{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,1]],"date-time":"2026-02-01T03:20:27Z","timestamp":1769916027494,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":19,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2017,3,8]],"date-time":"2017-03-08T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1488931200000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/www.springer.com\/tdm"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Scientometrics"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2017,5]]},"DOI":"10.1007\/s11192-017-2331-0","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2017,3,8]],"date-time":"2017-03-08T07:09:55Z","timestamp":1488956995000},"page":"971-978","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["Difficulty in finding manuscript reviewers is not associated with manuscript acceptance rates: a study of the peer-review process at the journal Radiology"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"111","author":[{"given":"Kevin M.","family":"Kallmes","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-5271-5524","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Waleed","family":"Brinjikji","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Ahmed T.","family":"Ahmed","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"David F.","family":"Kallmes","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2017,3,8]]},"reference":[{"key":"2331_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"56","DOI":"10.3389\/fncom.2011.00056","volume":"5","author":"A Birukou","year":"2011","unstructured":"Birukou, A., Wakeling, J. R., Bartolini, C., Casati, F., Marchese, M., Mirylenka, K., et al. (2011). Alternatives to peer review: Novel approaches for research evaluation. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 5, 56.","journal-title":"Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience"},{"key":"2331_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"231","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.280.3.231","volume":"280","author":"N Black","year":"1998","unstructured":"Black, N., Van, R. S., Godlee, F., Smith, R., & Evans, S. (1998). What makes a good reviewer and a good review for a general medical journal? JAMA, 280, 231\u2013233.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"6","key":"2331_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e11344","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0011344","volume":"5","author":"L Bornmann","year":"2010","unstructured":"Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2010). The usefulness of peer review for selecting manuscripts for publication: A utility analysis taking as an example a high-impact journal. PLoS ONE, 5(6), e11344.","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"issue":"8","key":"2331_CR4","first-page":"1094","volume":"17","author":"L Bornmann","year":"2016","unstructured":"Bornmann, L., & Werner, M. (2016). The journal impact factor and alternative metrics. Science and Society, 17(8), 1094\u20131097.","journal-title":"Science and Society"},{"key":"2331_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"d6783","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.d6783","volume":"343","author":"E Cobo","year":"2011","unstructured":"Cobo, E., Cortes, J., Ribera, J. M., Cardellach, F., Selva-O\u2019Callaghan, A., Kostov, B., et al. (2011). Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: Masked randomised trial. BMJ, 343, d6783.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"2331_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"137","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.1994.03520020063017","volume":"272","author":"JM Garfunkel","year":"1994","unstructured":"Garfunkel, J. M., Ulshen, M. H., Hamrick, H. J., & Lawson, E. E. (1994). Effect of institutional prestige on reviewers\u2019 recommendations and editorial decisions. JAMA, 272, 137\u2013138.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"2331_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"139","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.1994.03520020065018","volume":"272","author":"JR Gilbert","year":"1994","unstructured":"Gilbert, J. R., Williams, E. S., & Lundberg, G. D. (1994). Is there gender bias in JAMA\u2019s peer review process? JAMA, 272, 139\u2013142.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"issue":"3","key":"2331_CR8","first-page":"70","volume":"41","author":"D Johnston","year":"2015","unstructured":"Johnston, D. (2015). Peer review incentives: A simple idea to encourage fast and effective peer review. European Science Editing, 41(3), 70\u201371.","journal-title":"European Science Editing"},{"key":"2331_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e10072","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0010072","volume":"5","author":"RL Kravitz","year":"2010","unstructured":"Kravitz, R. L., Franks, P., Feldman, M. D., Gerrity, M., Byrne, C., & Tierney, W. M. (2010). Editorial peer reviewers\u2019 recommendations at a general medical journal: Are they reliable and do editors care? PLoS ONE, 5, e10072.","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"key":"2331_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"246","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.280.3.246","volume":"280","author":"AM Link","year":"1998","unstructured":"Link, A. M. (1998). US and non-US submissions: An analysis of reviewer bias. JAMA, 280, 246\u2013247.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"2331_CR11","unstructured":"Peer Review Survey (2009). Sense about Science. \n                        http:\/\/archive.senseaboutscience.org\/pages\/peer-review-survey-2009.html\n                        \n                    . Accessed Jan 25, 2017."},{"key":"2331_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"685","DOI":"10.2214\/ajr.165.3.7645496","volume":"165","author":"JF Polak","year":"1995","unstructured":"Polak, J. F. (1995). The role of the manuscript reviewer in the peer review process. AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology, 165, 685\u2013688.","journal-title":"AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology"},{"key":"2331_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1675","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.295.14.1675","volume":"295","author":"JS Ross","year":"2006","unstructured":"Ross, J. S., Gross, C. P., Desai, M. M., Hong, Y., Grant, A. O., et al. (2006). Effect of blinded peer review on abstract acceptance. JAMA, 295, 1675\u20131680.","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"2331_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"507","DOI":"10.1258\/jrsm.2008.080062","volume":"101","author":"S Schroter","year":"2008","unstructured":"Schroter, S., Black, N., Evans, S., Godlee, F., Osorio, L., & Smith, R. (2008). What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them? Journal of Royal Society of Medicine, 101, 507\u2013514.","journal-title":"Journal of Royal Society of Medicine"},{"key":"2331_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"27","DOI":"10.1186\/1746-160X-3-27","volume":"3","author":"T Stamm","year":"2007","unstructured":"Stamm, T., Meyer, U., Wiesmann, H. P., Kleinheinz, J., Cehreli, M., et al. (2007). A retrospective analysis of submissions, acceptance rate, open peer review operations, and prepublication bias of the multidisciplinary open access journal Head & Face Medicine. Head and Face Medicine, 3, 27.","journal-title":"Head and Face Medicine"},{"key":"2331_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"9","DOI":"10.1136\/jech.2006.049817","volume":"61","author":"L Tite","year":"2007","unstructured":"Tite, L., & Schroter, S. (2007). Why do peer reviewers decline to review? Journal of Epidemiology Community Health, 61, 9\u201312.","journal-title":"Journal of Epidemiology Community Health"},{"key":"2331_CR17","volume-title":"Peer review in scholarly journals: Perspective of the scholarly community\u2014An international study","author":"M Ware","year":"2008","unstructured":"Ware, M., & Monkman, M. (2008). Peer review in scholarly journals: Perspective of the scholarly community\u2014An international study. Bristol: Publishing Research Consortium."},{"key":"2331_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"5","DOI":"10.1002\/leap.1006","volume":"29","author":"M Willis","year":"2016","unstructured":"Willis, M. (2016). Why do peer reviewers decline to review manuscripts? A study of reviewer invitation responses. Learned Publishing, 29, 5\u20137.","journal-title":"Learned Publishing"},{"key":"2331_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"69","DOI":"10.1016\/j.emj.2015.12.004","volume":"34","author":"MA Zaharie","year":"2016","unstructured":"Zaharie, M. A., & Osoian, C. L. (2016). Peer review motivation frames: A qualitative approach. European Management Journal, 34, 69\u201379.","journal-title":"European Management Journal"}],"container-title":["Scientometrics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s11192-017-2331-0.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s11192-017-2331-0\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s11192-017-2331-0.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2017,4,21]],"date-time":"2017-04-21T12:47:59Z","timestamp":1492778879000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s11192-017-2331-0"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2017,3,8]]},"references-count":19,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2017,5]]}},"alternative-id":["2331"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11192-017-2331-0","relation":{},"ISSN":["0138-9130","1588-2861"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0138-9130","type":"print"},{"value":"1588-2861","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2017,3,8]]}}}