Peer-selected "best papers"-are they really that "good"?

Wainer J, Eckmann M, Rocha A.

Open source

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118446
Published: 2015-03-19
Container: PLoS One
Publisher: Not recorded
Open access: yes

Credibility signals

uncertain Score 53/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
supportingDirectory of Open Access Journals: A matching record was returned by DOAJ. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
supportingOpen access status: Normalized open-access status: open. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1371/journal.pone.0118446,
  title = {Peer-selected "best papers"-are they really that "good"?},
  author = {Wainer J and  Eckmann M and  Rocha A.},
  year = {2015},
  journal = {PLoS One},
  doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0118446},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118446}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Peer-selected "best papers"-are they really that "good"?
AU  - Wainer J
AU  -  Eckmann M
AU  -  Rocha A.
PY  - 2015
JO  - PLoS One
DO  - 10.1371/journal.pone.0118446
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118446
ER  -

APA

J, W., M, E., & A., R. (2015). Peer-selected "best papers"-are they really that "good"?. PLoS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118446

Source records

europe-pmc · retrieved 2026-11-10T21:39:37.420Z
doaj · retrieved 2026-11-10T21:39:37.400Z