Veterinary pathology and peer review

G. H. Cantor, J. L. Caswell, J. W. Crissman, D. M. Gillette, D. E. Gunson, H. HogenEsch, M. Kiupel, M. G. Mense, M. A. Miller, L. J. Rush, J. A. St. Leger, T. R. Schoeb, R. S. Sellers, R. C. Sills, D. E. Swayne, H. C. Thomas, J. M. Ward, C. L. Alden

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review


With these guidelines, reviewing can be a fascinating way to engage in the progress of scientific knowledge. As one reviewer wrote, "The best reviewers also appreciate the opportunity for teaching and find reviewing a good paper as informative and exhilarating as participating in an inspiring work-in-progress research seminar. The quality of their reviews, furthermore, is importantly contagious."3 The editorial staff of Veterinary Pathology believes that any and all ACVP members should agree, when requested, to review papers on topics within their realm of expertise as a service to the membership. Only by broad support from the membership will our journal achieve the highest impact possible. Veterinary Pathology is grateful to and thanks the many excellent scientific reviewers who have made Veterinary Pathology such a high-quality journal. We hope to continue and grow this fine tradition by recruiting and mentoring additional talented reviewers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)173-175
Number of pages3
JournalVeterinary Pathology
Issue number2
StatePublished - Mar 2009

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • veterinary(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Veterinary pathology and peer review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this