开发期刊同行评审者的策略:一个范围审查
Elizabeth A Gazza1, April D Matthias, Jeff Griffin
1About the Authors Elizabeth A. Gazza, PhD, RN, LCCE, FACCE, ANEF, is associate director for faculty and staff development and a professor, School of Nursing, University of North Carolina Wilmington, Wilmington, North Carolina. April D. Matthias, PhD, RN, CNE, is associate professor and program coordinator, MSN-NE Program, School of Nursing, University of North Carolina Wilmington. Jeff Griffin, MLIS, is data management specialist, University of North Carolina Wilmington. Katie Chick, MSN, RN, is a clinical instructor, North Carolina. The authors acknowledge the education and support provided by John Osinski, UNCW nursing librarian, and Lynnee Argabright, UNCW data librarian and team lead of scholarly research services. For more information, contact Dr. Gazza at gazzae@uncw.edu .
这次范围审查探讨了培训期刊同行评审员的策略. 虽然存在各种方法,但在文献中没有确定一个全面有效的审查员培养方法.
科学领域:
- 学术传播学术交流
- 同行评审是同行评审的过程.
- 学术出版学术出版是一门学术出版业.
背景情况:
- 同行评审过程对于推进护理教育研究至关重要.
- 有效的同行评审支持科学文献的完整性.
研究的目的:
- 检查开发策略,准备同行评审人员.
- 批判性地评估提交给同行评审期刊的手稿的内容.
主要方法:
- 使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所的程序进行了范围审查.
- 在五个数据库中搜索了2012-2022年期间的英语文章.
- 包括专注于开发期刊同行评审人策略的文章.
主要成果:
- 包括44篇文章,主要是评论 (52%).
- 大多数文章来自医学 (61%),其次是护理 (9%) 和多学科期刊 (9%).
- 审查发展策略,分为教学方法,资源和个人实践.
结论:
- 多个学科已经解决了审稿人发展问题,但缺乏全面的方法.
- 调查结果表明,需要一个多层次的审稿人发展计划.
- 学术护士教育工作者可以领导这样的课程的发展.
相关概念视频
Types of Selection
Proofreading
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
The Scientific Method
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
Feedback Loops
Sustainable Development


