Peer Review: What’s Most Important in a Review?

episode

ASCPT Podcast Channel not yet transcribed

▲ 0

Transcript

This episode hasn't been transcribed yet Upvotes decide what gets transcribed next — 0 so far. Sign in to upvote

Related

recent transcribed audio

A.I. Safety Goes Mainstream + a ‘Hard Fork’ Exit AMA 1h 25m · 18 Sep 2026 · Hard Fork

Layoffs at the Kansas City Star will hurt local communities 15 min · 18 Sep 2026 · Kansas City Today

AWP: Beyond the Exam Room: Purpose, Myopia, and Population Health 54 min · 17 Sep 2026 · EyeCode Media

Planning Commission Meeting - Sep 17, 2026 1h 11m · 17 Sep 2026 · Leesburg Planning Commission

Heritage Commission - Sep 14, 2026 1h 57m · 17 Sep 2026 · Loudoun County Board Committees and Advisory Boards

Historic District Review Committee - Sep 14, 2026 1h 36m · 17 Sep 2026 · Loudoun County Board Committees and Advisory Boards

Report any issue

Source

Recorded27 Jul 2021

Publisherascptpod.com ↗

Handlerec:15195416

Show notes

In the second installment of ClinPharmPod’s six-part peer review series, host Alaina Webster is joined by returning guest Dr. Deanna Kroetz, Professor at the University of California, San Francisco in the Department of Bioengineering Therapeutic Sciences and Deputy Editor-in-Chief of Clinical and Translational Science (CTS). They break down the top three things Deanna looks for when undertaking a peer review as well as the importance of peer review to sound science. You can access CTS’s Reviewer Instructions here.

Ask this episode

“What did the council decide on item 42?” — answered with the speaker and the moment.

Sign in