begin
This commit is contained in:
174
z_f1-6.html
Normal file
174
z_f1-6.html
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
|
||||
<!doctype html>
|
||||
<html lang="zh">
|
||||
<head>
|
||||
<meta charset="UTF-8">
|
||||
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
|
||||
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge,chrome=1">
|
||||
<title>TMR</title>
|
||||
<link rel="shortcut icon" href="img/tmr3.png" type="image/x-icon"/>
|
||||
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style/form.css"/>
|
||||
<style>
|
||||
div a {
|
||||
color: #024393
|
||||
}
|
||||
.topics>h2 {
|
||||
font-weight: 700;
|
||||
text-align: center;
|
||||
color: #000;
|
||||
font-size: 24px;
|
||||
padding: 30px 0;
|
||||
border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
|
||||
margin-bottom: 20px;
|
||||
}
|
||||
</style>
|
||||
</head>
|
||||
<body>
|
||||
<div id="col-content">
|
||||
<div id="index_top" class="ind_home">
|
||||
|
||||
<!--头部信息-->
|
||||
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
<div class="article">
|
||||
<div style="width: 1300px;margin: 0 auto">
|
||||
<div class="topics">
|
||||
<h2 class="rgb_color">Peer-Review Process</h2>
|
||||
<div style="line-height: 24px;text-align: justify;">
|
||||
<a href="#2_1"><b>● Peer Review Policy</b></a><br>
|
||||
<a href="#2_2"><b>● Information for Reviewers</b></a><br>
|
||||
<a href="#2_3"><b>● Applications to Review for TMR Publishing Group</b></a><br>
|
||||
<a href="#2_4"><b>● How to Peer Review for TMR Publishing Group</b></a><br>
|
||||
<a href="#2_5"><b>● Reporting Guidelines</b></a><br>
|
||||
<a href="#2_6"><b>● Confidentiality</b></a><br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
<strong id="2_1">Peer Review Policy</strong><br>
|
||||
TMR Publishing Group follows a double blind peer review process to ensure impartial
|
||||
editorial decision-making; that is, the reviewers do not know who the authors of the
|
||||
manuscript are, and the authors do not have access to the information of who the peer
|
||||
reviewers are. All submissions to TMR Publishing Group are assessed by an editor, who will
|
||||
decide whether they are suitable for peer review. The editorial office will collect at least
|
||||
two review reports per manuscript. If an editor is on the author list or has
|
||||
any other competing interest regarding a specific manuscript, another member of the
|
||||
Editorial Board will be assigned to assume responsibility for overseeing peer review.
|
||||
Submissions felt to be suitable for consideration will be sent for peer review by
|
||||
appropriate independent experts. Editors will make a decision based on the reviewers’
|
||||
reports and authors are sent these reports along with the editorial decision on their
|
||||
manuscript. Authors should note that even in light of one positive report, concerns raised
|
||||
by another reviewer may fundamentally undermine the study and result in the manuscript being
|
||||
rejected.<br>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
<strong id="2_2">Information for Reviewers</strong><br>
|
||||
Authors may suggest potential reviewers if they wish (Email address:
|
||||
publisher@tmrjournals.com). However, whether or not to consider these reviewers is at the
|
||||
editor's discretion. Authors should not suggest recent collaborators or colleagues who work
|
||||
in the same institution as themselves. Authors who wish to suggest peer reviewers can do so
|
||||
in the cover letter and should provide institutional email addresses where possible, or
|
||||
information which will help the editor to verify the identity of the reviewer. Authors may
|
||||
request exclusion of individuals as peer reviewers, but they should explain the reasons in
|
||||
their cover letter on submission. Authors should not exclude too many individuals as this
|
||||
may hinder the peer review process. Please note that the editor may choose to invite
|
||||
excluded peer reviewers. Intentionally falsifying information, for example, suggesting
|
||||
reviewers with a false name or email address, will result in rejection of the manuscript and
|
||||
may lead to further investigation in line with our misconduct policy.<br>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
<strong id="2_3">Applications to Review for TMR Publishing Group</strong><br>
|
||||
We appreciate applications to join our community of peer reviewers. Our Academic Editors
|
||||
select reviewers on a manuscript-by-manuscript basis. In each case, the most relevant
|
||||
scientists will be invited. To provide up-to-date contact details, interested reviewers
|
||||
should register a reviewer account.<br>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
<strong id="2_4">How to Peer Review for TMR Publishing Group</strong><br>
|
||||
The reviewer report should comprehensively critique the submission, consisting of more than
|
||||
a few brief sentences.<br>
|
