207 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22741165)
1. ERJ peer reviewers: does this pillar of the Journal's quality need help?
Migliori GB; Soriano JB; Brusasco V; Dinh-Xuan AT
Eur Respir J; 2011 Aug; 38(2):251-2. PubMed ID: 22741165
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Preserving blind peer review of electronic manuscript files.
Jacobson AF; Schmidt K; Coeling H
Nurse Author Ed; 2005; 15(1):1-4, 7. PubMed ID: 15739759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. [How to make out misuse of statistics in manuscripts or papers quickly and accurately].
Hu LP; Liu HG
Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao; 2007 Jan; 5(1):97-100. PubMed ID: 17214946
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The discourteous reviewer.
Leviton A
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol; 2007 Jan; 21(1):2-4. PubMed ID: 17239173
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Open access under scrutiny.
Samkange-Zeeb F; Zeeb H
J Radiol Prot; 2013 Dec; 33(4):885-6. PubMed ID: 24285443
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. More than 1000 new manuscripts in 2017.
Glimelius B
Acta Oncol; 2018 Feb; 57(2):174-175. PubMed ID: 29303398
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Landmark, landmine, or landfill? The role of peer review in assessing manuscripts.
Balistreri WF
J Pediatr; 2007 Aug; 151(2):107-8. PubMed ID: 17643754
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Peer review of biomedical manuscripts: an update.
Ludbrook J
J Clin Neurosci; 2003 Sep; 10(5):540-2. PubMed ID: 12948455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Peer review: an essential step in the publishing process.
Weil J
J Genet Couns; 2004 Jun; 13(3):183-7. PubMed ID: 15617209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Peer Review of Scholarly Work.
Brandon D; McGrath JM
Adv Neonatal Care; 2018 Dec; 18(6):423-424. PubMed ID: 30499821
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The Art of Peer Review.
Fraser D
Neonatal Netw; 2018 Jul; 37(4):195-196. PubMed ID: 30567915
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Perfecting peer review?
Nat Med; 2011 Jan; 17(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 21217648
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. How does peer review work?
Aaron L
Radiol Technol; 2008; 79(6):553-4. PubMed ID: 18650531
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Peer-Review Mentorship: What It Is and Why We Need It.
Haase KR; Dzurec L
ANS Adv Nurs Sci; 2019; 42(3):191-192. PubMed ID: 31356351
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The editorial process for medical journals: I. Introduction of a series and discussion of the responsibilities of editors, authors, and reviewers.
Liesegang TJ; Albert DM; Schachat AP; Minckler DS
Am J Ophthalmol; 2003 Jul; 136(1):109-13. PubMed ID: 12834678
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Peer review: the cornerstone of scientific publishing integrity.
Hillard T; Baber R
Climacteric; 2021 Apr; 24(2):107-108. PubMed ID: 33645415
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The peer review process: Giving and receiving advice.
Jull G; Moore A
Musculoskelet Sci Pract; 2019 Apr; 40():v. PubMed ID: 30773425
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Making the First Cut: An Analysis of Academic Medicine Editors' Reasons for Not Sending Manuscripts Out for External Peer Review.
Meyer HS; Durning SJ; Sklar DP; Maggio LA
Acad Med; 2018 Mar; 93(3):464-470. PubMed ID: 28767495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Is Peer Review Still Anonymous?
Ritchie AI; Polkey MI; Donaldson GC; Wedzicha JA
Am J Respir Crit Care Med; 2018 Jul; 198(2):278-280. PubMed ID: 29537300
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
