542 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16452946)
41. Three cheers for peers.
Nature; 2006 Jan; 439(7073):118. PubMed ID: 16407911
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
42. Bureaucracy won't change the character of a cheat.
Bentley P
Nature; 2006 Feb; 439(7078):782-4. PubMed ID: 16482126
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. The politics of publication.
Lawrence PA
Nature; 2003 Mar; 422(6929):259-61. PubMed ID: 12646895
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
44. Promoting ethical conduct in the publication of research.
Freedman JE
Cardiovasc Ther; 2008; 26(2):89-90. PubMed ID: 18485131
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. Predatory publishers are corrupting open access.
Beall J
Nature; 2012 Sep; 489(7415):179. PubMed ID: 22972258
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. Why we should reward peer reviewers.
Maffia P
Cardiovasc Res; 2018 Apr; 114(5):e30-e31. PubMed ID: 29590390
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
47. Mystery fraud accusations.
Ledford H
Nature; 2010 Oct; 467(7319):1020. PubMed ID: 20981065
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
48. Peers under pressure.
Dalton R
Nature; 2001 Sep; 413(6852):102-4. PubMed ID: 11557944
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
49. Challenging the tyranny of impact factors.
Colquhoun D
Nature; 2003 May; 423(6939):479; discussion 480. PubMed ID: 12774093
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. [Copy is fraudulent--but what is the consequence?].
Nielsen OH; Schroeder TV
Ugeskr Laeger; 2006 Nov; 168(45):3891. PubMed ID: 17118247
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. Editors are meant to be judges, not postmen.
Michell B
Nature; 2003 May; 423(6939):479-80; discussion 480. PubMed ID: 12774094
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. [Retractions due to errors and frauds].
Decullier E; Samson G; Huot L
Presse Med; 2012 Sep; 41(9 Pt 1):847-52. PubMed ID: 22841376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Without scientific integrity, there can be no evidence base.
Jette AM
Phys Ther; 2005 Nov; 85(11):1122-3. PubMed ID: 16253041
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry publication standards of ethical conduct.
Lefebvre CA; Lang BR
J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Apr; 93(4):311-4. PubMed ID: 15798678
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
55. The manuscript review process.
Triadafilopoulos G
Gastrointest Endosc; 2006 Dec; 64(6 Suppl):S23-5. PubMed ID: 17113850
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
56. Plagiarism, a major danger for medical publications, is ever-present and endangers the credibility of academic surgery.
Pocard M
J Visc Surg; 2020 Oct; 157(5):369-371. PubMed ID: 32284243
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. Scientific misconduct.
Sundaram M; Rosenthal DI; Hodler J
Skeletal Radiol; 2007 Mar; 36(3):179. PubMed ID: 17205322
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
58. Misconduct in scientific publishing.
Chan DL
J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio); 2011 Jun; 21(3):181-3. PubMed ID: 21631701
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
59. Publication ethics.
Hays JC
Public Health Nurs; 2009; 26(3):205-6. PubMed ID: 19386055
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
60. The do's and don't's of submitting scientific papers.
Walsh PJ; Mommsen TP; Nilsson GE
Comp Biochem Physiol B Biochem Mol Biol; 2009 Mar; 152(3):203-4. PubMed ID: 19146976
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
