B, Breitinger C, Meuschke N, et al. CryptSubmit:Introducing securely timestamped manuscript submission and peer review feedback using the blockchain[C]// 2017 ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, June 19-23,2017, Toronto,ON,Canada. New York: IEEE Press, 2017.
|
[44] |
王凤产. 期刊评审人危机的化解机制:认证、认定与激励[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2020, 31(4):395-400.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201910220718
|
[45] |
Kulczycki E, Rozkosz E A, Engels T C E, et al. How to identify peer-reviewed publications:Open-identity labels in scholarly book publishing[J]. PLoS ONE, 2019, 14(3):e0214423.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214423
URL
|
[46] |
Sadeghi A, Capadisli S, Wilm J, et al. Opening and reusing transparent peer reviews with automatic article annotation[J]. Publications, 2019, 7(1):1-12.
doi: 10.3390/publications7010001
URL
|
[47] |
da Silva J A T, Nazarovets S. Publication history:A double-DOI-based method for storing and/or monitoring information about published and corrected academic literature[J]. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 2022, 53(2):85-108.
doi: 10.3138/jsp-2017-0017
URL
|
[48] |
Himmelstein D S, Rubinetti V, Slochower D R, et al. Open collaborative writing with Manubot[J]. PLoS Computational Biology, 2019, 15(6):e1007128.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007128
URL
|
[49] |
Aleman-Meza B, Nagarajan M, Ding L, et al. Scalable semantic analytics on social networks for addressing the problem of conflict of interest detection[J]. ACM Transactions on the Web, 2008, 2(1):7.
|
[50] |
Choi D H, Seo T S. Development of an open peer review system using blockchain and reviewer recommendation technologies[J]. Science Editing, 2021, 8(1):104-111.
doi: 10.6087/kcse.237
URL
|
[51] |
Thelwall M, Papas E R, Nyakoojo Z, et al. Automatically detecting open academic review praise and criticism[J]. Online Information Review, 2020, 44(5):1057-1076.
doi: 10.1108/OIR-11-2019-0347
URL
|
[52] |
治丹丹. 区块链技术破解同行评议难题的全程多元应用:以Decentralized Science、Orvium、Pluto Network、Katalysis平台为例[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2020, 31(8):851-858.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.202002190078
|
[53] |
Tenorio-Fornés A, Jacynycz V, Llop-Vila D, et al. Towards a decentralized process for scientific publication and peer review using blockchain and IPFS[C]// Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, January 8-11,2019,Maui,Hawaii,USA. Honolulu:ScholarSpace, 2019.
|
[54] |
Ghosal T, Kumar S, Bharti P K, et al. Peer review analyze:A novel benchmark resource for computational analysis of peer reviews[J]. PLoS ONE, 2022, 17(1):e0259238.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259238
URL
|
[55] |
Dadkhah M, Kahani M, Borchardt G. A method for improving the integrity of peer review[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2018, 24(5):1603-1610.
doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9
pmid: 28812275
|
[56] |
Squazzoni F, Ahrweiler P, Barros T, et al. Unlock ways to share data on peer review[J]. Nature, 2020, 578(7796):512-514.
doi: 10.1038/d41586-020-00500-y
URL
|
[57] |
The blockchain and its potential for science and academic publishing[J]. Information Services & Use, 2018, 38(1/2):95-98.
|
[58] |
Casado M. Engage more early-career scientists as peer reviewers[J]. Nature, 2018, 560(7718):307.
|
[59] |
甘可建, 汪挺, 梁碧霞, 等. 《Gastroenterology Report》青年学术委员会初筛稿件的效果[J]. 编辑学报, 2020, 32(6):659-662.
|
[60] |
Frijters P, Torgler B. Improving the peer review process:A proposed market system[J]. Scientometrics, 2019, 119(2):1285-1288.
doi: 10.1007/s11192-019-03076-1
|
[61] |
Patel J, Pierce M, Boughton S L, et al. Do peer review models affect clinicians' trust in journals? A survey of junior doctors[J]. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 2017, 2:11.
doi: 10.1186/s41073-017-0029-8
pmid: 29451550
|
[62] |
da Silva J A T. Conflicts of interest arising from simultaneous service by editors of competing journals or publishers[J]. Publications, 2021, 9(1):6.
doi: 10.3390/publications9010006
URL
|
[63] |
Barnsteiner J, Kennedy M S, Flanagin A, et al. Nursing journal policies on disclosure and management of conflicts of interest[J]. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 2020, 52(6):680-687.
doi: 10.1111/jnu.12605
pmid: 33078574
|
[64] |
Malički M, Aalbersberg I J, Bouter L, et al. Journals' instructions to authors:A cross-sectional study across scientific disciplines[J]. PLoS ONE, 2019, 14(9):e0222157.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222157
URL
|
[65] |
Lane P. Adoption of PubMed Commons as a forum for post-publication peer-review[J]. Current Medical Research and Opinion, 2015, 31(S1):S5.
doi: 10.1185/03007995.2015.1021576
URL
|
[66] |
刘丽萍, 刘春丽. 基于Publons平台的审稿人贡献认可与评价研究[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2020, 31(1):99-107.
doi: 10.11946/cjstp.201909250663
|