||||
A suggested format is:<br>
|
||||
Summary<br>
|
||||
Major issues<br>
|
||||
Minor issues<br>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
We encourage reviewers to help authors improve their manuscript. The report should give
|
||||
constructive analysis to authors, particularly where revisions are recommended. Where
|
||||
reviewers do not wish authors to see certain comments, these can be added to the
|
||||
confidential comments to the Academic Editor.<br>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
While expectations vary by discipline, some core aspects that should be critiqued by
|
||||
reviewers may include:<br>
|
||||
Are the research questions valid?<br>
|
||||
Is the sample size sufficient?<br>
|
||||
Is there necessary ethical approval and/or consent and was the research ethical?<br>
|
||||
Are the study design and methods appropriate to answer the research question?<br>
|
||||
Do the experiments have appropriate controls?<br>
|
||||
Is the reporting of the methods, including any equipment and materials, sufficiently
|
||||
detailed that the research might be reproduced?<br>
|
||||
Are statistical tests appropriate and correctly reported?<br>
|
||||
Are the figures and tables clear and do they accurately represent the results?<br>
|
||||
Has previous research by the authors and others been discussed and have those results been
|
||||
compared to the current results?<br>
|
||||
Are there any inappropriate citations, for example, not supporting the claim being made or
|
||||
too many citations to the authors' own articles?<br>
|
||||
Do the results support the conclusions?<br>
|
||||
Are limitations of the research acknowledged?<br>
|
||||
Is the abstract an accurate summary of the research and results, without spin?<br>
|
||||
Is the language clear and understandable?<br>
|
||||
To help authors receive timely reviews, reviewer reports should be submitted via the
|
||||
Manuscript Tracking System or Email on or before the agreed deadline. Reviewers should
|
||||
contact TMR if they are unable to meet the deadline so an alternative date can be
|
||||
arranged.<br>
|
||||
We encourage reviewers to focus their reports on objectively critiquing the scientific
|
||||
aspects of the submission, including soundness of the methodology and whether the
|
||||
conclusions can be supported by the results. Comments may also be given on novelty and the
|
||||
potential impact of the work. Reviewers provide a recommendation to accept, revise, or
|
||||
reject; however, the decision will be made by the Academic Editor.<br>
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
<strong id="2_5">Reporting Guidelines</strong><br>
|
||||
TMR Publishing Group does not mandate the use of reporting guidelines by authors, however,
|
||||
we encourage reviewers to use relevant reporting guidelines to help assess the submission.
|
||||
The EQUATOR Network and FAIRsharing list clinical and general science guidelines,
|
||||
respectively. We particularly encourage the use of:<br>
|
||||
CONSORT for randomized controlled trials<br>
|
||||
TREND for non-randomized trials<br>
|
||||
PRISMA for systematic review and meta-analyses<br>
|
||||
CARE for case reports<br>
|
||||
STROBE for observational studies<br>
|
||||
STREGA for genetic association studies<br>
|
||||
SRQR for qualitative studies<br>
|
||||
STARD for diagnostic accuracy studies<br>
|
||||
ARRIVE for animal experiments<br><br>
|
||||
|
||||
<strong id="2_6">Confidentiality</strong><br>
|
||||
Reviewers are therefore required to respect the confidentiality of the peer review process
|
||||
and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review
|
||||
process, beyond the information released by the journal. If reviewers wish to involve a
|
||||
colleague in the review process they should first obtain permission from the journal. The
|
||||
editor should be informed of the names of any individuals who assisted in the review process
|
||||
when the report is returned.<br>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
<br clear="both">
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
<div class="footer">
|
||||
<!--底部菜单栏-->
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
</body>
|
||||
<script src="js/jquery.min.js"></script>
|
||||
<script src="js/return-top.js"></script>
|
||||
<script src="js/jquery-ui.js"></script>
|
||||
<script src="js/js.js"></script>
|
||||
<script src="js/scientist.js"></script>
|
||||
|
||||
<script>
|
||||
$(function () {
|
||||
scien_list();
|
||||
$(".tab li").click(function () {
|
||||
$(".tab li").eq($(this).index()).addClass("cur").siblings().removeClass('cur');
|
||||
$(".tab_con>div").hide().eq($(this).index()).show();
|
||||
//另一种方法: $("div").eq($(".tab li").index(this)).addClass("on").siblings().removeClass('on');
|
||||
});
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
</script>
|
||||
</html>
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user