Abstract
RECENT concern about the validity and honesty of biomedical research — especially that large fraction of research supported by public funds — has led to demands for greater accountability on the part of the research community. Since most scientific research is published only after evaluation by editors of scientific journals and their advisers — a process known as peer review — it is not surprising that this process, too, has come under critical examination. Peer review now stands to receive the same scrutiny as the work being reviewed. Particularly in view of recent cases in which fraudulent reports appeared in . . .
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
