181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22412087)
21. Research to Publication e-learning.
Groves T
BMJ; 2016 Feb; 352():i796. PubMed ID: 26864658
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. The illusion of scientific objectivity and the death of the investigator.
Richardson ET; Polyakova A
Eur J Clin Invest; 2012 Feb; 42(2):213-5. PubMed ID: 21752023
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Retraction policies of top scientific journals ranked by impact factor.
Resnik DB; Wager E; Kissling GE
J Med Libr Assoc; 2015 Jul; 103(3):136-9. PubMed ID: 26213505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Trends in scientific publishing: Dark clouds loom large.
Vinny PW; Vishnu VY; Lal V
J Neurol Sci; 2016 Apr; 363():119-20. PubMed ID: 27000235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Fake data, paper mills, and their authors: The International Journal of Cancer reacts to this threat to scientific integrity.
Heck S; Bianchini F; Souren NY; Wilhelm C; Ohl Y; Plass C
Int J Cancer; 2021 Aug; 149(3):492-493. PubMed ID: 33905542
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Editors call for misconduct watchdog.
Williams N
Science; 1998 Jun; 280(5370):1685-6. PubMed ID: 9660704
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. The role of group dynamics in scientific inconsistencies: a case study of a research consortium.
Rosmalen JG; Oldehinkel AJ
PLoS Med; 2011 Dec; 8(12):e1001143. PubMed ID: 22180733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Journals and authors: rules, principles, and ethos.
Huth EJ
Diabetes Care; 1992 Aug; 15(8):1062-4. PubMed ID: 1505312
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. [Scientific reporting guidelines].
Nylenna M
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2009 Nov; 129(22):2340. PubMed ID: 19935931
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. The Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium.
Eur Psychiatry; 2009 Mar; 24(2):69-70. PubMed ID: 19248983
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. The science institutions hiring integrity inspectors to vet their papers.
Abbott A
Nature; 2019 Nov; 575(7783):430-433. PubMed ID: 31745367
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. The need to improve the quality of scientific manuscripts published in Nigerian biomedical journals.
Laabes EP; Glew RH
West Afr J Med; 2007; 26(2):160. PubMed ID: 17939322
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Pneumologia's workshops: how to write a scientific article.
Strâmbu I; Toma T
Pneumologia; 2015; 64(4):47. PubMed ID: 27451596
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Gel slicing and dicing: a recipe for disaster.
Nat Cell Biol; 2004 Apr; 6(4):275. PubMed ID: 15057234
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. [Impact factor--is it indeed a reliable tool for evaluation of scientific merit?].
Gadoth N
Harefuah; 1997 Sep; 133(5-6):196-8. PubMed ID: 9461689
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. How should medical science change?
Kleinert S; Horton R
Lancet; 2014 Jan; 383(9913):197-8. PubMed ID: 24411649
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Correcting honest pervasive errors in the scientific literature: Retractions without stigma.
Baskin PK; Mink JW; Gross RA
Neurology; 2017 Jul; 89(1):11-13. PubMed ID: 28674155
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Salami slicing.
Gray R; Baker C
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs; 2016 Nov; 23(9-10):541-542. PubMed ID: 27620457
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. An unbiased scientific record should be everyone's agenda.
The
PLoS Med; 2009 Feb; 6(2):e1000038. PubMed ID: 19243217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Open season: positive changes for increased transparency in the biomedical literature.
Jones PM; Bryson GL
Can J Anaesth; 2018 Mar; 65(3):246-253. PubMed ID: 29164529
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
