=== Time Stamps:
5:55 - Big vs. Small Journals
11:51 - Judging Methodology Based on Conclusions
15:59 - BMJ Study on Error Identification Rate
17:37 - Prestige and Paper Acceptance
22:59 - Inter-Rate Reliability
24:17 - Does "Peer Review" CAUSE Studies to be Better Done?
26:58 - A HOT TAKE on "Peer Review"
1. Reviewer Bias, Annals of Internal Medicine:
2. Peer Review and Editorial Decision Making:
3. Effect of Institutional Prestige on Reviewer's Recommendations and Editorial Decisions:
4. Effect of Blinded Peer Review on Abstract Acceptance:
5. Double-Blind Peer Review Failure Rate:
6. Are Road Safety Evaluation Studies Published in Peer Reviewed Journals More Valid than Similar Studies not Published in Peer Reviewd Journals:
7. A Reliability-Generalization Study of Journal Peer Reviews: A Multileval Meta-Analysis of Inter-Rater Reliability and Its Determinants:
8. Prestigious Science Journals Struggle to Reach Even Average Reliability:
9. Confirmational Response Bias Among Social Work Journals:
10. Testing for the Presence of Positive-Outcome Bias in Peer Review:
11. What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them?
12. Retracted Science and the Retraction Index
13. Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review