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.
23. [The journal impact factor as a parameter for the evaluation of researchers and research]. Kaltenborn KF; Kuhn K Med Klin (Munich); 2003 Mar; 98(3):153-69. PubMed ID: 12647090 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. On judgment, impact factor and feelings: what can we learn from the impact factor? Fatović-Ferencić S Croat Med J; 2004 Jun; 45(3):344-5. PubMed ID: 15190920 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Why buy a medical journal? Brown AF Emerg Med Australas; 2004 Feb; 16(1):1-3. PubMed ID: 15239745 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. What weight does impact factor carry? Aase S J Am Diet Assoc; 2008 Oct; 108(10):1604-7. PubMed ID: 18926118 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Textbook-based impact factors could be better (but don't be absolutely sure of it)! Capella GL J Am Acad Dermatol; 2006 Jan; 54(1):183-4. PubMed ID: 16384784 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Rigor of peer review and the standing of a journal. Tobin MJ Am J Respir Crit Care Med; 2002 Oct; 166(8):1013-4. PubMed ID: 12379538 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. [We wish more professional debate about the bibliometric research indicators]. Søndergaard J; Mouritzen PE; Olesen SP; Molin S; Fink H; Blaabjerg F; Sivertsen G Ugeskr Laeger; 2010 Mar; 172(12):984; author reply 984. PubMed ID: 20376986 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Peer review--reject, accept, or major revision? Lancet Neurol; 2003 Sep; 2(9):517. PubMed ID: 12941568 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Challenges for the evaluation of scientific literature: peer review. Coimbra CE Cad Saude Publica; 2003; 19(5):1225, 1224. PubMed ID: 14666204 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Spotlight on "peer-review": the noble foundation of scientific research. Bhandari S Indian Heart J; 2008; 60(2):159-60. PubMed ID: 19218730 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Peer review and the nursing literature. Dougherty MC Nurs Res; 2009; 58(2):73. PubMed ID: 19289927 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Improved accuracy of nutrition information in popular magazines. Kava R Health Care Food Nutr Focus; 1997 Nov; 14(3):8-10. PubMed ID: 10175267 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. New developments in the use of citation analysis in research evaluation. Moed HF Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz); 2009; 57(1):13-8. PubMed ID: 19219533 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Peer review: recognition via year-end statements. van Loon AJ Nature; 2003 May; 423(6936):116. PubMed ID: 12736656 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. The perils of the least publishable unit. Dupps WJ; Randleman JB J Cataract Refract Surg; 2012 Sep; 38(9):1517-8. PubMed ID: 22906438 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. The positive and negative impacts, and dangers of the impact factor. Scully C Community Dent Health; 2007 Sep; 24(3):130-4. PubMed ID: 17958071 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Medical reviews and the importance of being a "peer" in science. Beritic T Isr J Med Sci; 1996 Jul; 32(7):573-5. PubMed ID: 8756988 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]