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 *

239 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12038913)

  • 21. [Trend and characteristics of manuscripts received and rejected in the Peruvian Journal of Experimental Medicine and Public Health between 2011 and 2017].
    Arroyo-Hernández H; Huarez B
    Rev Peru Med Exp Salud Publica; 2019; 36(2):281-287. PubMed ID: 31460642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Analysis of submissions, editorial and peer-review process, and outcome of manuscripts submitted to the
    Gupta V; Bhatia R; Pathak M; Ramam M
    Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol; 2020; 86(5):519-525. PubMed ID: 32167071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Predictors of publication: characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals.
    Lee KP; Boyd EA; Holroyd-Leduc JM; Bacchetti P; Bero LA
    Med J Aust; 2006 Jun; 184(12):621-6. PubMed ID: 16803442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The fate of triaged and rejected manuscripts.
    Zoccali C; Amodeo D; Argiles A; Arici M; D'arrigo G; Evenepoel P; Fliser D; Fox J; Gesualdo L; Jadoul M; Ketteler M; Malyszko J; Massy Z; Mayer G; Ortiz A; Sever M; Vanholder R; Vinck C; Wanner C; Więcek A
    Nephrol Dial Transplant; 2015 Dec; 30(12):1947-50. PubMed ID: 26597920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The fate of manuscripts rejected by a general medical journal.
    Ray J; Berkwits M; Davidoff F
    Am J Med; 2000 Aug; 109(2):131-5. PubMed ID: 10967154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Unpublished research from a medical specialty meeting: why investigators fail to publish.
    Weber EJ; Callaham ML; Wears RL; Barton C; Young G
    JAMA; 1998 Jul; 280(3):257-9. PubMed ID: 9676674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Coauthors' contributions to major papers published in the AJR: frequency of undeserved coauthorship.
    Slone RM
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1996 Sep; 167(3):571-9. PubMed ID: 8751654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. How well does a journal's peer review process function? A survey of authors' opinions.
    Sweitzer BJ; Cullen DJ
    JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):152-3. PubMed ID: 8015130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. You're a published author!
    Wachs JE; Williamson G; Moore PV; Roy D; Childre F
    AAOHN J; 2010 Jun; 58(6):233-6. PubMed ID: 20677718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Quantifying the effect of editor-author relations on manuscript handling times.
    Sarigöl E; Garcia D; Scholtes I; Schweitzer F
    Scientometrics; 2017; 113(1):609-631. PubMed ID: 29056793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The relationship between a reviewer's recommendation and editorial decision of manuscripts submitted for publication in obstetrics.
    Vintzileos AM; Ananth CV; Odibo AO; Chauhan SP; Smulian JC; Oyelese Y
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Dec; 211(6):703.e1-5. PubMed ID: 24983685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Peer review is an effective screening process to evaluate medical manuscripts.
    Abby M; Massey MD; Galandiuk S; Polk HC
    JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):105-7. PubMed ID: 8015116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Acceptance rate and reasons for rejection of manuscripts submitted to Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound during 2012.
    Lamb CR; Mai W
    Vet Radiol Ultrasound; 2015; 56(1):103-8. PubMed ID: 24798652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A comparison of reviewers selected by editors and reviewers suggested by authors.
    Rivara FP; Cummings P; Ringold S; Bergman AB; Joffe A; Christakis DA
    J Pediatr; 2007 Aug; 151(2):202-5. PubMed ID: 17643779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. An audit of the editorial process and peer review in the journal Clinical rehabilitation.
    Wade D; Tennant A
    Clin Rehabil; 2004 Mar; 18(2):117-24. PubMed ID: 15053119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Is there gender bias in JAMA's peer review process?
    Gilbert JR; Williams ES; Lundberg GD
    JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):139-42. PubMed ID: 8015126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Improving Publication Quality and Quantity for Acute Care Authors From Low- and Middle-Income Settings.
    Bruijns SR; Banner M; Jacquet GA
    Ann Emerg Med; 2017 Apr; 69(4):462-468. PubMed ID: 27914720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The fate of epidemiologic manuscripts: a study of papers submitted to epidemiology.
    Hall SA; Wilcox AJ
    Epidemiology; 2007 Mar; 18(2):262-5. PubMed ID: 17301708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Are reviewers suggested by authors as good as those chosen by editors? Results of a rater-blinded, retrospective study.
    Wager E; Parkin EC; Tamber PS
    BMC Med; 2006 May; 4():13. PubMed ID: 16734897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.