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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1351973)

  • 1. The Lancet's statistical review process: areas for improvement by authors.
    Gore SM; Jones G; Thompson SG
    Lancet; 1992 Jul; 340(8811):100-2. PubMed ID: 1351973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Minimizing the three stages of publication bias.
    Chalmers TC; Frank CS; Reitman D
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1392-5. PubMed ID: 2406473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Practical recommendations for statistical analysis and data presentation in Biochemia Medica journal.
    Simundic AM
    Biochem Med (Zagreb); 2012; 22(1):15-23. PubMed ID: 22384516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. An exploratory study of statistical assessment of papers published in the British Medical Journal.
    Gardner MJ; Bond J
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1355-7. PubMed ID: 2304214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Problems identified by secondary review of accepted manuscripts.
    Garfunkel JM; Ulshen MH; Hamrick HJ; Lawson EE
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1369-71. PubMed ID: 2304215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. US and non-US submissions: an analysis of reviewer bias.
    Link AM
    JAMA; 1998 Jul; 280(3):246-7. PubMed ID: 9676670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Tips for writing and publishing an article.
    Nahata MC
    Ann Pharmacother; 2008 Feb; 42(2):273-7. PubMed ID: 18212252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Peer-Review and Rejection Causes in Submitting Original Medical Manuscripts.
    Mendiola Pastrana IR; Hernández AV; Pérez Manjarrez FE; López EO; Romero-Henríquez LF; López-Ortiz G
    J Contin Educ Health Prof; 2020; 40(3):182-186. PubMed ID: 32427687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Lies, damn lies and statistics: errors and omission in papers submitted to INJURY 2010-2012.
    Prescott RJ; Civil I
    Injury; 2013 Jan; 44(1):6-11. PubMed ID: 23182752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reviewing scientific manuscripts: how much statistical knowledge should a reviewer really know?
    Morton JP
    Adv Physiol Educ; 2009 Mar; 33(1):7-9. PubMed ID: 19261753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Changing expectations: Do journals drive methodological changes? Should they?
    Erb HN
    Prev Vet Med; 2010 Dec; 97(3-4):165-74. PubMed ID: 20951447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Peer review in a post-eprints world: a proposal.
    Till JE
    J Med Internet Res; 2000; 2(3):E14. PubMed ID: 11720937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Becoming a peer reviewer to medical education journals.
    Azer SA; Ramani S; Peterson R
    Med Teach; 2012; 34(9):698-704. PubMed ID: 22643022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Reporting research results: recommendations for improving communication.
    Cooper RJ; Wears RL; Schriger DL
    Ann Emerg Med; 2003 Apr; 41(4):561-4. PubMed ID: 12658257
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Healthcare improvement is incomplete until it is published: the cystic fibrosis initiative to support scholarly publication.
    Stevens DP; Marshall BC
    BMJ Qual Saf; 2014 Apr; 23 Suppl 1():i104-7. PubMed ID: 24608545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Reports of case-control studies: what editors want from authors and peer reviewers.
    Squires BP; Elmslie TJ
    CMAJ; 1990 Jul; 143(1):17-8. PubMed ID: 2357677
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. What can and should be done to reduce publication bias? The perspective of an editor.
    Sharp DW
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1390-1. PubMed ID: 2304218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Academic Primer Series: Key Papers About Peer Review.
    Yarris LM; Gottlieb M; Scott K; Sampson C; Rose E; Chan TM; Ilgen J
    West J Emerg Med; 2017 Jun; 18(4):721-728. PubMed ID: 28611894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. WASP (Write a Scientific Paper): Structuring a scientific paper.
    Cuschieri S; Grech V; Savona-Ventura C
    Early Hum Dev; 2019 Jan; 128():114-117. PubMed ID: 30236948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Construction, consent, and condemnation in research on peer review.
    Feinstein AR
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1991; 44(4-5):339-41. PubMed ID: 2010776
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.