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 *

177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2304222)

  • 1. The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation.
    Horrobin DF
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1438-41. PubMed ID: 2304222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. How do peer reviewers of journal articles perform? Evaluating the reviewers with a sham paper.
    Kumar PD
    J Assoc Physicians India; 1999 Feb; 47(2):198-200. PubMed ID: 10999090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Peer review--the newcomers' perspective.
    Mainguy G; Motamedi MR; Mietchen D
    PLoS Biol; 2005 Sep; 3(9):e326. PubMed ID: 16149851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Basic philosophy and concepts underlying scientific peer review.
    Stehbens WE
    Med Hypotheses; 1999 Jan; 52(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 10342668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Peering into peer review: Galileo, ESP, Dr Scott Reuben, and advancing our professional evolution.
    Biddle C
    AANA J; 2011 Oct; 79(5):365-6. PubMed ID: 23256263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. A randomized trial.
    McNutt RA; Evans AT; Fletcher RH; Fletcher SW
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1371-6. PubMed ID: 2304216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [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]  

  • 8. Functions of an institutional a review board and the protection of human subjects.
    Brown JH
    Fed Proc; 1979 Jun; 38(7):2049-50. PubMed ID: 376351
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Biomedical information, peer review, and conflict of interest as they influence public health.
    Cantekin EI; McGuire TW; Potter RL
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1427-30. PubMed ID: 2078202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Peer review procedures in pathology - more than ten years of experience in the free state of Saxony].
    Eberlein-Gonska M; Baretton G; Habeck JO
    Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes; 2012; 106(8):571-8. PubMed ID: 23084863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessing peer review in the quest for improved medical services.
    Hershey N; Bontempo LC
    Qual Assur Util Rev; 1989 Nov; 4(4):94-100. PubMed ID: 2535587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [The "peer-review" process in biomedical journals: characteristics of "Elite" reviewers].
    Alfonso F
    Neurologia; 2010; 25(9):521-9. PubMed ID: 21093700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Is peer review in crisis?
    Mulligan A
    Oral Oncol; 2005 Feb; 41(2):135-41. PubMed ID: 15695114
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Peer review: an experiment.
    Harnad S
    Science; 1980 May; 208(4447):974, 976. PubMed ID: 7375919
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. What does peer review need?
    Pollock DM
    Physiologist; 2015 Jan; 58(1):1, 13. PubMed ID: 25745684
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Peer review conflicts of interest surface at CIHR.
    Webster PC
    CMAJ; 2015 Mar; 187(5):313. PubMed ID: 25691785
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Toward benchmarking medical research--defining and applying key performance indicators in the measurement of research output.
    French P
    Am Clin Lab; 1998 Aug; 17(7):12-4. PubMed ID: 10182366
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Training and experience of peer reviewers: is being a "good reviewer" a persistent quality?
    García-Doval I
    PLoS Med; 2007 Mar; 4(3):e144; author reply e145. PubMed ID: 17388682
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Lux and veritas: approaching the thorny process of peer-review and "peer-review" 2011.
    Apuzzo ML
    World Neurosurg; 2011; 76(1-2):1. PubMed ID: 21839925
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Proposals for improving the Peer Review System of the National Institutes of Health.
    Kirschstein RL
    Clin Res; 1977 Dec; 25(5):295-6. PubMed ID: 10304717
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.