Good Practices for authors during the Review Process
Prof Bernardo Innoncenti • 2021-01-01
Université Libre de Bruxelles
A discussion with Prof. Bernardo Innocenti where ask the following question. What are the most common reason of revision? What do reviewers look a first? How to deal with conflicting views between reviews? How to make the best out of the review process? What are the key elements to a good response? What to do with off-topic or irrelevant comments? How are reviewers selected? What is the role of the editor in the review process? What are open reviews? Are these types of practices the future of reviews?
What is this about?
1. Formal training with Françoise Vandooren The peer-review process & Open Peer Review 2. A discussion with Prof. Bernardo Innocenti • What are the most common sources of revision? • What do reviewers look a first? • How to deal with conflicting views between reviews? • How to make the best out of the review process? • What are the key elements to a good response? • What to do with off-topic or irrelevant comments? • How are reviewers selected? • What is the role of the editor in the review process? • What are open reviews? Are these types of practices the future of reviews?
Prof Bernardo Innoncenti
Université Libre de Bruxelles
Founder and ex-President of the CAOS Belgium, the main research field of Bernardo Innocenti is orthopaedic biomechanics. He is author/co-author of more than 80 articles in international peer-reviewed journals, 4 book chapters and over 200 international conference contributions.He was awarded with several highly prestigious prices, as the ‘Marc Coventry Award’ in 2009 and the ‘Richard S. Laskin Award’ in 2011. He currently serves on the Editorial Board of Journal of Arthroplasty, Journal Orthopaedic Surgery and Research and in other 6 international journals in the field. Prof. Innocenti is also a consultant for several orthopaedic companies.
PhD & Post Doc Society
exclusively for and by ULB's PhDs
Copyright © 2023 P&PS. All rights reserved.