Match!

Peer Review to Ensure Quality in Forensic Mental Health Publication

Alan R. Felthous1
Estimated H-index: 1
(University of Pittsburgh),
Robert M. Wettstein10
Estimated H-index: 10
(University of Pittsburgh)
Abstract
Peer reviewers have been called the gatekeepers of science. For journal publications in forensic psychiatry, as well as other disciplines, the purposes of peer review are to assist in the selection of manuscripts to publish, improve the quality of manuscripts before their publication, and promote the fairness of the process. In this article, we examine, in particular, characteristics of high-quality peer reviewers, selection of peer reviewers, recruitment and retention of peer reviewers, desired quality of peer-reviewer ratings, and the value of peer review. We conclude with specific, albeit largely untested, recommendations for improvements in peer review of forensic mental health publications. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 42:305–14, 2014
  • References (38)
  • Citations (3)
References38
Newest
Published on Dec 1, 2013in BMC Medical Research Methodology2.51
Roger C.M. Ho32
Estimated H-index: 32
(NUS: National University of Singapore),
Kk Mak19
Estimated H-index: 19
(HKU: University of Hong Kong)
+ 3 AuthorsFang Pan9
Estimated H-index: 9
(SDU: Shandong University)
Background: Peer review is the major method used by biomedical journals for making the decision of publishing an article. This cross-sectional survey assesses views concerning the review system of biomedical journals among academics globally. Methods: A total of 28,009 biomedical academics from high-ranking universities listed by the 2009 Times Higher Education Quacquarelli Symonds (THE-QS) World University Rankings were contacted by email between March 2010 and August 2010. 1,340 completed an o...
Published on May 2, 2013in PLOS ONE2.78
Christopher Baethge23
Estimated H-index: 23
(University of Cologne),
Jeremy Franklin35
Estimated H-index: 35
(University of Cologne),
Stephan Mertens3
Estimated H-index: 3
Background Peer review is the mainstay of editorial decision making for medical journals. There is a dearth of evaluations of journal peer review with regard to reliability and validity, particularly in the light of the wide variety of medical journals. Studies carried out so far indicate low agreement among reviewers. We present an analysis of the peer review process at a general medical journal, Deutsches Arzteblatt International. Methodology/Principal Findings 554 reviewer recommendations on ...
Published on Nov 1, 2012in Perspectives on Psychological Science8.19
Wolfgang Stroebe63
Estimated H-index: 63
(UG: University of Groningen),
Tom Postmes53
Estimated H-index: 53
(UG: University of Groningen),
Russell Spears70
Estimated H-index: 70
(UG: University of Groningen)
The recent Stapel fraud case came as a shattering blow to the scientific community of psychologists and damaged both their image in the media and their collective self-esteem. The field responded with suggestions of how fraud could be prevented. However, the Stapel fraud is only one among many cases. Before basing recommendations on one case, it would be informative to study other cases to assess how these frauds were discovered. The authors analyze a convenience sample of fraud cases to see whe...
Published on Jul 25, 2011in PLOS ONE2.78
Jeffrey L. Jackson51
Estimated H-index: 51
,
Malathi Srinivasan17
Estimated H-index: 17
(UC Davis: University of California, Davis)
+ 2 AuthorsRichard L. Kravitz63
Estimated H-index: 63
(UC Davis: University of California, Davis)
Author(s): Jackson, JL; Srinivasan, M; Rea, J; Fletcher, KE; Kravitz, RL | Abstract: All the opinions in this article are those of the authors and should not be construed to reflect, in any way, those of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Background: Our study purpose was to assess the predictive validity of reviewer quality ratings and editorial decisions in a general medicine journal. Methods: Submissions to the Journal of General Internal Medicine (JGIM) between July 2004 and June 2005 were ...
