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.
234 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12703104)
1. Making processes transparent. King KM Can J Cardiovasc Nurs; 2003; 13(1):31-2. PubMed ID: 12703104 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Consider the source. Mason DJ Am J Nurs; 2009 Apr; 109(4):7. PubMed ID: 19325281 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The introduction of a performance-based system for funding research. Smith T Nurs Prax N Z; 2006 Mar; 22(1):2-5. PubMed ID: 17205666 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. [Advice for authors. Four principal reasons for manuscript rejection]. Clarke SP Perspect Infirm; 2006; 3(3):35-9. PubMed ID: 16480058 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Reviewing peer review: the three reviewers you meet at submission time. Clarke SP Can J Nurs Res; 2006 Dec; 38(4):5-9. PubMed ID: 17342873 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. In praise of peer reviewers and the peer review process. Peternelj-Taylor C J Forensic Nurs; 2010; 6(4):159-61. PubMed ID: 21114756 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Writing a feature article: not all articles are alike. Pelletier LR Nurse Author Ed; 2003; 13(4):7-8. PubMed ID: 14562512 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Stewards of the discipline: The role of referees and peer review. Broome ME Nurs Outlook; 2010; 58(4):169-70. PubMed ID: 20637926 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Conference presentations: a guide to writing the abstract. Happell B Nurse Res; 2008; 15(4):79-87. PubMed ID: 18700662 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Responding to peer reviews: pointers that authors don't learn in school. Algase DL Res Theory Nurs Pract; 2008; 22(4):219-21. PubMed ID: 19093658 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluating abstracts: preparing a research conference. Morse JM; Dellasega C; Doberneck B Nurs Res; 1993; 42(5):308-10. PubMed ID: 8415049 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Appraisal of abstracts published in volume 45-no.5 supplement-2001 of Indian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology. Bhutkar MV Indian J Physiol Pharmacol; 2003 Apr; 47(2):225-8. PubMed ID: 15255630 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: writing and editing for biomedical publication. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Croat Med J; 2003 Dec; 44(6):770-83. PubMed ID: 14725274 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Peer review of nursing research proposals. Lindquist RD; Tracy MF; Treat-Jacobson D Am J Crit Care; 1995 Jan; 4(1):59-65. PubMed ID: 7894558 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Peer review and the nursing literature. Dougherty MC Nurs Res; 2009; 58(2):73. PubMed ID: 19289927 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Critiquing research for use in practice. Dale JC J Pediatr Health Care; 2005; 19(3):183-6. PubMed ID: 15867836 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Grant reviews: how to do them well. Koop PM Can Oncol Nurs J; 1999; 9(2):61-3. PubMed ID: 10703294 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Publish or perish: the inside story. Brunier G; Turpin C J CANNT; 1998; 8(1):26-7. PubMed ID: 9582755 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]