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 *

226 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16226562)

  • 1. Ratings and rankings: judging the evaluation of quality.
    Broome ME
    Nurs Outlook; 2005; 53(5):215-6. PubMed ID: 16226562
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quality evaluation needs some better quality tools.
    Döring TF
    Nature; 2007 Feb; 445(7129):709. PubMed ID: 17301769
    [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. Modellers seek reason for low retraction rates.
    Butler D; Hogan J
    Nature; 2007 May; 447(7142):236-7. PubMed ID: 17507938
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A rose by any other name is still a rose: assessing journal quality.
    Broome ME
    Nurs Outlook; 2007; 55(4):163-4. PubMed ID: 17678678
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Citation rate unrelated to journals' impact factors.
    Waheed AA
    Nature; 2003 Dec; 426(6966):495. PubMed ID: 14654813
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The counting house.
    Adam D
    Nature; 2002 Feb; 415(6873):726-9. PubMed ID: 11845174
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Impact factors reward and promote excellence.
    Lomnicki A
    Nature; 2003 Jul; 424(6948):487. PubMed ID: 12891329
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The impact of the impact factor.
    Manske PR
    J Hand Surg Am; 2004 Nov; 29(6):983-6. PubMed ID: 15576205
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Journals: impact factors are too highly valued.
    Davies J
    Nature; 2003 Jan; 421(6920):210. PubMed ID: 12529611
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Consider the source.
    Mason DJ
    Am J Nurs; 2009 Apr; 109(4):7. PubMed ID: 19325281
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Peer review: recognition via year-end statements.
    van Loon AJ
    Nature; 2003 May; 423(6936):116. PubMed ID: 12736656
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Quality of manuscript reviews in nursing research.
    Mohr WK
    Nurs Outlook; 2009; 57(5):239. PubMed ID: 19789000
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Journals submit to scrutiny of their peer-review process.
    Giles J
    Nature; 2006 Jan; 439(7074):252. PubMed ID: 16421533
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [The real value of the impact factors].
    Puche RC
    Medicina (B Aires); 2003; 63(4):355-7. PubMed ID: 14518150
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The introduction of a performance-based system for funding research.
    Smith T
    Nurs Prax N Z; 2006 Mar; 22(1):2-5. PubMed ID: 17205666
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Impact factors aren't top journals' sole attraction.
    Törnqvist TE
    Nature; 2003 May; 423(6939):480. PubMed ID: 12774096
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Reviewing peer review: the three reviewers you meet at submission time.
    Clarke SP
    Can J Nurs Res; 2006 Dec; 38(4):5-9. PubMed ID: 17342873
    [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. Encouraging letters to the editor in EMHJ.
    Afifi M
    East Mediterr Health J; 2006 Nov; 12(6):933-4. PubMed ID: 17333846
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.