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.
22. The Benefits of Being a "Peer-Reviewer". Cuellar NG J Transcult Nurs; 2024 May; 35(3):185. PubMed ID: 38651822 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. How does peer review work? Aaron L Radiol Technol; 2008; 79(6):553-4. PubMed ID: 18650531 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Web manuscript submission and tracking system for peer review. The journal moves with the time. Schroeder TV; Beard JD Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg; 2002 Feb; 23(2):95-6. PubMed ID: 11863324 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. From the editors' desk: peer review now and in the future. Kravitz RL; Feldman MD J Gen Intern Med; 2011 Dec; 26(12):1385-90. PubMed ID: 21971601 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Peer review comes under peer review. Sun M Science; 1989 May; 244(4907):910-2. PubMed ID: 2727683 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Reducing the costs of peer review. Nat Neurosci; 2008 Apr; 11(4):375. PubMed ID: 18368038 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Peer review in a post-eprints world: a proposal. Till JE J Med Internet Res; 2000; 2(3):E14. PubMed ID: 11720937 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Getting to yes: the fate of neuroradiology manuscripts rejected by radiology over a 2-year period. Khosla A; McDonald RJ; Bornmann L; Kallmes DF Radiology; 2011 Jul; 260(1):3-5. PubMed ID: 21697305 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Digital plagiarism--the Web giveth and the Web shall taketh. Barrie JM; Presti DE J Med Internet Res; 2000; 2(1):E6. PubMed ID: 11720925 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Trouble with peer review. Rocha B Nat Immunol; 2001 Apr; 2(4):277. PubMed ID: 11276191 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Response to letter Dr Rezaeian: journals should review articles, not protocols. Smulders Y J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Jan; 69():249. PubMed ID: 26087890 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Beyond open access: open discourse, the next great equalizer. Dayton AI Retrovirology; 2006 Aug; 3():55. PubMed ID: 17007632 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Reducing publication bias in biomedical research: reviewing and registering protocol with a suitable journal. Rezaeian M J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Jan; 69():248-9. PubMed ID: 26051243 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. The Future of Medical Publishing. Groves T Acta Med Port; 2018 Jul; 31(9):447-448. PubMed ID: 30332365 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. Implementing a "publish, then review" model of publishing. Eisen MB; Akhmanova A; Behrens TE; Harper DM; Weigel D; Zaidi M Elife; 2020 Dec; 9():. PubMed ID: 33258772 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. 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]
38. How to Review a Manuscript. Hill JA J Electrocardiol; 2016; 49(2):109-11. PubMed ID: 26850498 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. The history and practice of peer review. Chapelle FH Ground Water; 2014; 52(1):1. PubMed ID: 24266884 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]