297 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21593816)
1. There's a time to be critical.
Nature; 2011 May; 473(7347):253. PubMed ID: 21593816
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Translation of the scientific method... Peer review.
Scarfe WC
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2010 Apr; 109(4):485-7. PubMed ID: 20176497
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Journals under pressure: publish, and be damned.
Adam D; Knight J
Nature; 2002 Oct; 419(6909):772-6. PubMed ID: 12397323
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Consider the source.
Mason DJ
Am J Nurs; 2009 Apr; 109(4):7. PubMed ID: 19325281
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Peer review: should we modify our process?
Berquist TH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Mar; 202(3):463-4. PubMed ID: 24555581
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The manuscript review process.
Triadafilopoulos G
Gastrointest Endosc; 2006 Dec; 64(6 Suppl):S23-5. PubMed ID: 17113850
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Fortifying the external peer review: an editorial perspective.
Sohail S
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2015 Jan; 25(1):2-3. PubMed ID: 25604359
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Peer review and the nursing literature.
Dougherty MC
Nurs Res; 2009; 58(2):73. PubMed ID: 19289927
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Peer review and appeal: flawed but trusted?
Pravinkumar E
Lancet; 2003 Aug; 362(9385):747. PubMed ID: 12957106
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Journals lack explicit policies for separating eds from ads.
Giles J
Nature; 2005 Mar; 434(7033):549. PubMed ID: 15800585
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Peer review of NZMJ articles: issues raised after publication of the viewpoint article on Janet Frame.
Frizelle FA
N Z Med J; 2007 Oct; 120(1264):U2788; discussion U2787. PubMed ID: 17972995
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Scientific letters.
Henly SJ
Nurs Res; 2008; 57(5):301. PubMed ID: 18794713
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Stewards of the discipline: The role of referees and peer review.
Broome ME
Nurs Outlook; 2010; 58(4):169-70. PubMed ID: 20637926
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Measures urgently required to prevent multiple submissions.
Molaei G
Nature; 2009 Oct; 461(7265):723. PubMed ID: 19812651
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Civil, sensible, and constructive peer review in APS journals.
Raff H; Brown D
Physiol Genomics; 2013 Aug; 45(15):629-30. PubMed ID: 23695886
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Reviewing for journals: ask not what your profession can do for you but what you can do for your profession.
Steers WD
J Urol; 2006 May; 175(5):1597. PubMed ID: 16600708
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Publishing in a peer-reviewed journal.
Downer M
Community Dent Health; 2003 Mar; 20(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 12688596
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. If it's too good to be true, it probably is.
Kennedy MS
Am J Nurs; 2009 Dec; 109(12):7. PubMed ID: 19935148
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Upgrading our instructions for authors.
Schriger DL; Wears RL; Cooper RJ; Callaham ML
Ann Emerg Med; 2003 Apr; 41(4):565-7. PubMed ID: 12658258
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
