On Peer Review Standards For the Information Systems Literature

The quality of research published in journals is not only dependent on the work performed by authors, but also on the service undertaken by peer reviewers. In this paper, we take a two-pronged qualitative approach to establish an integrated set of criteria for reviewers, for the reviews they produce, and for the papers they review in the IS domain. These criteria are intended to be of value to three sets of stakeholders: authors, reviewers and editors. Authors should find them useful as they write, knowing in advance how reviewers are evaluating their work; reviewers should find them useful to improve the quality of the reviews of manuscripts; editors should use them to ensure that manuscripts are well written and that reviewers performed their tasks effectively. We discuss the implications of these criteria for the review process and identify areas for future research

HOW TO GET PAPERS PUBLISHED IN LEADING IS JOURNALS?

Journals are the most important vehicles for sharing research results. Some countries (such as Brazil, Chile and Portugal) are underrepresented in terms of originating papers published in top Information Systems journals. This theoretical paper aims to provide a roadmap signposting the key elements for a paper to meet the criteria for publication in the top Information Systems journals. Ten dimensions for critically reviewing Information Systems papers were identified in the literature. Considering the importance of having a paper published in a top journal, for both the author and for the institution to which he is affiliated, this paper might be used by researchers wishing to submit papers to top journals, as well as by editors and reviewers who might benefit by reflecting on the standards adopted in peer review systems

External review systems for radiation oncology facilities – clinical audit versus other review systems

BackgroundBetween 1996 and 1999 project team of ExPeRT, catalogued four external review systems of health care facilities in the European Union and countries associated with EU.AimThe aim of this paper is a/ to identify and compare currently existing external review systems for radiation oncology facilities and b/ to distinguish main differences between clinical audit and other external evaluation models and c/ to identify where those models are currently used in European Union member states.Materials and MethodsBased on the literature review and the survey conducted between January and April 2007 among representatives of 67 national societies (for diagnostic radiology, radiotherapy and nuclear medicine) in European Union member states, the analysis of existing external review systems in radiation oncology was performed. Relevant information about purpose, scope and methodology of evaluation process for those systems were surveyed.ResultsThe response to the questionnaire was 72%. Only a few countries did not supply any reply in spite of repeated enquiries to several recipients. Six main categories of systems aiming at measuring the quality of service management and delivery were identified: professional peer review –based schemes, hospital accreditation, accreditation in terms of ISO standards, award seeking, certification by International Standards Organization, and clinical audit.ConclusionsThough the methodology and terminology of the five main external review systems differ, a constant movement towards collaboration and convergence of those models has been observed. Due to the social, political, and economical aspects of each European country, the different audit systems have been implemented either on voluntary or mandatory basis

Impact of Medical Device Integration on Real-Time Visibility of Electronic Medical Records

Health care leaders are expected to make sound decisions regarding the equipment they purchase for use by personnel. One topic of consideration is the ability of the equipment to integrate with an organization’s electronic medical record, known as medical device integration (MDI). One aspect of MDI is the ability for information gathered at the patient bedside to be viewable in real time, or as close to it as possible. The real-time visibility (RTV) of information refers to the time it takes for information gathered by one individual to be visible to another. The purpose of this systematic review of the literature was to assess the evidence of MDI-ready platforms and their impact on RTV. The guiding theories for this project were planned change theory, cognitive theory, and systems theory. Health care databases, information technology databases, and nursing informatics resources were accessed during the literature review. Results were described using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. Articles included in the study were summarized using the revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence criteria. Results yielded one peer-reviewed article with information on the measurable impact of MDI on RTV which demonstrated that MDI can improve RTV by allowing nurses more time to focus on important clinical tasks. An additional 10 articles provided information on other benefits of MDI including considerations when purchasing equipment for staff such as additional locations, additional tools that could be used, and reductions in documentation errors. This project will contribute to social change by helping leaders pursue technology that improves patient safety, improves nurse efficiency, and improves nurse satisfaction

