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 *

85 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22325343)

  • 1. Peer review by the Peers, for the Peers: response to Hettyey et al.
    Seppänen JT; Mönkkönen M; Kotiaho JS
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2012 Apr; 27(4):191-2. PubMed ID: 22325343
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Peer review: Does it matter?
    Elwood TW
    J Allied Health; 2011; 40(2):55. PubMed ID: 21695363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Problems with traditional science publishing and finding a wider niche for post-publication peer review.
    Teixeira da Silva JA; Dobránszki J
    Account Res; 2015; 22(1):22-40. PubMed ID: 25275622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Student peer review decisions on submitted manuscripts are as stringent as faculty peer reviewers.
    Navalta JW; Lyons TS
    Adv Physiol Educ; 2010 Dec; 34(4):170-3. PubMed ID: 21098383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Searching for the one.
    Groll H
    Elife; 2017 Sep; 6():. PubMed ID: 28956752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Eyes wide open: reader and author responsibility in understanding the limits of peer review.
    Benson PJ
    Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2015 Oct; 97(7):487-9. PubMed ID: 26414359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Safeguarding the integrity of science communication by restraining 'rational cheating' in peer review.
    Barroga EF
    J Korean Med Sci; 2014 Nov; 29(11):1450-2. PubMed ID: 25408573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Teaching peers to talk to peers: the time has come for science to create a respectable, full-time career track for "peer-peer communication teachers".
    Rodríguez AC
    Bioessays; 2012 Nov; 34(11):918-20. PubMed ID: 22903505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A review of peer review by peers.
    Heinemann MK
    Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2013 Dec; 61(8):649-50. PubMed ID: 24323666
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Peer review.
    Twaij H; Oussedik S; Hoffmeyer P
    Bone Joint J; 2014 Apr; 96-B(4):436-41. PubMed ID: 24692607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Making the most of peer review.
    Slavov N
    Elife; 2015 Nov; 4():. PubMed ID: 26559758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Judgment by peers.
    James PF
    Lancet; 2000 Feb; 355(9203):580. PubMed ID: 10683038
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cultivating global science.
    Suresh S
    Science; 2012 May; 336(6084):959. PubMed ID: 22628620
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Hurdles to international review scupper science in Romania.
    Miclăuș M; Micu O
    Nature; 2018 Jun; 558(7709):189. PubMed ID: 29899485
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Commentary on Cicchetti's "reliability of peer review".
    Colliver JA
    Teach Learn Med; 2002; 14(3):142-3. PubMed ID: 12189632
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Dr. Sadat Hosseini et al.'s Response to Comments.
    Sadat Hoseini AS
    Int J Nurs Knowl; 2015 Oct; 26(4):149. PubMed ID: 26450528
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Rewarding peer reviewers: maintaining the integrity of science communication.
    Gasparyan AY; Gerasimov AN; Voronov AA; Kitas GD
    J Korean Med Sci; 2015 Apr; 30(4):360-4. PubMed ID: 25829801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Three cheers for peers.
    Nature; 2006 Jan; 439(7073):118. PubMed ID: 16407911
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Peerage of Science: will it work?
    Hettyey A; Griggio M; Mann M; Raveh S; Schaedelin FC; Thonhauser KE; Thoss M; van Dongen WF; White J; Zala SM; Penn DJ
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2012 Apr; 27(4):189-90. PubMed ID: 22325345
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Lawyers beware! The scientific process, peer review, and the use of papers in evidence.
    Ogden T
    Ann Occup Hyg; 2011 Aug; 55(7):689-91. PubMed ID: 21831846
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.