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 *

288 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16883466)

  • 1. Ensuring the quality of peer-review process.
    Afifi M
    Saudi Med J; 2006 Aug; 27(8):1253. PubMed ID: 16883466
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comments on European Medical Writers Association (EMWA) guidelines on the role of medical writers in developing peer-reviewed publications.
    Foote M; Hamilton CW; Mallia-Hughes M
    Curr Med Res Opin; 2005 May; 21(5):703-4; author reply 704. PubMed ID: 15969869
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Why your manuscript was rejected and how to prevent it.
    Dogra S
    Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol; 2011; 77(2):123-7. PubMed ID: 21393939
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [More stringent requirements concerning manuscripts. Declarations of potential connections and conflicts of interest published in the Lakartidningen].
    Milerad J; Ahlberg J; Eliasson M; Fridén B; Håkansson A; Sundberg CJ; Agren H; Ostergren J
    Lakartidningen; 2002 Apr; 99(15):1662-3. PubMed ID: 12025190
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluating the surgery literature: can standardizing peer-review today predict manuscript impact tomorrow?
    Sosa JA; Mehta P; Thomas DC; Berland G; Gross C; McNamara RL; Rosenthal R; Udelsman R; Bravata DM; Roman SA
    Ann Surg; 2009 Jul; 250(1):152-8. PubMed ID: 19561471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Improving the reporting quality of randomised controlled trials in surgery.
    Carney S
    Int J Surg; 2007 Dec; 5(6):376. PubMed ID: 18063433
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Debate on peer review. Report from an international congress on peer review].
    Grimby G
    Lakartidningen; 2002 Jul; 99(30-31):3109-10. PubMed ID: 12198929
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Bad peer reviewers.
    Nature; 2001 Sep; 413(6852):93. PubMed ID: 11557930
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Pressure also leads to worthless publications.
    de Carvalho LB
    Nature; 2006 Feb; 439(7078):784. PubMed ID: 16482133
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An open letter to WJNR reviewers.
    Brink PJ
    West J Nurs Res; 2003 Apr; 25(3):247-50. PubMed ID: 12705110
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Peers review, editors decide, and then, what?
    Schachat AP
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2007 Apr; 143(4):677-8. PubMed ID: 17386274
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Integrity of the peer review process.
    Smith ER
    Can J Cardiol; 2000 Jun; 16(6):814. PubMed ID: 10863172
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Editorial: an age of enlightenment or information overload?
    Davis TR
    J Hand Surg Br; 2004 Dec; 29(6):521-9. PubMed ID: 15542210
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Peer review: is the process broken?
    Berquist TH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Aug; 199(2):243. PubMed ID: 22826383
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cause, correlation, conjecture.
    Nat Genet; 2015 Apr; 47(4):305. PubMed ID: 25814304
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Lack of correct data format and comparability limits future integrative microarray research.
    Larsson O; Sandberg R
    Nat Biotechnol; 2006 Nov; 24(11):1322-3. PubMed ID: 17093466
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Reviewing scientific manuscripts.
    Castagnetti M; Bagli D; Fossum M;
    J Pediatr Urol; 2018 Apr; 14(2):133-134. PubMed ID: 29429827
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. How to write a paper: revising your manuscript.
    Su'a B; MacFater WS; Hill AG
    ANZ J Surg; 2017 Mar; 87(3):195-197. PubMed ID: 27905185
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The matter of standards. III. The editorial process.
    Wilkins AS
    Bioessays; 2008 Nov; 30(11-12):1037-9. PubMed ID: 18937297
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.