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.
118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12038915)
1. Identifying manuscript reviewers: randomized comparison of asking first or just sending. Pitkin RM; Burmeister LF JAMA; 2002 Jun; 287(21):2795-6. PubMed ID: 12038915 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Prodding tardy reviewers: a randomized comparison of telephone, fax, and e-mail. Pitkin RM; Burmeister LF JAMA; 2002 Jun; 287(21):2794-5. PubMed ID: 12038914 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Multiple blinded reviews of the same two manuscripts. Effects of referee characteristics and publication language. Nylenna M; Riis P; Karlsson Y JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):149-51. PubMed ID: 8015129 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. How to reply to referees' comments when submitting manuscripts for publication. Williams HC J Am Acad Dermatol; 2004 Jul; 51(1):79-83. PubMed ID: 15243528 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. A comparison of reports from referees chosen by authors or journal editors in the peer review process. Earnshaw JJ; Farndon JR; Guillou PJ; Johnson CD; Murie JA; Murray GD Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2000 Apr; 82(4 Suppl):133-5. PubMed ID: 10889776 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Decline to Review a Manuscript: Insight and Implications for Raniga SB AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Apr; 214(4):723-726. PubMed ID: 31967499 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The Game Between a Biased Reviewer and His Editor. García JA; Rodriguez-Sánchez R; Fdez-Valdivia J Sci Eng Ethics; 2019 Feb; 25(1):265-283. PubMed ID: 29079911 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Does masking author identity improve peer review quality? A randomized controlled trial. PEER Investigators. Justice AC; Cho MK; Winker MA; Berlin JA; Rennie D JAMA; 1998 Jul; 280(3):240-2. PubMed ID: 9676668 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Peer review in the Croatian Medical Journal from 1992 to 1996. Marusić A; Mestrović T; Petrovecki M; Marusić M Croat Med J; 1998 Mar; 39(1):3-9. PubMed ID: 9475799 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. How to "peer review" a medical journal manuscript. Salasche SJ Dermatol Surg; 1997 Jun; 23(6):423-8. PubMed ID: 9217794 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. A randomized trial. McNutt RA; Evans AT; Fletcher RH; Fletcher SW JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1371-6. PubMed ID: 2304216 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. How to review a manuscript. Alam M Dermatol Surg; 2015 Aug; 41(8):883-8. PubMed ID: 26218722 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Peer review at the Health Information and Libraries Journal. Grant MJ Health Info Libr J; 2014 Dec; 31(4):251-3. PubMed ID: 25443027 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. What do peer reviewers do? Lock S; Smith J JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1341-3. PubMed ID: 2304211 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Subspecialty Influence on Scientific Peer Review for an Obstetrics and Gynecology Journal With a High Impact Factor. Parikh LI; Benner RS; Riggs TW; Hazen N; Chescheir NC Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Feb; 129(2):243-248. PubMed ID: 28079780 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The art and science of reviewing manuscripts for orthopaedic journals: Part II. Optimizing the manuscript: practical hints for improving the quality of reviews. Levine AM; Heckman JD; Hensinger RN Instr Course Lect; 2004; 53():689-97. PubMed ID: 15116659 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [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] [Next] [New Search]