Nursing Outlook
Volume 58, Issue 4 , Pages 188-199 , July 2010

Scientific and statistical reviews of manuscripts submitted to Nursing Research: Comparison of completeness, quality, and usefulness

References 

  1. Baggs JG, Broome ME, Dougherty MC, Freda MC, Kearney MH. Blinding in peer review: the preferences of reviewers for nursing journals. J Nurs Sch. 2008;64:131–138
  2. Freda MC, Kearney MH, Baggs JG, Broome ME, Dougherty MC. Peer reviewer training and editor support: results from an international survey of nursing peer reviewers. J Prof Nurs. 2009;25:101–108
  3. Kearney MH, Baggs JG, Broome ME, Dougherty MC, Margolis DJ. Experience, time investment, and motivators of nursing journal peer reviewers. J Nurs Sch. 2008;40:395–400
  4. Council of Science Editors. Policy on Responsibilities and Rights of Editors of Peer-reviewed Journals. Available at: http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/services/draft_approved.cfm#Authors. Accessed February 5, 2010.
  5. Jöreskog KG. Testing structural equation models. In:  Bollen KA,  Long JS editor. Testing structural equation models. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 1993;p. 294–316
  6. Tukey JW. Analyzing data: sanctification or detective work?. Am Psych. 1969;24:83–91
  7. Abdellah FG, Levine E. Better patient care through nursing research. New York: Macmillan; 1965;
  8. McClellan MB, McGinnis M, Nabel EG, Olsen LM. Evidence-based medicine and the changing nature of health care. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2008;
  9. Altman DG. Statistics in medical journals. Stat Med. 1983;1:59–71
  10. Altman DG. The scandal of poor medical research [editorial]. BMJ. 1994;308:283–284
  11. Brogan DR. A statistician's view on statistics, quantitative methods, and nursing. In:  Abraham I,  Fitzpatrick J,  Nazdam D editor. Statistics and quantitative methods in nursing. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1989;p. 219–232
  12. Polit DF, Sherman RT. Statistical power in nursing research. Nurs Res. 1990;39:365–369
  13. Cohn EG, Jia H, Larson E. Evaluation of statistical approaches in quantitative nursing research. Clin Nurs Res. 2009;18:223–241
  14. Parent N, Hanley JA. Assessing the quality of reports on randomized clinical trials in nursing journals. Can J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2009;19(2):25–39
  15. Polit DF, Gillespie BM. Use of the intention-to-treat principle in nursing clinical trials. Nurs Res. 2009;58:391–399
  16. Bailar JC, Mosteller F. Guidelines for statistical reporting in articles for medical journals. Amplifications and explanations. Ann Intern Med. 1988;108:266–273
  17. Haller KB, Holditch-Davies D. Guidelines for statistical reporting. JOGNN. 2000;29:121
  18. Schriger DL, Arora S, Altman DG. The content of medical journal instructions for authors. Ann Emerg Med. 2006;48:743–749
  19. Clayton MK. How should we achieve high-quality reporting of statistics in scientific journals? A commentary on “guidelines for reporting statistics in journals published by the American Physiological Society.”. Adv Physiol Educ. 2007;31:302–304
  20. Curran-Everett D, Benos DJ. Last word on perspectives “guidelines for reporting statistics in journals published by the American Physiological Society: the sequel”. Adv Physiol Educ. 2007;31:306–307
  21. Herbison P. How to make your article more acceptable for the statistical reviewer [editorial]. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26:318–322
  22. Savik K. Reporting p-values. JWOCN. 2006;33:247–251
  23. Dougherty MC. Peer review and the nursing literature [editorial]. Nurs Res. 2009;58:73
  24. Godlee F, Jefferson T. Peer review in health sciences. 2nd ed.. London: BMJ Books; 2003;
  25. Bailar JC, Patterson K. Journal peer review: the need for a research agenda. N Engl J Med. 1985;312:2869–2871
