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.
3. Where did the scientific method go? Noseda M; McLean GR Nat Biotechnol; 2008 Jan; 26(1):28-9. PubMed ID: 18183010 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Response to Where did the scientific method go? Nat Biotechnol; 2008 Jan; 26(1):29. PubMed ID: 18183012 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. [Is it worthwhile to be a reviewer for a medical-scientific journal?]. Shoenfeld Y; Shemer J; Keren G Harefuah; 2009 Dec; 148(12):824. PubMed ID: 20088435 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. How to avoid the reviewer's axe: one editor's view. Senturia SD IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2004 Jan; 51(1):127-30. PubMed ID: 14995024 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The importance of peer review. Poland GA Vaccine; 2013 Jan; 31(4):567-83. PubMed ID: 23298688 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. In scientific publishing at the article level, effort matters more than journal impact factors: hard work and co-authors overshadow journal venue in acquiring citations. Winker K Bioessays; 2011 Jun; 33(6):400-2. PubMed ID: 21538415 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Korean scandal will have global fallout. Check E; Cyranoski D Nature; 2005 Dec; 438(7071):1056-7. PubMed ID: 16371963 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Impact factors aren't top journals' sole attraction. Törnqvist TE Nature; 2003 May; 423(6939):480. PubMed ID: 12774096 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The system rewards a dishonest approach. Brookfield J Nature; 2003 May; 423(6939):480; discussion 480. PubMed ID: 12774095 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]