Peer review continues to be a cornerstone of scientific publication by prioritizing
appropriate interpretations of relevant findings for dissemination. Until the mid-20th
century, the responsibility of manuscript review largely remained with editors-in-chief
and members of editorial committees [
[1]
]. With increasing specialization of articles, however, review by a select few stopped
being practical. In addition, modernization beginning with photocopying and now computer
and internet technology has expanded the ability to disseminate scientific papers
to a wider international group of academicians for input.To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Pediatric UrologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Scientific autonomy, public accountability, and the rise of “peer review” in the cold war United States.Isis. 2018; 109
- The global burden of journal peer review in the biomedical literature: strong imbalance in the collective enterprise.PLoS One. 2016; 11
Article info
Publication history
Published online: November 22, 2022
Accepted:
November 11,
2022
Received:
November 11,
2022
Footnotes
☆This article has been reproduced with kind permission of the American Urological Association: Restoring the pediatric urology peer review pipeline: “Journal Peer Review University” cast study”, published in the Journal of Urology, https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003072, November 2022.
Identification
Copyright
© 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Journal of Pediatric Urology Company.
