Search
Items tagged with: peerreview
#AcademicChatter #PeerReview #AcademicPublishing #academia
Published in an Elsevier journal.
Edit: at first I thought this must be a prank played on the editors, but as several people have pointed out in the replies, you can read the text as a satire of real problems in the medical profession, so maybe the editors were in on the joke.
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijscr.2024.1…
#science #PeerReview #AcademicPublishing
I would say the purpose of peer-review is to ensure that the work is correct (i.e. gives reliable information about the world).
"Improving the quality" doesn't mean much if the end result is improved but wrong (fake data, wrong statistics, inaccurate interpretation of the literature,...)
"Selecting the best papers" is.. useless IMO. The reader should select the papers they want to read but any results, as long as they're correct, should be published and available to read.
![Excerpt from the linked paper:
As strongly requested by the reviewers, here we cite some references [[35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47]] although they are completely irrelevant to the present work.](https://friendica.hellquist.eu/photo/preview/640/3358998 "Excerpt from the linked paper:
As strongly requested by the reviewers, here we cite some references [[35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47]] although they are completely irrelevant to the present work.")
