Aubree A Herman
Biographic Data
| ID | 6517930 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Aubree A Herman |
| GIVEN NAMES | Aubree A |
| FAMILY NAME | Herman |
| SIGNATURE | HERMAN A A |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of Kentucky |
| ORCID | 0009-0007-3120-1154 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 2 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 0 |
| WORKS AS AUTHOR | 2 |
| WORKS AS EDITOR | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2024 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2026 |
| H-INDEX | 0 |
Reimagining the peer review process
The peer review process is considered the gold standard of academic publishing. However, when exploring the process in greater detail, biases and challenges exist. By exploring existing literature, this paper highlights biases within academic peer review, including gender discrimination, language barriers, and the implications of institutional prestige. Additional challenges including reviewer fatigue, harsh feedback, and the tendency of journals…
Oncologists’ Perceptions of Strategies for Discussing the Cost of Care with Cancer Patients and the Meaning of Those Conversations
To better understand what makes cost-of-care communication between oncologists and cancer patients more or less successful, we conducted in-depth interviews with 32 oncologists (22 male, 10 female) who were board-certified in medical, surgical, or radiation oncology. Through qualitative descriptive analysis by four coders, we found that oncologists used six broad strategies to discuss cost with patients: open discussion, avoidance, reassurance, w…
No prominent works on this page.
Oncologists’ Perceptions of Strategies for Discussing the Cost of Care with Cancer Patients and the Meaning of Those Conversations
To better understand what makes cost-of-care communication between oncologists and cancer patients more or less successful, we conducted in-depth interviews with 32 oncologists (22 male, 10 female) who were board-certified in medical, surgical, or radiation oncology. Through qualitative descriptive analysis by four coders, we found that oncologists used six broad strategies to discuss cost with patients: open discussion, avoidance, reassurance, w…
Reimagining the peer review process
The peer review process is considered the gold standard of academic publishing. However, when exploring the process in greater detail, biases and challenges exist. By exploring existing literature, this paper highlights biases within academic peer review, including gender discrimination, language barriers, and the implications of institutional prestige. Additional challenges including reviewer fatigue, harsh feedback, and the tendency of journals…
Academic Publishing and Open Access (1 work) · Business (1 work) · Computer Science (1 work) · History (1 work) · Internet privacy (1 work) · Law (1 work) · Peer review (1 work) · Political science (1 work) · Process management (1 work) · Psychology (1 work)