共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 218 毫秒
1.
专家审稿意见是科技期刊在同行评议过程中学术价值最高的部分,具有一定的发表价值,但在目前多数科技期刊普遍实行的盲法审稿方式下,审稿意见只在专家、编辑和作者之间传递,造成学术资源的巨大浪费。而今同行评议方式向着更多元、更公开的方向发展,公开发表专家审稿意见可以作为实施开放式同行评议的尝试和突破,具有可行性和实践意义。本文建议采取先“精选”后“普及”、逐步推进的审稿意见发表方式,总结出精选审稿意见的遴选标准和程序,讨论了公开发表专家审稿意见对编辑工作的意义,以期为促进同行评议模式的转变,实施开放式同行评议打下基础。 相似文献
2.
Background:The proliferation of systematic reviews has impacted library operations and activities as librarians support, collaborate, and perform more tasks in the systematic review process. This case report describes a toolkit that librarians with extensive experience in supporting multiple review teams use to manage time, resources, and expectations in the systematic review process.Case Presentation:The toolkit is a compilation of documents that we use to effectively communicate with and help review teams understand and navigate each stage of the systematic review process. Elements included in the toolkit and discussed in this case report are intake forms, communication templates and memoranda, a process flow diagram, library guides on tools for retrieval and data appraisal, and established standards for guidance during the write-up stage. We describe the use of the toolkit for both education and project management, with a focus on its use in helping manage team time, resources, and expectations.Discussion:The systematic review toolkit helps librarians connect systematic review steps and tasks to actionable items. The content facilitates and supports discussion and learning by both librarians and team members. This toolkit helps librarians share important information and resources for each stage of the process. 相似文献
3.
Jessica C. Garner Jessica R. Williams 《Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery & Electronic Reserve》2013,23(4-5):119-137
Interlibrary Loan departments (ILLs) repeatedly receive requests for materials already owned by the home library. All libraries have the goal of providing the resources that patrons want and need in an easily searchable manner, but by submitting these requests, patrons unwittingly slow the process of the service by adding an unnecessary middleman into their search process. Interlibrary loan is a great tool for sampling how patrons are using (and mis-using) resources and diagnosing where breakdowns in communication between the library and the patrons regarding searches are taking place. The ILL at Georgia Southern University conducted a qualitative research study with IRB approval to explore this concern. From this research, we will describe how data suggest a more streamlined approach to redirecting searches originating in the library for outside sources to assets already physically (or electronically) stored in the library. We will discuss our research process and how we partnered with other departments in the library. Our findings have been useful to our Discovery Services managers and our instruction faculty. 相似文献
4.
应加强国内医学文章刊出的管理——读《黄禹锡论文如何逃过同行评议和编辑审查》一文有感 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
通过阅读《黄禹锡论文如何逃过同行评议和编辑审查》一文,揭示办刊与审稿过程中应注意的问题,同时认识到我国医学期刊潜在的危险.呼吁有关部门应采取防范措施. 相似文献
5.
国内外图书馆信息资源共享机制研究述评 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
6.
针对科技学术期刊审稿要素多、审稿周期长的状况,为了提高审稿效率,提出分层次的标准化审稿方法。将诸审稿要素按照其相关性和特点归纳为宏观要素、中观要素和微观要素,将审稿过程分为初审—复审—终审—定稿4个层次。按照学术期刊审稿的内在规律,在4个层次中以不同力度分别处理这3类要素,达到细致、科学、全面、快速审稿的目的。 相似文献
7.
网络信息资源质量评价研究综述 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
8.
9.
10.
