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 *

264 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14707659)

  • 1. Validity of a structured method of selecting abstracts for a plastic surgical scientific meeting.
    van der Steen LP; Hage JJ; Kon M; Monstrey SJ
    Plast Reconstr Surg; 2004 Jan; 113(1):353-9. PubMed ID: 14707659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reliability of a structured method of selecting abstracts for a plastic surgical scientific meeting.
    van der Steen LP; Hage JJ; Kon M; Mazzola R
    Plast Reconstr Surg; 2003 Jun; 111(7):2215-22. PubMed ID: 12794462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessment of abstracts submitted to the annual scientific meeting of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists.
    Bydder S; Marion K; Taylor M; Semmens J
    Australas Radiol; 2006 Aug; 50(4):355-9. PubMed ID: 16884423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Interrater reliability in grading abstracts for the orthopaedic trauma association.
    Bhandari M; Templeman D; Tornetta P
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2004 Jun; (423):217-21. PubMed ID: 15232452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A critical evaluation of free paper abstracts accepted for the 1996 RACS Annual Scientific Congress.
    Usatoff V; Waxman BP
    Aust N Z J Surg; 1997 Jan; 67(1):45-6. PubMed ID: 9033376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Conversion of Plastic Surgery meeting abstract presentations to full manuscripts: a brazilian perspective.
    Denadai R; Pinho AS; Samartine H; Denadai R; Raposo-Amaral CE
    Rev Col Bras Cir; 2017; 44(1):17-26. PubMed ID: 28489207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Advice on writing an abstract for a scientific meeting and on the evaluation of abstracts by selection committees.
    Taboulet P
    Eur J Emerg Med; 2000 Mar; 7(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 10839383
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. How reliable is peer review of scientific abstracts? Looking back at the 1991 Annual Meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine.
    Rubin HR; Redelmeier DA; Wu AW; Steinberg EP
    J Gen Intern Med; 1993 May; 8(5):255-8. PubMed ID: 8505684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Reviewer agreement in scoring 419 abstracts for scientific orthopedics meetings.
    Poolman RW; Keijser LC; de Waal Malefijt MC; Blankevoort L; Farrokhyar F; Bhandari M;
    Acta Orthop; 2007 Apr; 78(2):278-84. PubMed ID: 17464619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Assessment of abstracts submitted for the 1998 BNMS annual meeting: concordance or lottery?
    Kemp PM; Goddard JR
    Nucl Med Commun; 1999 Feb; 20(2):195-8. PubMed ID: 10088171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Research ethics committee approval as reported for abstracts submitted to the annual Euroanaesthesia meeting.
    McConnell P; Kaufman N; De Hert S; Samama CM; Molnar Z; Einav S
    Eur J Anaesthesiol; 2017 Dec; 34(12):824-830. PubMed ID: 28841636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Do recorded abstracts from scientific meetings concur with the research presented?
    Buchan JC; Spokes DM
    Eye (Lond); 2010 Apr; 24(4):695-8. PubMed ID: 19498453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Impact of blinded versus unblinded abstract review on scientific program content.
    Smith J; Nixon R; Bueschen AJ; Venable DD; Henry HH
    J Urol; 2002 Nov; 168(5):2123-5. PubMed ID: 12394728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reporting quality of abstracts presented at the European Association of Urology meeting: a critical assessment.
    De Sio M; Yakoubi R; De Nunzio C; Damiano R; Balsamo R; Di Palma C; Cantiello F; Azzarito G; Mirone V; Tubaro A; Autorino R
    J Urol; 2012 Nov; 188(5):1883-6. PubMed ID: 22999688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Profile of a meeting: how abstracts are written and reviewed.
    Panush RS; Delafuente JC; Connelly CS; Edwards NL; Greer JM; Longley S; Bennett F
    J Rheumatol; 1989 Feb; 16(2):145-7. PubMed ID: 2746562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The consistency between scientific papers presented at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association and their subsequent full-text publication.
    Preston CF; Bhandari M; Fulkerson E; Ginat D; Egol KA; Koval KJ
    J Orthop Trauma; 2006 Feb; 20(2):129-33. PubMed ID: 16462566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The fate of research abstracts submitted to a national surgical conference: a cross-sectional study to assess scientific impact.
    de Meijer VE; Knops SP; van Dongen JA; Eyck BM; Vles WJ
    Am J Surg; 2016 Jan; 211(1):166-71. PubMed ID: 26349584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.
    Larian B; Namazie A; Agha N; Azizzadeh B; Blackwell K; Wang MB
    Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2001 Sep; 125(3):166-9. PubMed ID: 11555749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Duplicate presentations on prostate cancer at American Urological Association and European Association of Urology annual meetings.
    Pop GH; Fesperman SF; Ball DA; Yeung LL; Vieweg J; Dahm P
    J Urol; 2009 Aug; 182(2):674-8; discussion 678-9. PubMed ID: 19535105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.