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.
24. [A sunny future to serve our readers]. de Baat C Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2010 Jan; 117(1):3. PubMed ID: 20180343 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Peer review under the microscope: an editor's view. Chan DL J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio); 2011 Oct; 21(5):453-7. PubMed ID: 22316192 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. The editor's dilemma: how DSM politics are turning psychiatry into a pseudoscience. Wakefield JC Acta Psychiatr Scand; 2015 Dec; 132(6):425-6. PubMed ID: 26372298 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Editor's report: peer review. Yankauer A Am J Public Health; 1979 Mar; 69(3):222-3. PubMed ID: 420368 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Cost-effectiveness analyses in obstetrics & gynecology. Evaluation of methodologic quality and trends. Subak LL; Caughey AB; Washington AE J Reprod Med; 2002 Aug; 47(8):631-9. PubMed ID: 12216429 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Appealing the Editor's Decision: When and How. Chyun DA; Sullivan MC; Vessey JA; Henly SJ Nurs Res; 2017; 66(1):1. PubMed ID: 27977562 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Editor's report. Vinjamuri S Nucl Med Commun; 2010 Jan; 31(1):1. PubMed ID: 19952918 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Avoiding errors in the medical literature: an editor's perspective. Waalen J Am J Prev Med; 2013 Nov; 45(5):672-3. PubMed ID: 24139783 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Write a scientific paper (WASP): Editor's perspective of submissions and dealing with editors. Cuschieri S; Vassallo J Early Hum Dev; 2019 Feb; 129():93-95. PubMed ID: 30578111 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. [Gynäkologisch-geburtshilfliche Rundschau -revisited, future directed and practice oriented]. Haller U; Hepp H; Winter R Gynakol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch; 2001; 41(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 11423729 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Peering into the Future of Peer Review. Parsi K; Elster N Am J Bioeth; 2018 May; 18(5):3-4. PubMed ID: 29697347 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Assessing ethical and peer review standards of medical journals. Dickens B; Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2016 May; 133(2):249-50. PubMed ID: 26972183 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Taking a peek into the editor's office. Nat Cell Biol; 2018 Oct; 20(10):1101. PubMed ID: 30258125 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Editor's Letter. Miles JR J Correct Health Care; 2012 Jan; 18(1):7. PubMed ID: 22286654 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Ideas regarding developing, submitting, reviewing, and publishing a scientific manuscript: an editor's perspective. Apuzzo ML World Neurosurg; 2014; 81(3-4):443-6. PubMed ID: 24720909 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. [New features for your journal in 2007]. Fernandez H J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2007 Feb; 36(1):1. PubMed ID: 17293246 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Peer reviewing and Editor's decision should never be a personal conflicting matter. Chirumbolo S Eur J Intern Med; 2017 May; 40():e10. PubMed ID: 28129996 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]