mavii

SDI Manuscript Submission Guide Notice: Kindly note that ONLINE manuscript management system is under technical maintenance and upgradation. Submission and other communication should be done by email only. Thanks for your cooperation. Manuscript Submission Guide Manuscript formatting as per journal format is not mandatory during initial submission for review. General Guideline for Authors ...

Peer review is the system used to assess the quality of a manuscript before it is published. Independent researchers in the relevant research area assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity and significance to help editors determine whether a manuscript should be published in their journal.

Notice: We are delighted to inform that we have launched new websites of the journals. From 12.02.2019, all articles will be published in the new websites.

Peer review has been defined as a process of subjecting an author’s scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field. It functions to encourage authors to meet the accepted high standards of their ...

PubMed® comprises more than 38 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.

Peer review cannot improve poor research, but it can often "correct, enhance and strengthen the statistical analysis of data and can markedly improve presentation and clarity" [4]. Why should you volunteer to be a referee and review papers? The noblest motive is altruism, to help others to improve their papers.

The peer review process provides a foundation for the credibility of scientific findings in medicine. The following article discusses the history of peer review in scientific and medical journals, the process for the selection of peer reviewers, and ...

PubMed Central ® (PMC) is a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM)

Peer review is central to the publishing process and has a fundamental role to play in maintaining the integrity of the published literature and advancing discovery. At BMC, we have always supported innovation in peer review and were one of the first publishers to truly open up peer review in 1999. We are leading on new initiatives to further develop peer review, and suggest ways to improve ...

Scholarly Book Review should be within 2000 words. Scholarly Book Review must have to be systematic and structured and proper references (2-6 numbers) should be cited during the review. Scholarly Book Review must be avoided to advertise the book. Normal peer review process will be followed to ensure the academic quality of such book review.

Examining the publication to see if it is peer-reviewed. If the first two methods described above did not identify the journal, (and the article), as peer-reviewed, you may then need to examine the journal physically or look at additional pages of the journal online to determine if it is peer-reviewed.

References of the included studies were reviewed, and citation tracking was used. Eligible studies were English or Chinese peer-reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with type 2 diabetes, with PCC applied in the trial group and routine care in the control group, focusing on self-management outcomes.

In episode 30 of the Be Well, Practice Well podcast, Physician Just Equity experts share potential solutions for managing a sham peer review in medicine.

Three gaps highlighted eight years ago by the previous scoping review remain unresolved. Research on decision makers (e.g., scientists in positions of power, policymakers, accounting for 3%), the private research sector and patents (4.7%), and the peer review system (0.3%) continues to be underexplored.

Peer review has been a fundamental pillar of scholarly publishing for decades, serving as a critical mechanism for maintaining academic rigor and research integrity. Yet, the contemporary landscape of scholarly evaluation is fraught with mounting challenges that threaten the sustainability of this essential process. Reviewers are experiencing burnout as submission volumes increase, and many ...

What is wrong with the peer review system? Is peer review sustainable? Useful? What other models exist? These are central yet contentious questions in today’s academic discourse. This perspective critically discusses alternative models and revisions ...

“People are saying, ‘Peer review is broken, and we need a new system.’” Here’s how APA and the research community are reengineering for the long haul.

Nurses are central to sepsis management, and their knowledge, confidence, and clinical reasoning significantly impact patient outcomes. This systematic review evaluates critical care nurses’ knowledge, confidence, and clinical reasoning in sepsis management and examines factors influencing these competencies.

Due to the restructuring of our editorial policy and regulations, we have closed all the files of these types of manuscripts. Files of these types of manuscripts can be kept alive if authors agree for a fresh round of peer review by at least two peer reviewers or re-approved by the present editorial board.