Background Peer review is widely used in academic fields to assess a manuscript's significance and to improve its quality for publication. This scoping review will assess existing peer review guidelines and/or checklists intended for reviewers of biomedical journals and provide an overview on the review guidelines. Methods PubMed, Embase, and Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED) databases were searched for review guidelines from the date of inception until February 19, 2021. There was no date restriction nor article type restriction. In addition to the database search, websites of journal publishers and non-publishers were additionally hand-searched. Results Of 14,633 database publication records and 24 website records, 65 publications and 14 websites met inclusion criteria for the review (78 records in total). From the included records, a total of 1,811 checklist items were identified. The items related to Methods, Results, and Discussion were found to be the highly discussed in reviewer guidelines. Conclusion This review identified existing literature on peer review guidelines and provided an overview of the current state of peer review guides. Review guidelines were varying by journals and publishers. This calls for more research to determine the need to use uniform review standards for transparent and standardized peer review. Protocol registration The protocol for this study has been registered at Research Registry (www.researchregistry.com): reviewregistry881.

/pdf/a-scoping-review-on-biomedical-journal-peer-review-guides-3xajamma1j.pdf

A scoping review on biomedical journal peer review guides for reviewers

The author's productivity is assessed based on publications, which requires a lot of motivation and time. Manuscripts get through several steps before being accepted and published. The purpose of this paper is to understand the time gap between acceptance to the publication of manuscripts in reputed journals of Library and Information Science. This paper is useful to contemporary researchers for knowing the journal publication duration. In this paper, we discussed the refereed and index journals in the field of library and information science. For this study, we collected the data from six LIS journals which were published from the 2020 January to December Asian region. The study focuses on detailed analyses of journal processing and publishing duration. The major contribution of this study gives the six LIS journal processing time they are: author manuscript submitted to accepted, accepted to published, and submitted to published period.

Library and Information Science Scholarly Journals Publishing Simulation: A Study

The author's productivity is assessed based on publications, which requires a lot of motivation and time. Manuscripts get through several steps before being accepted and published. The purpose of this paper is to understand the time gap between acceptance to the publication of manuscripts in reputed journals of Library and Information Science. This paper is useful to contemporary researchers for knowing the journal publication duration. In this paper, we discussed the refereed and index journals in the field of library and information science. For this study, we collected the data from six LIS journals which were published from the 2020 January to December Asian region. The study focuses on detailed analyses of journal processing and publishing duration. The major contribution of this study gives the six LIS journal processing time they are: author manuscript submitted to accepted, accepted to published, and submitted to published period. 

/pdf/library-and-information-science-scholarly-journals-t9csd2r6.pdf

Library and Information Science Scholarly Journals Publishing
  Simulation: A Study

/pdf/library-and-information-science-scholarly-journals-2f6ewvefuj.pdf

Concise and follows guidelines to authors stated by the journal. Usually structured‐ Background/introduction, aims, methods, results, conclusions (or similar subsections). Whether it is independent, complete and stand‐alone (i.e., give a fair idea of the contents of the paper without reading the complete manuscript). Reflects the content of the article accurately (especially after a revision). Is it consistent with the content of the main text? Word limit stated by the journal is adhered to (usually about 250 words).

M S Tullu

Papers

Peer reviewing an original research paper