159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11015568)
1. Constants and scientific progress.
Dzau V; Frank M; Reich M; Austin MJ; Aebersold R; Cowley A; Housman D; Mulligan R; Rosenberg R
Physiol Genomics; 1999 Nov; 1(3):107. PubMed ID: 11015568
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. [How to reward and stimulate the task of reviewing scientific articles?].
Muccioli C; Campos M; Goldchmit M; Dantas PE; Bechara SJ; Costa VP
Arq Bras Oftalmol; 2007; 70(1):5. PubMed ID: 17505710
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Making sure corrections don't vanish online.
Shim EH; Parekh V
Nature; 2005 Mar; 434(7029):18; discussion 18. PubMed ID: 15744271
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Bad peer reviewers.
Nature; 2001 Sep; 413(6852):93. PubMed ID: 11557930
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The undercover academic keeping tabs on 'predatory' publishing.
Singh Chawla D
Nature; 2018 Mar; 555(7697):422-423. PubMed ID: 29565386
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Predatory journals: Ban predators from the scientific record.
Beall J
Nature; 2016 Jun; 534(7607):326. PubMed ID: 27306178
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. HIV denialists will exploit any journal's tolerance.
Moore JP
Nature; 2004 Feb; 427(6977):777. PubMed ID: 14985731
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Restoring integrity to the scientific literature: lowering the bar to raise our standards.
Gordon SE
J Gen Physiol; 2014 Dec; 144(6):495-7. PubMed ID: 25422501
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Journals: how to decide what's worth publishing.
Jefferson T; Shashok K
Nature; 2003 Jan; 421(6920):209-10. PubMed ID: 12529609
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Learning to review.
Freedman R
J Clin Psychiatry; 2009 Nov; 70(11):1599-600. PubMed ID: 20031100
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Journals under pressure: publish, and be damned.
Adam D; Knight J
Nature; 2002 Oct; 419(6909):772-6. PubMed ID: 12397323
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Journals should set a new standard in transparency.
Dellavalle RP; Lundahl K; Freeman SR; Schilling LM
Nature; 2007 Jan; 445(7126):364. PubMed ID: 17251958
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The garbage collectors: could a particular sector of author-pays journals become silently acknowledged collectors of scientific waste?
Moore A
Bioessays; 2009 Aug; 31(8):821. PubMed ID: 19609967
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Progress and prospects in scientific publications--a call for more transparency and less voluminous output.
Zaenker KS
Inflamm Allergy Drug Targets; 2012 Dec; 11(6):421. PubMed ID: 23256617
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Journals submit to scrutiny of their peer-review process.
Giles J
Nature; 2006 Jan; 439(7074):252. PubMed ID: 16421533
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Publishing coronavirology: Peering into peer(less?) review.
Pederson T
FASEB J; 2020 Aug; 34(8):9825-9827. PubMed ID: 32803811
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The do's and don't's of submitting scientific papers.
Walsh PJ; Mommsen TP; Nilsson GE
Comp Biochem Physiol B Biochem Mol Biol; 2009 Mar; 152(3):203-4. PubMed ID: 19146976
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Peers under pressure.
Dalton R
Nature; 2001 Sep; 413(6852):102-4. PubMed ID: 11557944
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. [Scientific reporting guidelines].
Nylenna M
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2009 Nov; 129(22):2340. PubMed ID: 19935931
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Scientific publishing. Peer review and quality: a dubious connection?
Enserink M
Science; 2001 Sep; 293(5538):2187-8. PubMed ID: 11567115
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