[目的/意义]近年来频发的"学术丑闻"对我国的科研评议机制提出新的挑战。而在开放科学运动中兴起的注册式研究报告因其独特的同行评议机制,能有效地提高研究过程、评估环节的透明度,减少审稿过程中的出版偏见,确保学术严谨和科研质量,最大程度地减少学术造假行为。对注册式研究报告的同行评议机制现状和特点进行分析,以期为我国同行评议的创新发展和科学完善提供参考。[方法/过程]综合运用网络调研法和内容分析法,从注册式研究报告同行评议机制的评议流程、评议形式、评议效率、评议道德指南、同行评议专家库建设等方面进行分析,探讨注册式研究报告同行评议机制中作者、评议专家、编辑三者之间关系以及相关权利,总结注册式研究报告的同行评议机制的特征。[结果/结论]注册式研究报告同行评议机制创新性特点主要表现在：①审稿流程与标准的优化：注册式研究报告实行两次同行评议的新模式,不再仅以专家主观判断为标准,同时评议专家选择和专家意见处理等流程科学合理;②审稿匿名性和交互性的改进：同行评议的形式多样化,在保持基本的制衡关系中追求最大的灵活性;③审稿效率的提升：并行式的评议信息传递方式、明文化规定和系统化监惩机制促成高效率的同行评议。注册式研究报告同行评议机制的先进性特点主要表现在：①建立严格且细致的评议专家道德规范体系;②重视同行评议专家库的建设,形成完善的评议专家激励机制。 相似文献
11.
ABSTRACT Capella University, an online university, started its library liaison program in 2007. The goals of the program were to increase the use of library resources and services and promote integration of information literacy competencies into coursework. A review of the literature of liaison programs shows a focus on liaison activities in traditional colleges and universities. While some activities are adaptable to the online environment, this setting provides unique opportunities for enhancing the impact of the liaison relationship. This article will describe key initiatives in three areas: the online course room, reference transactions, and collaboration with both academic and nonacademic departments. Strategies, activities, and tools used to implement the initiatives will be discussed. 相似文献
12.
《Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory #》1998,22(3):295-301
The acquisition of electronic resources presented many new issues for staff at the Texas Tech University Library. Traditional communication pathways between acquisitions and other departments were inadequate to address the increasingly complex questions that were raised in the process of acquiring the electronic resources that were increasingly in demand by the university community. While it was possible to handle decision making for electronic resources through the library’s departmental structure, the process was hampered by a lack of speed and focus. To resolve this problem, six library staff members were brought together to form an electronic resources group (ERG). This cross-functional team is composed of library staff from four different departments, each of whom had experience with different aspects of acquiring electronic resources. Members continue to work within their departments and report to their functional managers, but they also report to the ERG project manager and are expected to contribute substantially to the accomplishment of group goals. This paper describes how Texas Tech has successfully used the cross-functional team approach for managing the acquisition of materials in electronic formats. 相似文献
13.
14.
审稿是学术期刊质量把关不可或缺的重要途径,目前常规的“四审制”流程还存在一定的局限性.通过增加编委初审环节、完善审稿内容和优化审稿流程,不仅可以缩短审稿周期,节省审稿资源,提高审稿效率和审稿质量,而且能吸引优质稿源和优化学术成果,从而提升期刊的学术影响力和品牌形象.同时,编委初审退稿还更具权威性和实用性. 相似文献
15.
国外期刊论文同行评议创新态势述评 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：1
[目的/意义]综述国外期刊论文同行评议的创新实践,以期为国内学术出版提供参考。[方法/过程]通过对国外期刊论文同行评议的创新实践加以述评,分析其优势和挑战,总结创新实践的整体趋势。[结果/结论]预印本和发表后同行评议反映了人们对同行评议更快捷的期待,非选择性同行评议和注册报告反映了人们对同行评议更客观的期待,开放同行评议和协作同行评议反映了人们对同行评议更公平的期待,而这些创新实践具有各自的优势及挑战。国外期刊论文同行评议的创新实践总体上呈现出加快发表速度、拓宽发文范围、弱化以刊评文、促进科学民主和认证审稿贡献的趋势。 相似文献
16.
