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 *

433 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16924300)

  • 41. Figure errors, sloppy science, and fraud: keeping eyes on your data.
    Williams CL; Casadevall A; Jackson S
    J Clin Invest; 2019 Mar; 129(5):1805-1807. PubMed ID: 30907748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Reviewing scientific manuscripts: A comprehensive guide for peer reviewers.
    Brown LM; David EA; Karamlou T; Nason KS
    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2017 Jun; 153(6):1609-1614. PubMed ID: 28526112
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. [The long pilgrimage of Spanish biomedical journals toward excellence. Who helps? Quality, impact and research merit].
    Alfonso F
    Endocrinol Nutr; 2010 Mar; 57(3):110-20. PubMed ID: 20347618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. The peer review process III: when the decision is made.
    Riss P
    Int Urogynecol J; 2012 Jul; 23(7):811-2. PubMed ID: 21901436
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. [Impact factor, its variants and its influence in academic promotion].
    Puche RC
    Medicina (B Aires); 2011; 71(5):484-9. PubMed ID: 22057180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Is the impact factor the only game in town?
    Smart P
    Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2015 Sep; 97(6):405-8. PubMed ID: 26320762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. [Effect of statistical review on manuscript quality in Medicina Clínica (Barcelona): a randomized study].
    Arnau C; Cobo E; Ribera JM; Cardellach F; Selva A; Urrutia A
    Med Clin (Barc); 2003 Nov; 121(18):690-4. PubMed ID: 14651815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Truth in Science Publishing: A Personal Perspective.
    Südhof TC
    PLoS Biol; 2016 Aug; 14(8):e1002547. PubMed ID: 27564858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. The importance of being earnest in post-publication review: scientific fraud and the scourges of anonymity and excuses.
    Stebbing J; Sanders DA
    Oncogene; 2018 Feb; 37(6):695-696. PubMed ID: 29035386
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Is the journal impact factor a valid indicator of scientific value?
    Oh HC; Lim JF
    Singapore Med J; 2009 Aug; 50(8):749-51. PubMed ID: 19710968
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. How to review a paper for Heart.
    Otto CM
    Heart; 2015 Jan; 101(1):3-4. PubMed ID: 25502328
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Data publishing and scientific journals: the future of the scientific paper in a world of shared data.
    De Schutter E
    Neuroinformatics; 2010 Oct; 8(3):151-3. PubMed ID: 20835853
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Dispersed publication of editorial research.
    Rosenberg J; Pommergaard HC; Vinther S; Burcharth J
    Dan Med J; 2015 Feb; 62(2):. PubMed ID: 25634502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. European Urology: serving our readership through systematic peer review, use of reporting standards, and encouragement of postpublication review.
    Catto JW; Cooperberg MR; Cornu JN; Gratzke C; Novara G; Shariat SF; Vickers A
    Eur Urol; 2015 Feb; 67(2):188-90. PubMed ID: 25175422
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Standards of practice and uniformity in references style.
    Salvagno GL; Lippi G; Montagnana M; Guidi GC
    Clin Chem Lab Med; 2008; 46(4):437-8. PubMed ID: 18605930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Peer review for biomedical publications: we can improve the system.
    Stahel PF; Moore EE
    BMC Med; 2014 Sep; 12():179. PubMed ID: 25270270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Reproducible research: moving toward research the public can really trust.
    Laine C; Goodman SN; Griswold ME; Sox HC
    Ann Intern Med; 2007 Mar; 146(6):450-3. PubMed ID: 17339612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Major mistakes in scientific medical writing based on manuscripts' reviews.
    Melki S; Ben Hassine D; Chebil D; Zanina Y; Ben Saad H; Ben Abdelaziz A
    Tunis Med; 2024 Jan; 102(1):13-18. PubMed ID: 38545724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Evaluation criteria for publishing in top-tier journals in environmental health sciences and toxicology.
    Lee BM
    Environ Health Perspect; 2011 Jul; 119(7):896-9. PubMed ID: 21414890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. How to write a perfect scientific manuscript.
    Rylski B
    Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2015 Aug; 48(2):179. PubMed ID: 26069240
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 22.