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.
201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22179321)
1. Evidence-based medicine and the peer review process: complementary or at odds? Fisher CG; Vaccaro AR Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Jan; 37(1):E1-2. PubMed ID: 22179321 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The matter of standards. III. The editorial process. Wilkins AS Bioessays; 2008 Nov; 30(11-12):1037-9. PubMed ID: 18937297 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. [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]
5. Research quality and integrity. Smith AJ Prim Dent Care; 2008 Apr; 15(2):44; author reply 44. PubMed ID: 18397590 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. [Scientific reporting guidelines]. Nylenna M Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2009 Nov; 129(22):2340. PubMed ID: 19935931 [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. [Investigation of scientific fraud. Statements from the Swedish Research Council not sufficiently normative]. Werkö L Lakartidningen; 2006 Oct 25-31; 103(43):3288-91. PubMed ID: 17117661 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Too close to call. Curfman GD; Drazen JM N Engl J Med; 2001 Sep; 345(11):832. PubMed ID: 11556307 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Update on the Manuscript Peer Review Process. Elmore SA Toxicol Pathol; 2017 Dec; 45(8):1028-1031. PubMed ID: 29145784 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Peer Review in Transplantation. Hutchinson JA Transplantation; 2015 Sep; 99(9):1746-8. PubMed ID: 26308410 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The Lancet Oncology to publish more research in 2010. Collingridge D Lancet Oncol; 2010 Jan; 11(1):11-2. PubMed ID: 20129125 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Editorial peer review in biomedical publishing: an overview. Napolitani Cheyne F Rom J Gastroenterol; 2004 Jun; 13(2):155-7. PubMed ID: 15229782 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Preface: Scientific Premise and Rigors in Scientific Research, Peer Review, Editing and Publishing. Zhang R Curr Cancer Drug Targets; 2017; 17(1):2. PubMed ID: 28067174 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. A vision for the European journal of clinical investigation: note from the new editors. Ioannidis JP; Tatsioni A; Karassa FB Eur J Clin Invest; 2010 Jan; 40(1):1-3. PubMed ID: 20055893 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. What are the Characteristics of an Excellent Review of Scientific Articles? Rochitte CE; Mesquita CT Arq Bras Cardiol; 2018 Feb; 110(2):106-108. PubMed ID: 29561986 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Reviewing peer review: the three reviewers you meet at submission time. Clarke SP Can J Nurs Res; 2006 Dec; 38(4):5-9. PubMed ID: 17342873 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]