These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10036454)

  • 21. Developing critical appraisal skills.
    McCaughan D
    Prof Nurse; 1999 Sep; 14(12):843-7. PubMed ID: 10603895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Stewards of the discipline: The role of referees and peer review.
    Broome ME
    Nurs Outlook; 2010; 58(4):169-70. PubMed ID: 20637926
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Critiquing a research article.
    Giuffre M
    J Perianesth Nurs; 1998 Apr; 13(2):104-8. PubMed ID: 9592451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Assessing the quality of research: a challenge for nursing.
    Luker K
    Nurs Inq; 2007 Mar; 14(1):1. PubMed ID: 17298602
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Research peer review: a committee when none is required.
    Martin PA
    Appl Nurs Res; 1998 May; 11(2):90-2. PubMed ID: 9627436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Responding to peer reviews: pointers that authors don't learn in school.
    Algase DL
    Res Theory Nurs Pract; 2008; 22(4):219-21. PubMed ID: 19093658
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Criticism, praise, and professional growth.
    Gray M
    J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs; 1996 Mar; 23(2):63-5. PubMed ID: 8845891
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Student research.
    Gelling L
    Nurse Res; 2010; 17(3):3. PubMed ID: 20450082
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Conceptual debates and empirical evidence about the peer review process for scholarly journals.
    Thomas SP
    J Prof Nurs; 2011; 27(3):168-73. PubMed ID: 21596357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Quality of manuscript reviews in nursing research.
    Mohr WK
    Nurs Outlook; 2009; 57(5):239. PubMed ID: 19789000
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Maintaining scientific integrity in publications.
    Fain JA
    Diabetes Educ; 1997; 23(3):232. PubMed ID: 9257614
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Do RAEs accurately measure the quality of nursing research?
    Richards D; Watson R
    Nurs Times; 2002 Oct 15-21; 98(42):17. PubMed ID: 12432659
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Measuring our words on measurement.
    Froman RD
    Res Nurs Health; 2000 Dec; 23(6):421-3. PubMed ID: 11130601
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Evaluating research proposals.
    Feigenbaum K
    Gastroenterol Nurs; 1994 Jun; 16(6):281-2. PubMed ID: 8075166
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Finding reviewers electronically.
    Yucha CB; Wiss M; Coleman BL
    Biol Res Nurs; 2005 Jan; 6(3):165-6. PubMed ID: 15583356
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. It's all academic.
    Shelley H
    Nurs Times; 1997 Jan 8-14; 93(2):49. PubMed ID: 9016129
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Research governance: Has it become a research hindrance?
    Gill P; Burnard P
    Nurse Educ Today; 2009 Feb; 29(2):137-9. PubMed ID: 19108936
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Garbage in, garbage out.
    Brink PJ
    West J Nurs Res; 1999 Dec; 21(6):725-7. PubMed ID: 11512209
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Should peer review be an open process?
    Malone RE
    J Emerg Nurs; 1999 Apr; 25(2):150-2. PubMed ID: 10097208
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The language of scholarship for novice writers.
    Freysteinson WM
    J Contin Educ Nurs; 2013 Dec; 44(12):533-4. PubMed ID: 24294894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.