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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

240 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19798600)

  • 21. Revising a manuscript: ten principles to guide success for publication.
    Provenzale JM
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Dec; 195(6):W382-7. PubMed ID: 21098168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Quality of manuscript reviews in nursing research.
    Henly SJ; Dougherty MC
    Nurs Outlook; 2009; 57(1):18-26. PubMed ID: 19150263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Scientific and statistical reviews of manuscripts submitted to Nursing Research: Comparison of completeness, quality, and usefulness.
    Henly SJ; Bennett JA; Dougherty MC
    Nurs Outlook; 2010; 58(4):188-99. PubMed ID: 20637932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Duplicate publication, Part 2: A case analysis.
    Johnson SH
    Nurse Author Ed; 2002; 12(4):7-8. PubMed ID: 12374002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. How a submitted manuscript is processed.
    Peh WC; Ng KH
    Singapore Med J; 2009 Sep; 50(9):853-5; quiz 856. PubMed ID: 19787169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Assessing the quality of the peer review process: author and editorial board member perspectives.
    Bunner C; Larson EL
    Am J Infect Control; 2012 Oct; 40(8):701-4. PubMed ID: 23021414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. [Ethics in articles published in medical journals].
    Reyes H; Palma J; Andresen M
    Rev Med Chil; 2007 Apr; 135(4):529-33. PubMed ID: 17554464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Tips for writing and publishing an article.
    Nahata MC
    Ann Pharmacother; 2008 Feb; 42(2):273-7. PubMed ID: 18212252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Research papers submitted to Australian Family Physician - types and timelines.
    Green R; Del Mar C
    Aust Fam Physician; 2006 May; 35(5):362-4. PubMed ID: 16680221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Appointment of statistical editor and quality of statistics in a small medical journal.
    Lukić IK; Marusić M
    Croat Med J; 2001 Oct; 42(5):500-3. PubMed ID: 11593496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The art and science of reviewing manuscripts for orthopaedic journals: Part II. Optimizing the manuscript: practical hints for improving the quality of reviews.
    Levine AM; Heckman JD; Hensinger RN
    Instr Course Lect; 2004; 53():689-97. PubMed ID: 15116659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The top-ten in journal impact factor manipulation.
    Falagas ME; Alexiou VG
    Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz); 2008; 56(4):223-6. PubMed ID: 18661263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Journals submit to scrutiny of their peer-review process.
    Giles J
    Nature; 2006 Jan; 439(7074):252. PubMed ID: 16421533
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Peer-review and publication of research protocols and proposals: a role for open access journals.
    Eysenbach G
    J Med Internet Res; 2004 Sep; 6(3):e37. PubMed ID: 15471763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A comparison of reviewers selected by editors and reviewers suggested by authors.
    Rivara FP; Cummings P; Ringold S; Bergman AB; Joffe A; Christakis DA
    J Pediatr; 2007 Aug; 151(2):202-5. PubMed ID: 17643779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The pattern of publishing previously rejected articles in selected journals.
    Whitman N; Eyre S
    Fam Med; 1985; 17(1):26-8. PubMed ID: 3843082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Quality and peer review of research: an adjudicating role for editors.
    Newton DP
    Account Res; 2010 May; 17(3):130-45. PubMed ID: 20461569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The role of the manuscript reviewer in the peer review process.
    Polak JF
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Sep; 165(3):685-8. PubMed ID: 7645496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The peer review process III: when the decision is made.
    Riss P
    Int Urogynecol J; 2012 Jul; 23(7):811-2. PubMed ID: 21901436
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Fate of manuscripts declined by the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
    Armstrong AW; Idriss SZ; Kimball AB; Bernhard JD
    J Am Acad Dermatol; 2008 Apr; 58(4):632-5. PubMed ID: 18249470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.