Pitfalls and successes of peer review in neurosurgery.

E R Laws, T G Pait, J A Jane
Author Information
  1. E R Laws: Department of Neurosurgery, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center, Charlottesville 22908, USA.

Abstract

As the first editor of the Journal of Neurosurgery, Louise Eisenhardt, acting with the advice of the editorial board, was responsible for making decisions on the acceptance or rejection of submitted manuscripts. Her log, covering the first 14 years of editorial decisions, is a record of neurosurgical progress and of the forces--scientific, technical and other--that shaped the field of neurosurgery. Any peer-review process is subject to pitfalls that become evident in retrospect, but an effective peer-review process is one of the basic ingredients of scientific progress. The decisions to accept or reject manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Neurosurgery during Eisenhardt's tenure are highlighted in this historical vignette.

MeSH Term

Decision Making
History, 20th Century
Humans
Medical Laboratory Science
Neurosurgery
Peer Review, Research
Periodicals as Topic
Publishing
Science
United States

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0decisionsfirstJournalNeurosurgeryeditorialsubmittedmanuscriptsprogressneurosurgerypeer-reviewprocesseditorLouiseEisenhardtactingadviceboardresponsiblemakingacceptancerejectionlogcovering14yearsrecordneurosurgicalforces--scientifictechnicalother--thatshapedfieldsubjectpitfallsbecomeevidentretrospecteffectiveonebasicingredientsscientificacceptrejectEisenhardt'stenurehighlightedhistoricalvignettePitfallssuccessespeerreview

Similar Articles

Cited By