Ross-Hellauer, Tony

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","4"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Research Integrity and Peer Review"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","4"],["dc.contributor.author","Ross-Hellauer, Tony"],["dc.contributor.author","Görögh, Edit"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:50:03Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:50:03Z"],["dc.date.issued","2019"],["dc.description.abstract","Abstract Open peer review (OPR) is moving into the mainstream, but it is often poorly understood and surveys of researcher attitudes show important barriers to implementation. As more journals move to implement and experiment with the myriad of innovations covered by this term, there is a clear need for best practice guidelines to guide implementation. This brief article aims to address this knowledge gap, reporting work based on an interactive stakeholder workshop to create best-practice guidelines for editors and journals who wish to transition to OPR. Although the advice is aimed mainly at editors and publishers of scientific journals, since this is the area in which OPR is at its most mature, many of the principles may also be applicable for the implementation of OPR in other areas (e.g., books, conference submissions)."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/s41073-019-0063-9"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/15845"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/59690"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.publisher","BioMed Central"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.title","Guidelines for open peer review implementation"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]