-
Reviews
Back to Reviews
-
Other Comments:
There were no needs for illustrations or tables; Dr. Stevanovic painted a picture of the peer review process that exceeded the artistic limits of the most technical software ever created. This scientist's comments demonstrate the weakness of those who have been exposed to more knowledge than human ego can control. Simply put, this "ordinary Physician" is invited to not only review my work but treat my worst ailment.
I declare, in spite of the advantages WebMedCentral brings to the Science Review, it has yet to provide the constructive review model this author identified. Well done Sir!
Bill Misner PhD
-
Competing interests:
None
-
Invited by the author to review this article? :
No -
Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
No
-
References:
None -
Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
Many years being unpredictively, unfairly and fairly reviewed...For a while I thought Dr. Stevanovic was describing me.
- How to cite: Misner B .Post-Publication - A Brilliant Exposé of The Peer Review Process[Review of the article 'Pre-Publication Peer Review - My Confession About being Reviewed and Reviewing others ' by Stevanovic D].WebmedCentral 2011;2(10):WMCRW001038
From the article it is clear what is "behind" the publication of an article
none
No
No
None
I am a young reviewer, but I find myself in many parts of this article