194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18984084)
1. Not for your eyes: information concealed through publication bias.
Liesegang TJ; Albert DM; Schachat AP
Am J Ophthalmol; 2008 Nov; 146(5):638-40. PubMed ID: 18984084
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Not for your eyes: information concealed through publication bias.
Kittisupamongkol W
Am J Ophthalmol; 2009 Mar; 147(3):558; author reply 558-9. PubMed ID: 19217959
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Do journals have a publication bias?
Pickar JH
Maturitas; 2007 May; 57(1):16-9. PubMed ID: 17376614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The publication process itself was the major cause of publication bias in genetic epidemiology.
Calnan M; Smith GD; Sterne JA
J Clin Epidemiol; 2006 Dec; 59(12):1312-8. PubMed ID: 17098574
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Peer review warts and all.
Nat Struct Mol Biol; 2004 Aug; 11(8):679. PubMed ID: 15280874
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. [Why was my article refused?].
Rosenberg J
Ugeskr Laeger; 2009 Jan; 171(5):303. PubMed ID: 19176154
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. ["Peer review" in the Lakartidningen. Competent and unbiased, but should openness be also included?].
Milerad J
Lakartidningen; 2002 Jul; 99(30-31):3098-9. PubMed ID: 12198925
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Suggesting reviewers.
Carmichael SW; Agur AM; Seifert MF; Spinner RJ; Tubbs RS; McDonald S; Nicholson H; Lachman N
Clin Anat; 2006 Jan; 19(1):1. PubMed ID: 16342266
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. [Five direct questions to Josef Milerad concerning credibility].
Holmgren PG
Lakartidningen; 2003 Jan; 100(5):346, 349. PubMed ID: 12607383
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Bad papers by Caveman.
J Cell Sci; 2005 Mar; 118(Pt 6):1103-4. PubMed ID: 15764593
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Expert bias in peer review.
Phillips JS
Curr Med Res Opin; 2011 Dec; 27(12):2229-33. PubMed ID: 21992074
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Testing for the presence of positive-outcome bias in peer review: a randomized controlled trial.
Emerson GB; Warme WJ; Wolf FM; Heckman JD; Brand RA; Leopold SS
Arch Intern Med; 2010 Nov; 170(21):1934-9. PubMed ID: 21098355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. When the MPU becomes the AMPB.
Wissow L
Patient Educ Couns; 2006 Apr; 61(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 16504453
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Public disclosure of clinical research.
Strahlman E; Rockhold F; Freeman A
Lancet; 2009 Apr; 373(9672):1319-20. PubMed ID: 19321201
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. [Lessons learned from the coxibs' ups and downs. The journals must be tougher against referees and authors].
Milerad J
Lakartidningen; 2008 May 21-27; 105(21):1560-1. PubMed ID: 18574991
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Scientific publishing. A cure for the common trial.
Grimm D
Science; 2006 May; 312(5775):835-7. PubMed ID: 16690831
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. [What does the Tidsskriftet's editorial committee do?].
Rørtveit G; Staff A; Schem BC; Busund LT; Nakken KO; Walstad M; Dale O; Vigen T
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2009 Jan; 129(3):175. PubMed ID: 19180158
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. [Who does sponsor Lakartidningen to keep secrets?].
Walhjalt B
Lakartidningen; 2003 Jan; 100(5):349-50. PubMed ID: 12607385
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Moving towards open access: high-quality research and publication is essential, but visibility of the work is critical.
Vahlquist A; Egelrud T; Andersson A
Acta Derm Venereol; 2010; 90(1):3. PubMed ID: 20107714
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Quality in epidemiological research: should we be submitting papers before we have the results and submitting more hypothesis-generating research?
Lawlor DA
Int J Epidemiol; 2007 Oct; 36(5):940-3. PubMed ID: 17875575
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
