Learning from open source software projects to improve scientific review.
Learning from open source software projects to improve scientific review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fncom.2012.00018
复制
发表时间：
2012
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Millman KJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ghosh SS;Klein A;Avants B;Millman KJ
同行评审的出版物是分享科学成果的主要机制。然而，目前的同行评审过程充满了许多问题，这些问题破坏了科学的速度、有效性和可信度。我们强调了五个突出的问题：（1）评论者应该有全面的专业知识;（2）评论者没有足够的方法和材料来评估研究;（3）评论者既没有被识别也没有被承认;（4）没有衡量评论质量的标准;（5）评论需要很多时间，一旦提交就不能发展。我们建议，这些问题可以通过对审查程序进行以下修改来解决。将评论分发给许多评论者将允许每个评论者专注于反映评论者的专业或感兴趣的领域的文章部分，并减少任何一个评论者的负担。向审查人员提供进行全面评价的材料和方法将有助于提高透明度、加强审查和推广结果。对审评人员表示感谢，可以对审评人员的贡献进行定量评估，这可用于确定审评人员在科学界的影响。量化评论质量有助于确定个人评论和评论者以及提交文章的重要性。最后，我们建议加快出版后审查，并允许对话以动态和互动的方式继续和蓬勃发展。我们认为，这些解决方案可以通过适应现有的功能，从开源软件管理和社交网络技术来实现。我们提出了一个开放的，互动的审查系统，量化的文章，评论的质量和评论家的声誉的重要性的模型。
Peer-reviewed publications are the primary mechanism for sharing scientific results. The current peer-review process is, however, fraught with many problems that undermine the pace, validity, and credibility of science. We highlight five salient problems: (1) reviewers are expected to have comprehensive expertise; (2) reviewers do not have sufficient access to methods and materials to evaluate a study; (3) reviewers are neither identified nor acknowledged; (4) there is no measure of the quality of a review; and (5) reviews take a lot of time, and once submitted cannot evolve. We propose that these problems can be resolved by making the following changes to the review process. Distributing reviews to many reviewers would allow each reviewer to focus on portions of the article that reflect the reviewer's specialty or area of interest and place less of a burden on any one reviewer. Providing reviewers materials and methods to perform comprehensive evaluation would facilitate transparency, greater scrutiny, and replication of results. Acknowledging reviewers makes it possible to quantitatively assess reviewer contributions, which could be used to establish the impact of the reviewer in the scientific community. Quantifying review quality could help establish the importance of individual reviews and reviewers as well as the submitted article. Finally, we recommend expediting post-publication reviews and allowing for the dialog to continue and flourish in a dynamic and interactive manner. We argue that these solutions can be implemented by adapting existing features from open-source software management and social networking technologies. We propose a model of an open, interactive review system that quantifies the significance of articles, the quality of reviews, and the reputation of reviewers.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
17.3
作者：
Smith, R
通讯作者：
Smith, R
影响因子：
15.8
作者：
Ioannidis, JPA
通讯作者：
Ioannidis, JPA
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.0507655102
发表时间：
2005-11-15
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Hirsch, JE
通讯作者：
Hirsch, JE
影响因子：
56.9
作者：
GARFIELD, E
通讯作者：
GARFIELD, E
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Bollen J;Van de Sompel H;Hagberg A;Chute R
通讯作者：
Chute R