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 *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21098355)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Association of cardiovascular trial registration with positive study findings: Epidemiological Study of Randomized Trials (ESORT).
    Emdin C; Odutayo A; Hsiao A; Shakir M; Hopewell S; Rahimi K; Altman DG
    JAMA Intern Med; 2015 Feb; 175(2):304-7. PubMed ID: 25545611
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effect of using reporting guidelines during peer review on quality of final manuscripts submitted to a biomedical journal: masked randomised trial.
    Cobo E; Cortés J; Ribera JM; Cardellach F; Selva-O'Callaghan A; Kostov B; García L; Cirugeda L; Altman DG; González JA; Sànchez JA; Miras F; Urrutia A; Fonollosa V; Rey-Joly C; Vilardell M
    BMJ; 2011 Nov; 343():d6783. PubMed ID: 22108262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Does mentoring new peer reviewers improve review quality? A randomized trial.
    Houry D; Green S; Callaham M
    BMC Med Educ; 2012 Aug; 12():83. PubMed ID: 22928960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of revealing authors' conflicts of interests in peer review: randomized controlled trial.
    John LK; Loewenstein G; Marder A; Callaham ML
    BMJ; 2019 Nov; 367():l5896. PubMed ID: 31694810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Grant Peer Review: Improving Inter-Rater Reliability with Training.
    Sattler DN; McKnight PE; Naney L; Mathis R
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(6):e0130450. PubMed ID: 26075884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Same review quality in open versus blinded peer review in "Ugeskrift for Læger".
    Vinther S; Nielsen OH; Rosenberg J; Keiding N; Schroeder TV
    Dan Med J; 2012 Aug; 59(8):A4479. PubMed ID: 22849979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Blinded vs. unblinded peer review of manuscripts submitted to a dermatology journal: a randomized multi-rater study.
    Alam M; Kim NA; Havey J; Rademaker A; Ratner D; Tregre B; West DP; Coleman WP
    Br J Dermatol; 2011 Sep; 165(3):563-7. PubMed ID: 21623749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of audit and feedback with peer review on general practitioners' prescribing and test ordering performance: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.
    Trietsch J; van Steenkiste B; Grol R; Winkens B; Ulenkate H; Metsemakers J; van der Weijden T
    BMC Fam Pract; 2017 Apr; 18(1):53. PubMed ID: 28407754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Single-blind vs Double-blind Peer Review in the Setting of Author Prestige.
    Okike K; Hug KT; Kocher MS; Leopold SS
    JAMA; 2016 Sep; 316(12):1315-6. PubMed ID: 27673310
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The evolution of general intelligence.
    Burkart JM; Schubiger MN; van Schaik CP
    Behav Brain Sci; 2017 Jan; 40():e195. PubMed ID: 27464851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A Shorter Invitation Period for
    Provenzale JM
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Jan; 214(1):37-40. PubMed ID: 31714844
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Fostering revision of argumentative writing through structured peer assessment.
    Tsai YC; Chuang MT
    Percept Mot Skills; 2013 Feb; 116(1):210-21. PubMed ID: 23829147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A novel approach to quality improvement in a safety-net practice: concurrent peer review visits.
    Fiscella K; Volpe E; Winters P; Brown M; Idris A; Harren T
    J Natl Med Assoc; 2010 Dec; 102(12):1231-6. PubMed ID: 21287904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial.
    Aimola L; Jasim S; Tripathi N; Bassett P; Quirk A; Worrall A; Tucker S; Holder S; Crawford MJ
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2018 Dec; 18(1):994. PubMed ID: 30577847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A randomized trial of fellowships for early career researchers finds a high reliability in funding decisions.
    Clarke P; Herbert D; Graves N; Barnett AG
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Jan; 69():147-51. PubMed ID: 26004515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Processes to manage analyses and publications in a phase III multicenter randomized clinical trial.
    Snow KK; Bell MC; Stoddard AM; Curto TM; Wright EC; Dienstag JL
    Trials; 2014 May; 15():159. PubMed ID: 24886378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Paired peer review of university classroom teaching in a school of nursing and midwifery.
    Bennett PN; Parker S; Smigiel H
    Nurse Educ Today; 2012 Aug; 32(6):665-8. PubMed ID: 21835513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of peer review on communication skills and learning motivation among nursing students.
    Yoo MS; Chae SM
    J Nurs Educ; 2011 Apr; 50(4):230-3. PubMed ID: 21323255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Limitations in Medical Research: Recognition, Influence, and Warning.
    Ott DE
    JSLS; 2024; 28(1):. PubMed ID: 38405216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.