145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18696135)
1. More on peer review: quality control for a costly product.
Newton M
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2008 Sep; 15(6):439-42. PubMed ID: 18696135
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Meeting our ethical obligations in medical publishing: responsibilities of editors, authors, and readers of peer-reviewed journals.
Albert DM; Liesegang TJ; Schachat AP
Arch Ophthalmol; 2005 May; 123(5):684-6. PubMed ID: 15883290
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Open access under scrutiny.
Samkange-Zeeb F; Zeeb H
J Radiol Prot; 2013 Dec; 33(4):885-6. PubMed ID: 24285443
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Peer Review of a Manuscript Submission: A How-To Guide for Effective and Efficient Commentary.
Allen LA; Ho PM
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes; 2017 Dec; 10(12):. PubMed ID: 29237748
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. How does peer review work?
Aaron L
Radiol Technol; 2008; 79(6):553-4. PubMed ID: 18650531
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Training and experience of peer reviewers: is being a "good reviewer" a persistent quality?
García-Doval I
PLoS Med; 2007 Mar; 4(3):e144; author reply e145. PubMed ID: 17388682
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Training and experience of peer reviewers: an additional variable to consider.
Kulstad E
PLoS Med; 2007 Mar; 4(3):e143; author reply e145. PubMed ID: 17388681
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Politics and peer review.
Magnus D
Am J Bioeth; 2004; 4(1):7-8. PubMed ID: 15035920
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Landmark, landmine, or landfill? The role of peer review in assessing manuscripts.
Balistreri WF
J Pediatr; 2007 Aug; 151(2):107-8. PubMed ID: 17643754
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Peer review in PLoS Medicine.
The
PLoS Med; 2007 Jan; 4(1):e58. PubMed ID: 17411325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Peer review: the cornerstone of scientific publishing integrity.
Hillard T; Baber R
Climacteric; 2021 Apr; 24(2):107-108. PubMed ID: 33645415
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The editorial process for medical journals: I. Introduction of a series and discussion of the responsibilities of editors, authors, and reviewers.
Liesegang TJ; Albert DM; Schachat AP; Minckler DS
Am J Ophthalmol; 2003 Jul; 136(1):109-13. PubMed ID: 12834678
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Fixing peer review.
Gyles C
Can Vet J; 2014 Apr; 55(4):299-302. PubMed ID: 24688130
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. [Scientific reports: responsibility for quality].
Balzer K
Pflege; 2013 Dec; 26(6):383-5. PubMed ID: 24297827
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Biomedical Journals in India: some critical concerns.
Satyanarayana K; Sharma A
Indian J Med Res; 2010 Aug; 132():119-22. PubMed ID: 20716810
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. What do journal editors want? … and everything you wanted to know about the peer review process for journal publication.
Muir-Cochrane E
Nurs Health Sci; 2013 Sep; 15(3):263-4. PubMed ID: 24021114
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Predatory journals: Authors and readers beware.
Vakil C
Can Fam Physician; 2019 Feb; 65(2):92-94. PubMed ID: 30765346
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Conflict of interest. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
Ann Intern Med; 1993 Apr; 118(8):646-7. PubMed ID: 8452334
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The discourteous reviewer.
Leviton A
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2007 Jan; 21(1):2-4. PubMed ID: 17239173
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. ERJ peer reviewers: does this pillar of the Journal's quality need help?
Migliori GB; Soriano JB; Brusasco V; Dinh-Xuan AT
Eur Respir J; 2011 Aug; 38(2):251-2. PubMed ID: 22741165
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
