News Double blind peer reviews are fairer and more objective, say academics BMJ 2008; 336 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39476.357280.DB (Published 31 January 2008) Cite this as: BMJ 2008;336:241 Article Related content Metrics Responses Peer review Related articles Letter Response rate was only 7.7% Published: 14 February 2008; BMJ 336 doi:10.1136/bmj.39486.496146.3A See more Constitutional symptoms in a young person BMJ December 07, 2016, 355 i5781; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i5781 The BMJ Christmas appeal 2016-7: Orbis, the sight savers BMJ December 01, 2016, 355 i6425; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6425 EU to launch new antimicrobial resistance action plan BMJ November 23, 2016, 355 i6328; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6328 A typical sign on a plain knee radiograph BMJ November 23, 2016, 355 i6021; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6021 An older man with thoracic back pain BMJ November 23, 2016, 355 i5786; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i5786 Cited by... Author-Reviewer Homophily in Peer ReviewAbstract Fulltext PDF Distilling the essence of general practice: a learning journey in progressAbstract Fulltext PDF Preferential publication of editorial board members in medical specialty journalsAbstract Fulltext PDF Response rate was only 7.7%Abstract Fulltext PDF
