The Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium
- PDF / 95,184 Bytes
- 3 Pages / 610 x 792 pts Page_size
- 42 Downloads / 191 Views
BioMed Central
Open Access
Editorial
The Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium Clifford B Saper1, John HR Maunsell2 and Terje Sagvolden*3 Address: 1Journal of Comparative Neurology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA, 2Journal of Neuroscience, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA and 3Behavioral and Brain Functions, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway Email: Clifford B Saper - [email protected]; John HR Maunsell - [email protected]; Terje Sagvolden* - [email protected] * Corresponding author
Published: 16 January 2009 Behavioral and Brain Functions 2009, 5:4
doi:10.1186/1744-9081-5-4
Received: 7 January 2009 Accepted: 16 January 2009
This article is available from: http://www.behavioralandbrainfunctions.com/content/5/1/4 © 2009 Saper et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract The Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium (NPRC) was conceived in the summer of 2007 at a meeting of editors and publishers of neuroscience journals. One of the working groups addressed whether it was possible to construct a system for permitting authors whose manuscript received supportive reviews at one journal but was not accepted to send a revised manuscript together with its first round of reviews to a new journal for the second round. This would speed up the review process and reduce the work for reviewers and editors. The working group not only designed a framework for transferring reviews among journals, but also implemented it as the NPRC. By the fall of 2007, more than a dozen major journals had signed onto the NPRC, sufficient to launch the experiment in January, 2008. We invite authors who have not yet used the NPRC to try this method for appropriate manuscripts. In order to encourage dissemination of the details outlined in this Editorial, it will also be published in other journals in the Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium.
Background As the Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium (NPRC) ends its first year, it is worth looking back to see how the experiment has worked. NPRC was conceived in the summer of 2007 at a meeting of editors and publishers of neuroscience journals. One of the working groups addressed whether it was possible to construct a system for permitting authors whose manuscript received supportive reviews at one journal but was not accepted (perhaps because it was not within the scope of the first journal, or not sufficiently novel to merit publication in a general journal and therefore better for a specialty journal) to send a revised manuscript together with its first round of reviews to a new journal for the second
round. This would speed up the review process and reduce the work for reviewers and editors. The working group not only designed a framework for transferring reviews among journals, but also impl
Data Loading...