同行评议时间控制应贯穿学术期刊专家审稿前、中、后全过程,而“审稿中”的时间控制是同行评议全程管理中易忽视的薄弱环节。对于该阶段的进度控制,编辑部可通过扩充专家邀请数量、提前设置增审、压缩增审周期来影响审稿进度。本文将围绕这3种方法调研其实施现状,以反映审稿进度控制现状并发现问题。结果显示,大多数期刊首次邀请专家人数仅等于要求回收意见的份数,审稿异常稿件需消耗1个审稿周期后才会被设置增审,审稿周期较长期刊的增审周期也未适当缩短,这些反映编辑部对处在“审稿中”稿件的时间管理处于近乎“虚空”的低干预状态。本文基于调研结果提出,期刊首次邀请专家人数宜大于要求回收意见份数但不是越多越好;分类确定提前增审对象及时间点;增审周期可控制在≤21 d;挖掘采编系统智能化辅助功能,减轻人力负担。多措并举,优化审稿进度控制效果,提升审稿运行效率,助力我国世界一流学术期刊建设。 相似文献
17.
[目的/意义]识别学术论文同行评审意见类型、分析不同被引频次下同行评审意见类型在同行评审报告中的分布情况,有助于加深对同行评议机制的认识,为评估论文学术质量、量化评审专家贡献提供新思路。[方法/过程]首先,将同行评审意见类型划分为正面评价、负面评价、要求/建议(主、次要方面)、问题/疑问、陈述六个类别,经人工标注、获取训练、测试语料后,对比分析传统机器学习模型、深度学习模型在同行评审意见类型自动识别上的效果;其次,将同行评审报告涉及的学术论文进行主题聚类,进而对被引频次进行标准化处理;最后,使用Spearman相关系数、累积分布、K-S检验、负二项回归分析不同被引频次学术论文对应的同行评审报告中同行评审意见类型的分布情况。[结果/结论]SciBert模型识别效果最佳;在基于Spearman的相关性分析中,评审报告中正面评价的分布占比与被引频次具有显著的弱正相关,负面评价的分布占比与被引频次具有显著的弱负相关;通过累计分布发现,多数情况下,当累积概率相同时,高被引分区中正面评价的分布占比大于低被引分区、负面评价的分布占比小于低被引分区,K-S检验能够检测到这种差异;在负二项回归分析中,正面评价分布占比、负面评价分布占比分别对被引频次有显著的正向影响、负向影响。研究结果表明,同行评审报告中正面评价、负面评价的分布情况与其对应论文的被引频次存在相关性,被引频次一定程度上能够反映论文的学术质量。 相似文献
18.
ABSTRACTLibrary impact statements can be key tools in evaluating a library's collection and determining what additional resources should be acquired to support a new course, major, or program. An academic institution's curricular review process can benefit from the inclusion of library impact statements. The application of library impact statements at Missouri State University and Southwest Baptist University will be examined. Information will be presented concerning the creation process, the types of research required, presentation formats, how the impact statements benefit both the library and the institution, and a selective review of how a number of other libraries handle the process. 相似文献
19.
Erin E. Boyd Olga Casey Ruth Elder Jana Slay 《Cataloging & classification quarterly》2013,51(1-3):202-213
With relatively new staff in all the Troy University campus libraries technical services departments, it was critical to collaborate on policies and procedures for consistency. Developing an online manual housed on a wiki that could be used and contributed to by staff on all three campuses was essential to this goal. Multi-campus meetings and online discussions are additional methods we use to promote collaboration. This article will include a literature review of collaboration and wikis along with methods the Troy University Libraries Technical Services departments are using to establish communication across the campuses. 相似文献
20.
审稿是期刊筛选论文、确保刊发论文质量的重要手段,审稿过程可能会受到审稿人、编辑和作者有意或无意的偏倚的影响而导致审稿结果失实。本文总结了医学论文常见审稿偏倚,如内容偏倚、保守偏倚、利益冲突、作者身份或地域偏倚等问题,对目前国内外期刊现有的审稿模式进行讨论并提出建议。各期刊可结合自身实际情况,采取一种或多种审稿模式;谨慎选择审稿人,既要“对口”送审,又要避免利益冲突;避免审稿一票否决,严格落实三审制度;尊重作者的科研成果,建立作者申诉机制。基于此,确保论文的优势得到承认,弱点得到剖析,为作者提供具有建设性的修改意见,帮助作者提高科学研究及论文撰写的水平,最大限度地减少审稿过程中出现偏倚。 相似文献