1365-2168/asset/olbannerleft.gif?v=1&s=35107666ba24da761c871cb3a97be17587810516)
Original Article
You have free access to this content
Fate of manuscripts declined by the British Journal of Surgery
Article first published online: 22 JAN 2010
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.6880
Copyright © 2010 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
1365-2168/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=bc5a1819380c064145da271c2d887371f804b6d7 "British Journal of Surgery")
Additional Information
How to Cite
Wijnhoven, B. P. L. and Dejong, C. H. C. (2010), Fate of manuscripts declined by the British Journal of Surgery. Br J Surg, 97: 450–454. doi: 10.1002/bjs.6880
Publication History
- Issue published online: 5 FEB 2010
- Article first published online: 22 JAN 2010
- Manuscript Accepted: 22 SEP 2009
References
- 1, . Reviewer bias: a blinded experimental study. J Lab Clin Med 1994; 124: 178–182.
- 2, . Reproducibility of peer review in clinical neuroscience. Is agreement between reviewers any greater than would be expected by chance alone? Brain 2000; 123: 1964–1969.
- 3, . Peer review. Crude and understudied, but indispensable. JAMA 1994; 272: 96–97.
- 4, , , . Fate of manuscripts declined by the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. J Am Acad Dermatol 2008; 58: 632–635.
- 5, , . The outcome of manuscripts submitted to the American Journal of Ophthalmology between 2002 and 2003. Am J Ophthalmol 2007; 143: 551–560.
- 6. What happens to the manuscripts that have not been accepted for publication in Occupational and Environmental Medicine? Occup Environ Med 2001; 58: 604–607.
- 7, , , . Regrets or no regrets? No regrets! The fate of rejected manuscripts. Cardiovasc Res 2000; 45: 255–258.
- 8, . Outcomes of rejected Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology manuscripts. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2008; 19: 1620–1623.
- 9, , , , , . Early editorial manuscript screening versus obligate peer review: a randomized trial. Ann Neurol 2007; 61: A10–A12.
- 10, , . Fate of manuscripts previously rejected by the American Journal of Neuroradiology: a follow-up analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009; 30: 253–256.
- 11, . The fate of epidemiologic manuscripts: a study of papers submitted to Epidemiology. Epidemiology 2007; 18: 262–265.
- 12, , . The fate of manuscripts rejected by a general medical journal. Am J Med 2000; 109: 131–135.
- 13, , , . A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PLoS One 2009; 4: e6022.
- 14, , , , . Predictors of publication: characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals. Med J Aust 2006; 184: 621–626.
- 15, , , , . What is submitted and what gets accepted in Indian Pediatrics: analysis of submissions, review process, decision making, and criteria for rejection. Indian Pediatr 2006; 43: 479–489.
- 16Anon. Citation data: the wrong impact? Nat Neurosci 1998; 1: 641–642.
- 17. Contradicted and initially stronger effects in highly cited clinical research. JAMA 2005; 294: 218–228.