228 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14724609)
1. Scandals stem from the low priority of peer review.
Connerade JP
Nature; 2004 Jan; 427(6971):196. PubMed ID: 14724609
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact factors reward and promote excellence.
Lomnicki A
Nature; 2003 Jul; 424(6948):487. PubMed ID: 12891329
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Impact factors: target the funding bodies.
Insall R
Nature; 2003 Jun; 423(6940):585. PubMed ID: 12789312
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The system rewards a dishonest approach.
Brookfield J
Nature; 2003 May; 423(6939):480; discussion 480. PubMed ID: 12774095
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Judge a paper on its own merits, not its journal's.
Zhang SD
Nature; 2006 Jul; 442(7098):26. PubMed ID: 16823431
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Peer review: recognition via year-end statements.
van Loon AJ
Nature; 2003 May; 423(6936):116. PubMed ID: 12736656
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Confidential reports may improve peer review.
Cintas P
Nature; 2004 Mar; 428(6980):255. PubMed ID: 15029169
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Three cheers for peers.
Nature; 2006 Jan; 439(7073):118. PubMed ID: 16407911
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The politics of publication.
Lawrence PA
Nature; 2003 Mar; 422(6929):259-61. PubMed ID: 12646895
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Citation rate unrelated to journals' impact factors.
Waheed AA
Nature; 2003 Dec; 426(6966):495. PubMed ID: 14654813
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The secrets of success.
Smaglik P
Nature; 2004 Nov; 432(7014):253. PubMed ID: 15538377
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Reviewers' reports should in turn be peer reviewed.
List A
Nature; 2006 Jul; 442(7098):26. PubMed ID: 16823432
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Peer review could be improved by market forces.
Jaffe K
Nature; 2006 Feb; 439(7078):782. PubMed ID: 16482127
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Transparency showcases strength of peer review.
Pulverer B
Nature; 2010 Nov; 468(7320):29-31. PubMed ID: 21048742
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The trouble with replication.
Giles J
Nature; 2006 Jul; 442(7101):344-7. PubMed ID: 16871184
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Predatory publishers are corrupting open access.
Beall J
Nature; 2012 Sep; 489(7415):179. PubMed ID: 22972258
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Why we should reward peer reviewers.
Maffia P
Cardiovasc Res; 2018 Apr; 114(5):e30-e31. PubMed ID: 29590390
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Swift publication would reward good reviewers.
Koonin EV
Nature; 2003 Mar; 422(6930):374. PubMed ID: 12660754
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Challenging the tyranny of impact factors.
Colquhoun D
Nature; 2003 May; 423(6939):479; discussion 480. PubMed ID: 12774093
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Should journals police scientific fraud?
Marris E
Nature; 2006 Feb; 439(7076):520-1. PubMed ID: 16452946
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
