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 *

159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11788015)

  • 21. Error, ignorance and fraud.
    Squires BP
    CMAJ; 1990 Dec; 143(12):1295. PubMed ID: 2253137
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Stem cells. ...and how the problems eluded peer reviewers and editors.
    Couzin J
    Science; 2006 Jan; 311(5757):23-4. PubMed ID: 16400115
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Trust-but verify-scientific findings.
    Rutkowski JL
    J Oral Implantol; 2015 Feb; 41(1):1. PubMed ID: 25699641
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Reactions to the Hwang scandal.
    Martin TJ
    Science; 2006 Feb; 311(5761):606-7. PubMed ID: 16459361
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Ethics for editors.
    Smith ER
    Can J Cardiol; 2004 Feb; 20(2):239-40. PubMed ID: 15010750
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Addressing scientific fraud.
    Crocker J; Cooper ML
    Science; 2011 Dec; 334(6060):1182. PubMed ID: 22144584
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. It's difficult to publish contradictory findings.
    DeCoursey TE
    Nature; 2006 Feb; 439(7078):784. PubMed ID: 16482132
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [Scientific misconduct].
    Fernández del Castillo C
    Ginecol Obstet Mex; 2002 Jun; 70():261-2. PubMed ID: 12216540
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Peer review and scientific misconduct: bad authors and trusting reviewers.
    Malay DS
    J Foot Ankle Surg; 2009; 48(3):283-4. PubMed ID: 19423027
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Reviewers peering from under a pile of 'omics' data.
    Nicholson JK
    Nature; 2006 Apr; 440(7087):992. PubMed ID: 16625173
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [Does the Scientific Committee have power to suppress scientific misconduct?].
    Josephson S
    Lakartidningen; 2003 Oct; 100(42):3350-1. PubMed ID: 14619052
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Editors and publishing: integrity, trust and faith.
    Freshwater D
    J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs; 2006 Feb; 13(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 16441386
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Ethics in publishing; are we practising to the highest possible standards?
    Hunter JM
    Br J Anaesth; 2000 Sep; 85(3):341-3. PubMed ID: 11103170
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The dark side of scientific research.
    McDonald JC
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2006; 118(3):231-2. PubMed ID: 16772306
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Scientific misconduct. Hall probe continues; no 'willful' fraud.
    Dayton L
    Science; 2002 Apr; 296(5568):641. PubMed ID: 11976422
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. [When the editor makes an error].
    Hem E
    Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2008 Oct; 128(20):2303. PubMed ID: 19096482
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Scientific misconduct.
    Sundaram M; Rosenthal DI; Hodler J
    Skeletal Radiol; 2007 Mar; 36(3):179. PubMed ID: 17205322
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Guide for peer reviewers of scientific article].
    Marusić M; Sambunjak D; Marusić A
    Lijec Vjesn; 2005; 127(5-6):107-11. PubMed ID: 16281469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [From misconduct to scientific probity: a turning towards prevention].
    Sylvain H
    Rech Soins Infirm; 2001 Sep; (66):4-15. PubMed ID: 12038284
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Dubious data remain in print two years after misconduct inquiry.
    Abbott A; Schwarz J
    Nature; 2002 Jul; 418(6894):113. PubMed ID: 12110849
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.