Table of contents for Peer review and manuscript management in scientific journals : guidelines for good practice / by Irene Hames.

Bibliographic record and links to related information available from the Library of Congress catalog.

Note: Contents data are machine generated based on pre-publication provided by the publisher. Contents may have variations from the printed book or be incomplete or contain other coding.


Counter
Contents
Foreword by Sally Morris and Robert Campbell	oo
Preface	oo
Chapter 1: Introduction	00
	What should peer review do?	00
	What does peer review assume?	00
	What is this book trying to achieve?	00
Chapter 2: The peer-review process -- how to get going	00
	The basic process	00
	The people involved in running the peer-review process	00
	Office organization	00
	Choice of system and procedures	00
		Record keeping	00
		Systems available	00
Chapter 3: Manuscript submission and initial checks on completeness 
and suitability	00
	Submission guidance to authors	00
		Journal scope and editorial policy	00
		Manuscript presentation	00
		Manuscript submission	00
	Checking and logging of submitted manuscripts	00
	Transfer to editor	00
	Initial assessment of suitability and rejection without external review	00
	Manuscripts with language problems	00
Chapter 4: The full review process	00
	Identifying and selecting appropriate reviewers	00
		Reviewer information	00
		How to go about identifying and selecting reviewers	00
	Finding reviewers	00
		To invite or not?	00
		Inviting reviewers	00
		Responses to invitations to review	00
	Getting the manuscript and associated material to reviewers	00
		Information reviewers will require	00
		Associated material needed by reviewers	00
	Monitoring review progress	00
		Reminding and chasing reviewers	00
		Problems during review	00
		Reviewers not returning reviews	00
	Receiving and checking of returned reviews	00
		Checking of reviews	00
		The ethics of amending reviewer reports for authors	00
		The ?ideal? report	00
	Back-to-back manuscripts	00
	Dealing with enquiries on manuscript status 	00
 
Chapter 5: The decision-making process for reviewed manuscripts	00
	The organizational structure for decision making	00
	The decision-making process	00
		Divided opinions from reviewers	00
		The decisions that can be made	00
	Checks to be made before communicating decisions to authors	00
	Communicating the decision to the authors	00
	Rebuttals and appeals from authors	00
	Dealing with revisions	00
	Dealing with resubmissions	00
		Problems with resubmissions	00
	Acceptance	00
	Decision making to consistent standards and the problem of 
	 availability of space 	00
	Special considerations in decision making: dual-use research 
	 and the possible misuse of information	00
Chapter 6: Moving to online submission and review	00
	How do you choose an online system?	00
	How to prepare to move to online working	00
		Evaluation of current workflow and responsibilities	00
		Specification design for the journal	00
		Questions and text options on the site	00
		Preparation of editorial correspondence for the online site	00
		Health and safety issues	00
		Training and support	00
		Data transfer	00
	The launch and transition period	00
	What to expect after going live online	00
		Impact on submission numbers	00
		Impact on the quality of submissions	00
		Impact on the geographical origin of submissions	00
		Impact on reviewing and administration times	00
	Problems that may be encountered and how to deal with them	00
		Online systems are never closed	00
		Users will grumble	00
		Users needing extra support	00
		Editors not using the online system properly	00
		The need to work ?offline? occasionally	00
		Users not using the online system to communicate or not mounting 
		 all relevant information	00
		Responses from reviewers	00
		Reviews submitted for the wrong manuscript or comments in the 
		 wrong place, and editors submitting the wrong documents or 
		 working on the wrong manuscript screen	00
		Other editors or people not associated with a manuscript needing to 
		 see material	00
		Submissions from the editor-in-chief	00
		Reviewers requesting hard copy and/or refusing to work online	00
		Users adding other people?s email addresses to their own accounts	00
	A final note	00
Chapter 7: Reviewers -- a precious resource	00
	Thanks and feedback to reviewers	00
	Reviewer training	00
	Ways to recompense reviewers	00
	How to develop and maintain reviewer loyalty	00
	Recognition of peer review as an accredited professional activity	00
Chapter 8: The obligations and responsibilities of the people involved 
in peer review	00
	Authors -- their obligations and responsibilities	00
		To act honestly	00
		To choose the most appropriate journal	00
		To make sure manuscripts are well presented, contain nothing 
		 inappropriate and are submitted correctly	00
		To deal appropriately with all authorship issues	00
	Editors -- their obligations and responsibilities	00
		General responsibilities	00
		Responsibilities to authors	00
		Responsibilities to reviewers	00
		Responsibilities to readers	00
	Reviewers -- their obligations and responsibilities	00
	Editorial office staff -- their obligations and responsibilities	00
	Conflicts of interest -- what they are and how to deal with them	00
		What are conflicts of interest?	00
		How should conflicts of interest be handled?	00
	Moral dilemmas	00
		Political or human rights issues	00
		Authors accused of criminal offences	00
		Refusals by publishers to publish articles	00
		Inability to complete review of a manuscript	00
Chapter 9: Misconduct in scientific research and publishing -- what 
it is and how to deal with it	00
	What types of misconduct can occur?	00
		Author misconduct	00
		Reviewer misconduct	00
		Editor misconduct	00
	How should cases of alleged or suspected misconduct be handled?	00
	Where can you turn for help?	00
		The publisher	00
		Professional bodies	00
		Scholarly publishing organizations	00
		The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)	00
		The Office of Research Integrity (ORI)	00
		International Committees for Scientific Misconduct	00
		Funding agencies	00
	What sanctions can be imposed as a penalty for misconduct?	00
		Authors found guilty of misconduct	00
		Reviewers found guilty of misconduct	00
		Editors found guilty of misconduct	00
	Correcting the literature 	00
		Notification of an error	00
		Expression of concern	00
		Retraction of an article	00
		Removal of an article	00
		Replacement of an article	00
	Dubious or fraudulent data remaining in the literature	00
	The future	00
Appendices
Appendix I	The Golden Rules and the Peer-Review Good Practice Checklist	00
Appendix II	Examples of checklists, forms, guidance for reviewers and editorial 
	 letters	00
Appendix III	Useful websites	00
Appendix IV	Alternative models of peer review	00
Index	00

Library of Congress Subject Headings for this publication:

Scientific literature -- Evaluation.
Science -- Periodicals -- Evaluation.
Technical writing -- Evaluation -- Analysis.
Peer review.
Science -- United States -- Information services.