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.
153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16967522)
1. Readers' and author's responses to "are traditional peer-reviewed medical articles obsolete?". Giustini D MedGenMed; 2006; 8(1):70. PubMed ID: 16967522 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Readers' and author's responses to "are traditional peer-reviewed medical articles obsolete?". Ward JA MedGenMed; 2006; 8(1):70. PubMed ID: 16967524 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Readers' and author's responses to "are traditional peer-reviewed medical articles obsolete?". Goldstone RA MedGenMed; 2006; 8(1):70; author reply 70. PubMed ID: 16967523 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Readers' and author's responses to "are traditional peer-reviewed medical articles obsolete?". Goodman MJ MedGenMed; 2006 Mar; 8(1):70; author reply 70. PubMed ID: 16915200 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Are traditional peer-reviewed medical articles obsolete? Frishauf P MedGenMed; 2006 Jan; 8(1):5. PubMed ID: 16915135 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Open access mandate threatens dissemination of scientific information. McMullan E J Neuroophthalmol; 2008 Mar; 28(1):72-4. PubMed ID: 18347464 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impact factors: a tool of the sterile audit culture. Tuck A Nature; 2003 Jul; 424(6944):14. PubMed ID: 12840730 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Experts plan to reclaim the web for pop science. Butler D Nature; 2006 Feb; 439(7076):516-7. PubMed ID: 16452941 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Pre-peer review, peer review, and post-peer review: three areas with potential for improvement. Stang A; Poole C; Schmidt-Pokrzywniak A J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Apr; 61(4):309-10. PubMed ID: 18313552 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Readers' responses to "open access medical publishing is finally coming alive". Xafopoulos G MedGenMed; 2005; 7(3):28. PubMed ID: 16385686 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Readers' responses to "open access medical publishing is finally coming alive". Matuza TM MedGenMed; 2005 Aug; 7(3):28. PubMed ID: 16369254 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Predatory publishing: what nurse executives need to know. Hill KS J Nurs Adm; 2015 Feb; 45(2):59-60. PubMed ID: 25621744 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Having non-medical readers of papers on internet will enhance peer review. Whatling P BMJ; 1999 Apr; 318(7191):1144-5. PubMed ID: 10213751 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The crisis in scholarly publishing: open access to the rescue? Oren GA J Neuroophthalmol; 2008 Mar; 28(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 18347450 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Critics blast 'premature' paper on adult stem cells. Schiermeier Q; Leeb M Nature; 2004 Jun; 429(6992):590. PubMed ID: 15190319 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Readers' responses to "is there a place for medical blogs in a medical media company?". MedGenMed; 2006; 8(1):4; author reply 4. PubMed ID: 16967548 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Readers' responses to "is there a place for medical blogs in a medical media company?". Richards DR MedGenMed; 2006 Jan; 8(1):4; author reply 4. PubMed ID: 16915134 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Future of open access could be online and peer-reviewed. Sandal M Nature; 2008 Jul; 454(7201):158. PubMed ID: 18615058 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Readers' responses to "is there a place for medical blogs in a medical media company?". Hoffman S MedGenMed; 2006; 8(1):4; author reply 4. PubMed ID: 16967549 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]