Published on Jun 1, 2011in Western Journal of Nursing Research1.46
Molly C. Dougherty24
Estimated H-index: 24
(UNC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill),
Margaret Comerford Freda20
Estimated H-index: 20
(Yeshiva University)
+ 2 AuthorsMarion E. Broome32
Estimated H-index: 32
(IU: Indiana University Bloomington)
Nursing journal peer reviewers (N = 1,675) completed a 69-item online survey that assessed their views on manuscripts’ contributions to nursing, priorities in writing reviews, use of journal impact factor, and other areas related to indicators of quality. They reported using contribution to knowledge or research evidence, topic of current interest, and newly emerging area as indicators of a manuscript’s contribution to nursing. In writing their reviews, research rigor and clinical relevance of t...
Published on Oct 1, 2010in Journal of Child Neurology2.09
Victoria S.S. Wong3
Estimated H-index: 3
(UC Davis: University of California, Davis)
Despite remarkable growth in the clinical neurology literature, there is little research on peer review and biomedical publication in neurology. Biomedical publication research encompasses every step of the research process, from the methodology to the publication of research findings. Some general medical journals have served as leaders in improving scientific publication. Many medical fields have taken it upon themselves to characterize journals and peer reviewers within their own fields. Not ...
Published on Jan 13, 2010
John C. Bailar1
Estimated H-index: 1
,
Kay Patterson1
Estimated H-index: 1
Journal peer review is a remote and mysterious business for many research investigators. Four paradigms seem to capture much current opinion about peer review of scientific works submitted for journal publication: the sieve (peer review screens worthy from unworthy submissions), the switch (a persistent author can eventually get anything published, but peer review determines where), the smithy (papers are pounded into new and better shapes between the hammer of peer review and the anvil of edito...
Published on Jan 1, 2009in Transnational Corporations Review
James Testa2
Estimated H-index: 2
(Thomson Reuters)
This paper includes a detailed description of the Thomson Reuters Journal Selection Process, which evaluates many criteria, including timeliness of publication, adherence to international editorial conventions, and English language bibliographic information. Thomson Reuters also examines a journal's editorial content and the international diversity of it authors and editors. Citation analysis is carried out using Thomson Reuters data to determine a journal's citation history and/or the citation ...
Liza H. Gold6
Estimated H-index: 6
,
Stuart A. Anfang5
Estimated H-index: 5
+ 5 AuthorsHoward Zonana14
Estimated H-index: 14
This document is intended to be a review of legal and psychiatric factors and to give practical guidance and assistance in the performance of psychiatric disability evaluations. It was developed by forensic psychiatrists who routinely conduct disability evaluations and have expertise in this area.
Douglas Mossman24
Estimated H-index: 24
,
Stephen Noffsinger6
Estimated H-index: 6
+ 9 AuthorsKarl G. Sieg1
Estimated H-index: 1
This document is intended as a review of legal and psychiatric factors to give practical guidance and assistance in the performance of competence to stand trial evaluations. This Guideline was developed through the participation of forensic psychiatrists who routinely conduct evaluations of
Cited By3
Newest
Published on Apr 1, 2017in Nursing for Women's Health
Melanie Chichester4
Estimated H-index: 4
,
Jesse Wool
Abstract As professionals and potential leaders in health care, nurses should be committed to advancing practice through publishing in peer-reviewed journals. Asking trusted and experienced colleagues to critique a manuscript before its submission to a journal is a useful strategy to improve the quality of the manuscript and increase its chances of publication.
Hal S. Wortzel13
Estimated H-index: 13
,
Robert P. Granacher9
Estimated H-index: 9
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) involves a wide range of potential neuropsychiatric outcomes, from death or profound impairment to full and fast recovery. This circumstance has contributed to an atmosphere with considerable potential for both clinical confusion and unjustified medicolegal outcomes. Given that mild (m)TBI accounts for most (∼80%) TBI events and is generally associated with an excellent prognosis, the risk for erroneous clinical formulations and unmerited legal outcomes seems particu...
Michael A. Norko9
Estimated H-index: 9
(Yale University)
The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law is published four times a year. But it is created every day in a series of countless individual and often unremarkable steps. A network of authors, reviewers, editorial board members, office staff, publishing staff, and senior editors
View next paperPeer review and the publication process