153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11310511)
1. Manuscript peer review--a guide for health care professionals.
Sylvia LM; Herbel JL
Pharmacotherapy; 2001 Apr; 21(4):395-404. PubMed ID: 11310511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Manuscript review continuing medical education: a retrospective investigation of the learning outcomes from this peer reviewer benefit.
Kawczak S; Mustafa S
BMJ Open; 2020 Nov; 10(11):e039687. PubMed ID: 33234636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Quality science and quality assurance: observations of an environmental scientist.
Hughes TJ
Qual Assur; 1999; 7(4):225-35. PubMed ID: 11191123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Reviewing manuscripts for peer-review journals: a primer for novice and seasoned reviewers.
Lovejoy TI; Revenson TA; France CR
Ann Behav Med; 2011 Aug; 42(1):1-13. PubMed ID: 21505912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A systematic guide for peer reviewers for a medical journal.
Garfield JM; Kaye AD; Kolinsky DC; Urman RD
J Med Pract Manage; 2015; 30(6 Spec No):13-7. PubMed ID: 26062311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Peer-review and editorial process of the Ethiopian Medical Journal: ten years assessment of the status of submitted manuscripts.
Enquselassie F
Ethiop Med J; 2013 Apr; 51(2):95-103. PubMed ID: 24079153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A core-item reviewer evaluation (CoRE) system for manuscript peer review.
Onitilo AA; Engel JM; Salzman-Scott SA; Stankowski RV; Doi SA
Account Res; 2014; 21(2):109-21. PubMed ID: 24228975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. So You Want To Be A Reviewer.
Vogt HB; Huber VC; Hansen KA
S D Med; 2017 Mar; 70(3):127-133. PubMed ID: 28813775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A systematic guide to reviewing a manuscript.
Provenzale JM; Stanley RJ
J Nucl Med Technol; 2006 Jun; 34(2):92-9. PubMed ID: 16751587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Are Reviewers' Scores Influenced by Citations to Their Own Work? An Analysis of Submitted Manuscripts and Peer Reviewer Reports.
Schriger DL; Kadera SP; von Elm E
Ann Emerg Med; 2016 Mar; 67(3):401-406.e6. PubMed ID: 26518378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Do readers and peer reviewers agree on manuscript quality?
Justice AC; Berlin JA; Fletcher SW; Fletcher RH; Goodman SN
JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):117-9. PubMed ID: 8015119
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [The recognition of peer reviewers activity: the potential promotion of a virtuous circle.].
Pierno A; Fruscio R; Bellani G
Recenti Prog Med; 2017 Sep; 108(9):355-359. PubMed ID: 28901342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Why Participate in Peer Review as a Journal Manuscript Reviewer: What's in It for You?
Pytynia KB
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2017 Jun; 156(6):976-977. PubMed ID: 27677597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Revising a manuscript: ten principles to guide success for publication.
Provenzale JM
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Dec; 195(6):W382-7. PubMed ID: 21098168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Authors' Submission Toolkit: a practical guide to getting your research published.
Chipperfield L; Citrome L; Clark J; David FS; Enck R; Evangelista M; Gonzalez J; Groves T; Magrann J; Mansi B; Miller C; Mooney LA; Murphy A; Shelton J; Walson PD; Weigel A
Curr Med Res Opin; 2010 Aug; 26(8):1967-82. PubMed ID: 20569069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The role of the manuscript reviewer in the peer review process.
Polak JF
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Sep; 165(3):685-8. PubMed ID: 7645496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Role of the manuscript reviewer.
Peh WC; Ng KH
Singapore Med J; 2009 Oct; 50(10):931-3; quiz 934. PubMed ID: 19907880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Improving peer review: alternatives to unstructured judgments by a single reviewer.
Goldman RL; Ciesco E
Jt Comm J Qual Improv; 1996 Nov; 22(11):762-9. PubMed ID: 8937950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Peer review of the biomedical literature.
Olson CM
Am J Emerg Med; 1990 Jul; 8(4):356-8. PubMed ID: 2194471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Peer review at the American Journal of Roentgenology: how reviewer and manuscript characteristics affected editorial decisions on 196 major papers.
Kliewer MA; DeLong DM; Freed K; Jenkins CB; Paulson EK; Provenzale JM
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2004 Dec; 183(6):1545-50. PubMed ID: 15547189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
