Relationship between journal impact factor and the thoroughness and helpfulness of peer reviews

Anna Severin(Swiss National Science Foundation), Stefan Müller(University of Freiburg), Alexander N. Sokolov(Institute of Psychology), Michaela Strinzel(Swiss National Science Foundation), Julia Vilstrup Mouatt(University of Auckland), Matthias Egger(University of Zurich), Tiago Barros(QB3)

PLoS Biology

August 29, 2023

10.1371/journal.pbio.3002238

Cited by 39

Related Papers

Comparative Efficacy and Acceptability of 21 Antidepressant Drugs for the Acute Treatment of Adults With Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

|The Lancet|2018|3.5k

CINeMA: An approach for assessing confidence in the results of a network meta-analysis

|PLoS Medicine|2020|1.7k

Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German

|The Lancet|1997|1k

Histopathological regression after neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or capecitabine in patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4-AIO): results from the phase 2 part of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2/3 trial

|The Lancet Oncology|2016|738

Predatory journals: no definition, no defence

|Nature|2019|723