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 *

472 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2304217)

  • 1. Effect of acceptance or rejection on the author's evaluation of peer review of medical manuscripts.
    Garfunkel JM; Lawson EE; Hamrick HJ; Ulshen MH
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1376-8. PubMed ID: 2304217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Acceptance rates for manuscripts submitted to veterinary peer-reviewed journals in 2012.
    Lamb CR; Adams CA
    Equine Vet J; 2015 Nov; 47(6):736-40. PubMed ID: 25302854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The fate of epidemiologic manuscripts: a study of papers submitted to epidemiology.
    Hall SA; Wilcox AJ
    Epidemiology; 2007 Mar; 18(2):262-5. PubMed ID: 17301708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. What is submitted and what gets accepted in Indian Pediatrics: analysis of submissions, review process, decision making, and criteria for rejection.
    Gupta P; Kaur G; Sharma B; Shah D; Choudhury P
    Indian Pediatr; 2006 Jun; 43(6):479-89. PubMed ID: 16820657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Problems identified by secondary review of accepted manuscripts.
    Garfunkel JM; Ulshen MH; Hamrick HJ; Lawson EE
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1369-71. PubMed ID: 2304215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Fate of manuscripts rejected from the Red Journal.
    Holliday EB; Yang G; Jagsi R; Hoffman KE; Bennett KE; Grace C; Zietman AL
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2015 Jan; 91(1):3-10. PubMed ID: 25835616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Acceptance rate and reasons for rejection of manuscripts submitted to Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound during 2012.
    Lamb CR; Mai W
    Vet Radiol Ultrasound; 2015; 56(1):103-8. PubMed ID: 24798652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. What happens to medical articles submitted in Spanish that are not accepted for publication?
    Matías-Guiu JA; García-Ramos R; Castellanos M; Martínez-Vila E; Matías-Guiu J
    Neurologia; 2013 May; 28(4):205-11. PubMed ID: 22795919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of reviewers selected by editors and reviewers suggested by authors.
    Rivara FP; Cummings P; Ringold S; Bergman AB; Joffe A; Christakis DA
    J Pediatr; 2007 Aug; 151(2):202-5. PubMed ID: 17643779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Author perception of peer review.
    Gibson M; Spong CY; Simonsen SE; Martin S; Scott JR
    Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Sep; 112(3):646-52. PubMed ID: 18757664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Author perception of peer review: impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction.
    Weber EJ; Katz PP; Waeckerle JF; Callaham ML
    JAMA; 2002 Jun; 287(21):2790-3. PubMed ID: 12038913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. How well does a journal's peer review process function? A survey of authors' opinions.
    Sweitzer BJ; Cullen DJ
    JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):152-3. PubMed ID: 8015130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The relationship between a reviewer's recommendation and editorial decision of manuscripts submitted for publication in obstetrics.
    Vintzileos AM; Ananth CV; Odibo AO; Chauhan SP; Smulian JC; Oyelese Y
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Dec; 211(6):703.e1-5. PubMed ID: 24983685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effect of masking manuscripts for the peer-review process of an ophthalmic journal.
    Isenberg SJ; Sanchez E; Zafran KC
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2009 Jul; 93(7):881-4. PubMed ID: 19211602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Peer-review and editorial process of the Ethiopian Medical Journal: ten years assessment of the status of submitted manuscripts.
    Enquselassie F
    Ethiop Med J; 2013 Apr; 51(2):95-103. PubMed ID: 24079153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Are Reviewers' Scores Influenced by Citations to Their Own Work? An Analysis of Submitted Manuscripts and Peer Reviewer Reports.
    Schriger DL; Kadera SP; von Elm E
    Ann Emerg Med; 2016 Mar; 67(3):401-406.e6. PubMed ID: 26518378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Peer review is an effective screening process to evaluate medical manuscripts.
    Abby M; Massey MD; Galandiuk S; Polk HC
    JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):105-7. PubMed ID: 8015116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The outcome of manuscripts submitted to the American Journal of Ophthalmology between 2002 and 2003.
    Liesegang TJ; Shaikh M; Crook JE
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2007 Apr; 143(4):551-60. PubMed ID: 17276380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Publishers: Save Authors' Time.
    Moustafa K
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2018 Apr; 24(2):815-816. PubMed ID: 28155095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Fate of manuscripts rejected for publication in the AJR.
    Chew FS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1991 Mar; 156(3):627-32. PubMed ID: 1899764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 24.