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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21824176)

  • 1. Impact, orthodoxy and peer review.
    Ritter JM
    Br J Clin Pharmacol; 2011 Sep; 72(3):367-8. PubMed ID: 21824176
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Enhancements in peer review of manuscripts by the Journal.
    Liesegang TJ
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2014 Jul; 158(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 24929824
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Analysis of three factors possibly influencing the outcome of a science review process.
    Araujo J; Ghiya ND; Calugar A; Popovic T
    Account Res; 2014; 21(4):241-64. PubMed ID: 24422703
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A retrospective study investigating requests for self-citation during open peer review in a general medicine journal.
    Peebles E; Scandlyn M; Hesp BR
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(8):e0237804. PubMed ID: 32817699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Publish or Perish: Five Steps to Navigating a Less Painful Peer Review.
    Lange CA; Hammes SR
    Endocrinology; 2021 Mar; 162(3):. PubMed ID: 33516156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. "Outing" peer review: medical editors scrutinize the value of secrecy.
    Vanchieri C
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 1997 Nov; 89(21):1568-9. PubMed ID: 9362150
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Thoughts of a manuscript reviewer.
    Bluestone N
    Pharos Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Med Soc; 1996; 59(3):14-8. PubMed ID: 9074317
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluating the surgery literature: can standardizing peer-review today predict manuscript impact tomorrow?
    Sosa JA; Mehta P; Thomas DC; Berland G; Gross C; McNamara RL; Rosenthal R; Udelsman R; Bravata DM; Roman SA
    Ann Surg; 2009 Jul; 250(1):152-8. PubMed ID: 19561471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Peering into peer review: Galileo, ESP, Dr Scott Reuben, and advancing our professional evolution.
    Biddle C
    AANA J; 2011 Oct; 79(5):365-6. PubMed ID: 23256263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Biomedical publishing. Secretive and subjective, peer review proves resistant to study.
    Couzin-Frankel J
    Science; 2013 Sep; 341(6152):1331. PubMed ID: 24052283
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [From the Cochrane Library: the use of peer review is still under discussion].
    Stijntjes F; Veeken H
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2008 Apr; 152(16):934-7. PubMed ID: 18561790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reclaiming responsibility for setting standards.
    Johnston M
    Genetics; 2009 Feb; 181(2):355-6. PubMed ID: 19233837
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Peer Review Initiatives in Nepal.
    Hamal PK; Dangal G
    J Nepal Health Res Counc; 2018 Oct; 16(3):I. PubMed ID: 30455480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Publishing in learned journals.
    Arseculeratne SN
    Indian J Med Res; 2010 Nov; 132(5):525-6. PubMed ID: 21150003
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. In scientific publishing at the article level, effort matters more than journal impact factors: hard work and co-authors overshadow journal venue in acquiring citations.
    Winker K
    Bioessays; 2011 Jun; 33(6):400-2. PubMed ID: 21538415
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Robotic-assisted versus standard unicompartmental knee arthroplasty-evaluation of manuscript conflict of interests, funding, scientific quality and bibliometrics.
    Cavinatto L; Bronson MJ; Chen DD; Moucha CS
    Int Orthop; 2019 Aug; 43(8):1865-1871. PubMed ID: 30291391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Online survey of nursing journal peer reviewers: indicators of quality in manuscripts.
    Dougherty MC; Freda MC; Kearney MH; Baggs JG; Broome M
    West J Nurs Res; 2011 Jun; 33(4):506-21. PubMed ID: 21078915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Peer review in hematopoietic cell transplantation: are we doing our fair share?
    Giralt S; Korngold R; Lazarus HM
    Bone Marrow Transplant; 2016 Sep; 51(9):1159-62. PubMed ID: 27159173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Peer review perspective for early career psychiatrists.
    Gelenberg AJ
    J Clin Psychiatry; 2009 Nov; 70(11):1599. PubMed ID: 20031101
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Journals' instructions to authors: A cross-sectional study across scientific disciplines.
    Malički M; Aalbersberg IJ; Bouter L; Ter Riet G
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(9):e0222157. PubMed ID: 31487331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.