  26. Sixth International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication. Peer Review Congress. 2009. Available at: http://www.ama-assn.org/public/peer/peerhome.htm. Accessed February 5, 2010.
  27. Murray GD. The task of a statistical referee. Br J Surg. 1988;75:664–667
  28. Sosa JA, Mehta P, Thomas DC, Berland G, Gross C, McNamara RL, et al. Evaluating the surgery literature: can standardization today predict manuscript impact tomorrow?. Ann Surg. 2009;250:152–158
  29. Gardner MJ, Bond J. An exploratory study of statistical assessment of papers published in the British Medical Journal. JAMA. 1990;263:1355–1357
  30. Harris AHS, Reeder R, Hyun JK. Common statistical and design problems in manuscripts submitted to high-impact psychiatry journals: what editors and reviewers would like authors to know. J Psych Res. 2009;43:1231–1234
  31. Brown AF. Research in nursing. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1958;
  32. In:  Gortner SR editors. Nursing science methods. A reader. San Francisco (CA): Regents, University of California; 1987;
  33. Brink PJ, Wood MJ. Advanced design in nursing research. 2nd ed.. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage; 1998;
  34. Aiken LS, West SG, Millsap RE. Doctoral training in statistics, measurement, and methodology in psychology. Am Psychol. 2008;63:32–50
  35. Abraham IL, Rice CV. Avoiding the “cookbook approach”: teaching nurses to be intelligent user's of statistics. Part II. Int Stat Ed Newsletter. 1989;9(2):2
  36. Aiken LS, West SG, Millsap RE. Improving training in methodology enriches the science of psychology [letter]. Am Psychol. 2009;64:51–52
  37. Borsboom D. The attack of the psychometricians. Psychometrika. 2006;71:425–440
  38. Willett JB, Singer JD. Longitudinal Research. Present Status and Future Prospects. Available at: http://gseacademic.harvard.edu/alda/Chapter%20presentations.htm. Accessed February 4, 2010.
  39. Day FC, Schriger DL, Todd C, Wears RL. The use of dedicated methodology and statistical reviewers for peer review: a content analysis of comments to authors made by methodology and regular reviewers. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;40:329–333
  40. Schriger DL, Cooper RJ, Wears RL, Waeckerle JF. The effect of dedicated methodology and statistical review on published manuscript quality. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;40:334–337
  41. Black N, van Rooyen S, Godlee F, Smith R, Evans S. What makes a good review and a good reviewer in a general medical journal?. JAMA. 1998;280:231–233
  42. Shattell MM, Chinn P, Thomas SP, Cowling WR. Authors' and editors' perspectives on peer review quality in three scholarly nursing journals. J Nurs Sch. 2010;42:58–65
  43. Henly SJ, Dougherty MC. Quality of manuscript reviews in nursing research. Nurs Outlook. 2009;57:18–26
  44. EQUATOR Network. Enhancing the quality and transparency of health research. Available at: http://www.equator-network.org/home/. Accessed April 1, 2010.
  45. Armstrong GD. The intraclass correlation as a measure of the interrater reliability of subjective judgments. Nurs Res. 1981;314–315320A
  46. Broomell SB, Budescu DV. Why are experts correlated? Decomposing correlations between judges. Psychometrika. 2009;74:531–553
  47. Baigent C, Harrell FE, Buyse M, Emberson JR, Altman DG. Ensuring trial validity by data quality assurance and diversification of monitoring methods. Clin Trials. 2008;5:49–55
  48. Allen MP, Jacobs SK, Levy JR. Mapping the literature of nursing: 1996-2000. J Med Libr Assoc. 2006;94:206–220

 Contact the first author for information about access to an on-line specimen copy of GARNR/SARNR, the Manual, and use of the instruments.

PII: S0029-6554(10)00246-0

doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2010.04.004

Nursing Outlook
Volume 58, Issue 4 , Pages 188-199 , July 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution