154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18493638)
1. Emerging Investigators issue.
Mol Biosyst; 2008 Jun; 4(6):465. PubMed ID: 18493638
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Editorial procedures reviewed.
Nat Cell Biol; 2003 Jul; 5(7):583-4. PubMed ID: 12833054
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Reviewers peering from under a pile of 'omics' data.
Nicholson JK
Nature; 2006 Apr; 440(7087):992. PubMed ID: 16625173
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Chairman explains Europe's research council. Interviewed by Alison Abbott.
Kafatos F
Nature; 2005 Dec; 438(7069):723. PubMed ID: 16340980
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Double-blind review: the paw print is a giveaway.
Naqvi KR
Nature; 2008 Mar; 452(7183):28. PubMed ID: 18322504
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. A reprogramming rush.
Nature; 2008 Mar; 452(7186):388. PubMed ID: 18368078
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Molecule pages live.
Nat Cell Biol; 2004 Jan; 6(1):1. PubMed ID: 14704670
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Entire-paper plagiarism caught by software.
Butler D
Nature; 2008 Oct; 455(7214):715. PubMed ID: 18843325
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Acceptance of peer review will free Italy's research slaves.
Marino IR
Nature; 2008 May; 453(7194):449. PubMed ID: 18497795
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The returning tide: how China, the world's most populous country, is building a competitive research base.
Wells WA
J Cell Biol; 2007 Feb; 176(4):376-401. PubMed ID: 17296792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Thoughtful peer review is worth the time it takes.
Michalet X
Nature; 2005 Jun; 435(7046):1160. PubMed ID: 15988495
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. When blogs make sense.
Nature; 2010 Jul; 466(7302):8. PubMed ID: 20595967
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Scientific research and the human condition.
Perez Velazquez JL
Nature; 2003 Jan; 421(6918):13. PubMed ID: 12511929
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Reviewing should be shown in publication list.
Clausen T; Nielsen OB
Nature; 2003 Feb; 421(6924):689. PubMed ID: 12610595
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. NIH responds to critics on peer review.
Wadman M
Nature; 2008 Jun; 453(7197):835. PubMed ID: 18548033
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Post-publication review could aid skills and quality.
Gibson TA
Nature; 2007 Jul; 448(7152):408. PubMed ID: 17653166
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium.
Saper CB
Exp Neurol; 2009 Mar; 216(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 19217967
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Doubts over evolution block funding by Canadian agency.
Hoag H
Nature; 2006 Apr; 440(7085):720-1. PubMed ID: 16598216
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
