ReviewLa Tunisie medicale2023
Enhancing scholarly discourse in the age of artificial intelligence: A guided approach to effective peer review process.
Review in La Tunisie medicale, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effects of high-intensity interval training and Iranian propolis extract on serum levels of TRPV4 and CYP2E1 proteins in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver.La Tunisie medicale · 2024Trial
- Diagnostic outcomes of the 2023 race-neutral and 2012 race-specific global lung function initiative spirometry equations in healthy Algerian adults: a cross-sectional comparative analysis.The Libyan journal of medicine · 2026Article
- Toward Precision Cardiac Rehabilitation: Current Limitations and Future Opportunities of Omics and Artificial Intelligence.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Impact of wet and dry cupping therapy on endurance, perceived wellness, and exertion in recreational male runners.Sports medicine and health science · 2026Article
- Residents' contribution to teaching at a Tunisian faculty of medicine.The Libyan journal of medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Writing an effective and succinct cover letter: A practical guide.La Tunisie medicale · 2024Review
- The cover letter in the era of artificial intelligence (ChatGPT as an example).La Tunisie medicale · 2024Article
- A new perspective on cardiovascular function and dysfunction during endurance exercise: identifying the primary cause of cardiovascular risk.Biology of sport · 2024Article
- Key Guidelines for Responding to Reviewers.F1000Research · 2024Article
- Influencing factors of health-related quality-of-life perceived by both children/adolescents patients with type-1 diabetes mellitus and their parents: A North-African study.F1000Research · 2024Article
- Navigating ethical challenges in prison medical research.La Tunisie medicale · 2023Article
- Comments on "Modulation of NRF2 and CYP24A1 Pathways by Hookah Smoke: Implications for Male Reproductive Health".American journal of men's healthArticle
- Impact of Ramadan Intermittent Fasting on Salivary pH, Flow Rate, and Electrolyte Levels in Healthy Adult Men.American journal of men's healthArticle
- Bronchoconstriction Induced by Spirometric Maneuvers in a Male Patient: A Case Report.American journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integrity of the peer-review process (PRP) is paramount in academic publishing and serves as a critical filter for scholarly output. This mini-review centers on the introduction of comprehensive guidelines, presented in tables format, aimed at streamlining the interactions between authors and reviewers during the PRP. These guidelines, derived from an in-depth exploration of the PRP, offer structured and practical advice to ensure constructive, transparent, and effective communication, especially related to the use of artificial intelligence. While this mini-review discusses the strengths and challenges of the current PRP, its primary focus is on providing tangible recommendations to enhance the quality and efficiency of the PRP. By providing explicit guidelines and emphasizing the cooperative essence of peer review, this mini-review aims to improve the PRP, ensuring that it remains a robust mechanism for upholding the highest standards of research and knowledge dissemination in an evolving academic setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38465750PMC11261523What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.