888-651-9160
info@DoctorsofNursingPractice.org
The author of this insightful article (Kim Manturuk) shares insights about how a blind review process could blind the editor (or conference abstract review team) from seeing bigoted and prejudiced points of views.
Here’s the LINK TO THIS ARTICLE.
Thank you to our colleague, Julee Waldrop, DNP, FNP, PNP, SANE-A, CNE, FAANP, FAAN, Professor, Assistant Dean & Director DNP Program, Duke University School of Nursing and the Editor in Chief, The Journal for Nurse Practitioners for sharing the link to this article through the INANE Nursing Editors Email Update.
As a result of the experiences in this article, Doctors of Nursing Practice, Inc. is considering anti-prejudice guidelines related to calls for abstracts in the future.
What are your thoughts? Please share.
 |
The article raises into question the point of possible limitations of the blind peer-review process in academic research. While blind review has been the basis for ensuring impartiality and reducing […] |
 |
Thank you, Kim Manturuk, for being transparent and bringing this issue to light. I always considered double-blind and peer-review research to be the gold standard. It didn’t occur to me […] |
 |
The article provided above was an interesting and unexpected read. As a student, I honestly inherently trusted the blind review process when reading research articles. After all, its function is […] |
- You must be logged in to create new topics.
If you liked this topic share it with your friends.
They will thank you later.