顶尖期刊通过同行评议淘汰了糟糕的研究,同时也常常拒绝掉日后的“引用冠军”。很多科学家们都有过重量级研究论文被拒稿的经历。为此,一个研究组对同行评议的效果进行了量化评估。他们调查了1000多篇10年前向《柳叶刀》、《英国医学期刊》、《内科学年鉴》投过稿的论文的引用次数,以此评估同行评议做出的决定是否正确。在这项研究中,他们以论文发表后的引用次数作为参考指标。结果显示,同行评议的结果,使得这三个 Top journals outdone poor research through peer review, and often refuse future reference titles. Many scientists have had heavyweight research papers rejected the experience. To this end, one study group conducted a quantitative assessment of the effectiveness of peer reviews. They surveyed more than 1,000 citations to papers titled “The Lancet,” “British Medical Journal,” Annals of Internal Medicine, a decade ago to assess whether the peer review was correct. In this study, they used the number of citations after the paper was published as a reference index. The results show that the peer review results, making these three