The metric tide: report of the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management

This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. The review was chaired by Professor James Wilsdon, supported by an independent and multidisciplinary group of experts in scientometrics, research funding, research policy, publishing, university management and administration. This review has gone beyond earlier studies to take a deeper look at potential uses and limitations of research metrics and indicators. It has explored the use of metrics across different disciplines, and assessed their potential contribution to the development of research excellence and impact. It has analysed their role in processes of research assessment, including the next cycle of the Research Excellence Framework (REF). It has considered the changing ways in which universities are using quantitative indicators in their management systems, and the growing power of league tables and rankings. And it has considered the negative or unintended effects of metrics on various aspects of research culture. The report starts by tracing the history of metrics in research management and assessment, in the UK and internationally. It looks at the applicability of metrics within different research cultures, compares the peer review system with metric-based alternatives, and considers what balance might be struck between the two. It charts the development of research management systems within institutions, and examines the effects of the growing use of quantitative indicators on different aspects of research culture, including performance management, equality, diversity, interdisciplinarity, and the ‘gaming’ of assessment systems. The review looks at how different funders are using quantitative indicators, and considers their potential role in research and innovation policy. Finally, it examines the role that metrics played in REF2014, and outlines scenarios for their contribution to future exercises

Research and Applications of the Processes of Performance Appraisal: A Bibliography of Recent Literature, 1981-1989

[Excerpt] There have been several recent reviews of different subtopics within the general performance appraisal literature. The reader of these reviews will find, however, that the accompanying citations may be of limited utility for one or more reasons. For example, the reference sections of these reviews are usually composed of citations which support a specific theory or practical approach to the evaluation of human performance. Consequently, the citation lists for these reviews are, as they must be, highly selective and do not include works that may have only a peripheral relationship to a given reviewer\u27s target concerns. Another problem is that the citations are out of date. That is, review articles frequently contain many citations that are fifteen or more years old. The generation of new studies and knowledge in this field occurs very rapidly. This creates a need for additional reference information solely devoted to identifying the wealth of new research, ideas, and writing that is changing the field

EU and OECD benchmarking and peer review compared

Benchmarking and peer review are essential elements of the so-called EU open method of coordination (OMC) which has been contested in the literature for lack of effectiveness. In this paper we compare benchmarking and peer review procedures as used by the EU with those used by the OECD. Different types of benchmarking and peer review are distinguished and pitfalls for (international) benchmarking are discussed. We find that the OECD has a clear single objective for its benchmarking and peer review activities (i.e. horizontal policy transfers) whereas the EU suffers from a mix of objectives (a. horizontal policy learning; b. EU wide vertical policy coordination and c. multilateral monitoring and surveillance under the shadow of hierarchy). Whereas the OECD is able to skirt around most of the benchmarking pitfalls, this is not the case for the EU. It is argued that, rather than continue working with the panacea OMC benchmarking and peer review currently represents, EU benchmarking should take a number of more distinct shapes in order to improve effectiveness. Moreover, in some areas benchmarking and peer review are not sufficient coordination tools, and are at best additional to those means of coordination that include enforceable sanctions

An examination into the role of knowledge management and computer security in organizations

Organisations develop their computer security procedures based on external guidelines such as ISO 17799 with very little provision to incorporate organisational knowledge in their security procedures. While these external guidelines make recommendations as to how an organisation should develop and implement best practices in computer security they often fail to provide a mechanism that links the security process to the organisational knowledge. The result is that often, security policies, procedures and controls are implemented that are neither strong nor consistent with the organisation's objectives. This study has examined the role of Knowledge Management in organisational Computer Security in 19 Australian SMEs. The study has determined that although the role of knowledge management in organisational computer security is currently limited, there appears to be evidence to argue that the application of knowledge management systems to organisational computer security development and management processes will considerably enhance performance and reduce costs. The study supports that future research is warranted to focus on how existing computer security standards and practices can be improved to allow for a stronger integration with organisational knowledge through the application of knowledge management systems