Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/26143
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGalipeau, Jamesen_UK
dc.contributor.authorCobey, Kelly Den_UK
dc.contributor.authorBarbour, Virginiaen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBaskin, Patriciaen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBell-Syer, Sallyen_UK
dc.contributor.authorDeeks, Jonen_UK
dc.contributor.authorGarner, Paulen_UK
dc.contributor.authorShamseer, Larissaen_UK
dc.contributor.authorStraus, Sharonen_UK
dc.contributor.authorTugwell, Peteren_UK
dc.contributor.authorWinker, Margareten_UK
dc.contributor.authorMoher, Daviden_UK
dc.date.accessioned2017-11-17T00:21:23Z-
dc.date.available2017-11-17T00:21:23Z-
dc.date.issued2017-10-13en_UK
dc.identifier.other1634en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/26143-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Scientific editors (i.e., those who make decisions on the content and policies of a journal) have a central role in the editorial process at biomedical journals. However, very little is known about the training needs of these editors or what competencies are required to perform effectively in this role. Methods: We conducted a survey of perceptions and training needs among scientific editors from major editorial organizations around the world, followed by a modified Delphi process in which we invited the same scientific editors to rate the importance of competency-related statements obtained from a previous scoping review. Results: A total of 148 participants completed the survey of perceptions and training needs. At least 80% of participants agreed on six of the 38 skill and expertise-related statements presented to them as being important or very important to their role as scientific editors. At least 80% agreed on three of the 38 statements as necessary skills they perceived themselves as possessing (well or very well). The top five items on participants’ list of top training needs were training in statistics, research methods, publication ethics, recruiting and dealing with peer reviewers, and indexing of journals. The three rounds of the Delphi were completed by 83, 83, and 73 participants, respectively, which ultimately produced a list of 23 “highly rated” competency-related statements and another 86 “included” items. Conclusion: Both the survey and the modified Delphi process will be critical for understanding knowledge and training gaps among scientific editors when designing curriculum around core competencies in the future.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherF1000Researchen_UK
dc.relationGalipeau J, Cobey KD, Barbour V, Baskin P, Bell-Syer S, Deeks J, Garner P, Shamseer L, Straus S, Tugwell P, Winker M & Moher D (2017) An international survey and modified Delphi process revealed editors' perceptions, training needs, and ratings of competency-related statements for the development of core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals. F1000Research, 6, Art. No.: 1634. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.12400.1en_UK
dc.rights© 2017 Galipeau J et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_UK
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_UK
dc.titleAn international survey and modified Delphi process revealed editors' perceptions, training needs, and ratings of competency-related statements for the development of core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journalsen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.12688/f1000research.12400.1en_UK
dc.identifier.pmid28979768en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleF1000Researchen_UK
dc.citation.issn2046-1402en_UK
dc.citation.volume6en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusVoR - Version of Recorden_UK
dc.citation.date04/09/2017en_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationOttawa Hospital Research Instituteen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationPsychologyen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationOffice of Research Ethics and Integrity, Brisbaneen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationAmerican Academy of Neurologyen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Yorken_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Birminghamen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationLiverpool School of Tropical Medicineen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationOttawa Hospital Research Instituteen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Torontoen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationOttawa Hospital Research Instituteen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationCouncil of Science Editorsen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationOttawa Hospital Research Instituteen_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85029226944en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid511669en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0003-2797-1686en_UK
dc.date.accepted2017-09-15en_UK
dcterms.dateAccepted2017-09-15en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2017-11-16en_UK
rioxxterms.apcnot requireden_UK
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_UK
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_UK
local.rioxx.authorGalipeau, James|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorCobey, Kelly D|0000-0003-2797-1686en_UK
local.rioxx.authorBarbour, Virginia|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorBaskin, Patricia|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorBell-Syer, Sally|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorDeeks, Jon|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorGarner, Paul|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorShamseer, Larissa|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorStraus, Sharon|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorTugwell, Peter|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorWinker, Margaret|en_UK
local.rioxx.authorMoher, David|en_UK
local.rioxx.projectInternal Project|University of Stirling|https://isni.org/isni/0000000122484331en_UK
local.rioxx.freetoreaddate2017-11-16en_UK
local.rioxx.licencehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/|2017-11-16|en_UK
local.rioxx.filename3baeb1f0-39cf-4648-8158-6a1ae3124e35_12400_-_david_moher.pdfen_UK
local.rioxx.filecount1en_UK
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
3baeb1f0-39cf-4648-8158-6a1ae3124e35_12400_-_david_moher.pdfFulltext - Published Version1.02 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.