@article{koopOpenTwostagePeerreview2006,
  title = {An Open, Two-Stage Peer-Review Journal},
  author = {Koop, Thomas and Pöschl, Ulrich},
  date = {2006},
  journaltitle = {Nature},
  issn = {0028-0836},
  doi = {10.1038/nature04988},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04988},
  abstract = {Recent high-profile cases of scientific fraud have fuelled the discussion of scientific quality control. A problem of similar, if not greater, importance is the large proportion of carelessly prepared scientific papers that dilute rather than enhance scientific knowledge. Both problems indicate shortcomings in the traditional peer-review system. Many scientists and publishers believe that peer review remains the best available approach for quality assurance, but requests for improvements are commonplace.},
  keywords = {*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-6408983,~to-add-doi-URL,peer-review,scientific-communication,two-stage-peer-review}
}

{"_id":"hsFn9e6SP22SBKR8A","bibbaseid":"koop-pschl-anopentwostagepeerreviewjournal","authorIDs":[],"author_short":["Koop, T.","Pöschl, U."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"An Open, Two-Stage Peer-Review Journal","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Koop"],"firstnames":["Thomas"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Pöschl"],"firstnames":["Ulrich"],"suffixes":[]}],"date":"2006","journaltitle":"Nature","issn":"0028-0836","doi":"10.1038/nature04988","url":"https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04988","abstract":"Recent high-profile cases of scientific fraud have fuelled the discussion of scientific quality control. A problem of similar, if not greater, importance is the large proportion of carelessly prepared scientific papers that dilute rather than enhance scientific knowledge. Both problems indicate shortcomings in the traditional peer-review system. Many scientists and publishers believe that peer review remains the best available approach for quality assurance, but requests for improvements are commonplace.","keywords":"*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-6408983,~to-add-doi-URL,peer-review,scientific-communication,two-stage-peer-review","bibtex":"@article{koopOpenTwostagePeerreview2006,\n title = {An Open, Two-Stage Peer-Review Journal},\n author = {Koop, Thomas and Pöschl, Ulrich},\n date = {2006},\n journaltitle = {Nature},\n issn = {0028-0836},\n doi = {10.1038/nature04988},\n url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04988},\n abstract = {Recent high-profile cases of scientific fraud have fuelled the discussion of scientific quality control. A problem of similar, if not greater, importance is the large proportion of carelessly prepared scientific papers that dilute rather than enhance scientific knowledge. Both problems indicate shortcomings in the traditional peer-review system. Many scientists and publishers believe that peer review remains the best available approach for quality assurance, but requests for improvements are commonplace.},\n keywords = {*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM,~INRMM-MiD:c-6408983,~to-add-doi-URL,peer-review,scientific-communication,two-stage-peer-review}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Koop, T.","Pöschl, U."],"key":"koopOpenTwostagePeerreview2006","id":"koopOpenTwostagePeerreview2006","bibbaseid":"koop-pschl-anopentwostagepeerreviewjournal","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04988"},"keyword":["*imported-from-citeulike-INRMM","~INRMM-MiD:c-6408983","~to-add-doi-URL","peer-review","scientific-communication","two-stage-peer-review"],"downloads":0},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://tmpfiles.org/dl/58794/INRMM.bib","creationDate":"2020-07-02T22:41:11.434Z","downloads":0,"keywords":["*imported-from-citeulike-inrmm","~inrmm-mid:c-6408983","~to-add-doi-url","peer-review","scientific-communication","two-stage-peer-review"],"search_terms":["open","two","stage","peer","review","journal","koop","pöschl"],"title":"An Open, Two-Stage Peer-Review Journal","year":null,"dataSources":["DXuKbcZTirdigFKPF"]}