Key result
The journal Thorax published an acknowledgement of its peer reviewers for their contribution to the journal's success and impact factor of 4.08 in 2003.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Peer review sustains journal quality amid rising submissions; leaves open optimal strategies for reviewer retention and process evolution.
Acknowledgement of the contribution of peer reviewers to the success of Thorax Thorax had a very successful year in 2003 with an increase in submissions and an impact factor which now stands at 4.08.1 The invaluable resource of our dedicated peer reviewers has allowed Thorax to maintain its high standards.2–4 Peer review has been used in journals for over 300 years5 and is an important part of the editorial process, as constructive criticism during the peer review process leads to improvements in the final published paper.6 In this issue of Thorax we publish the names of all the peer reviewers who have reviewed papers for the …
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jadwiga Anna Wedzicha (2003) reported an editorial. The journal Thorax published an acknowledgement of its peer reviewers for their contribution to the journal's success and impact factor of 4.08 in 2003.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: