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 *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23200516)

  • 21. Peer review and accountability.
    Hardy LK
    Can J Nurs Res; 1991; 23(2):1-5. PubMed ID: 1802369
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Open access will mean peer review will become "the job of the many, not the select few".
    Short R
    BMJ; 2007 Feb; 334(7589):330. PubMed ID: 17303851
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. [Our editing work and analysis of peer review in 1994-98].
    Loría A; Lisker R
    Rev Invest Clin; 2000; 52(1):52-9. PubMed ID: 10818811
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Peer review: is one-eye king?].
    de Jong BC; Overbeke AJ
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1993 Jan; 137(1):17-21. PubMed ID: 8419837
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Publishing--part II.
    Vogt HB
    S D Med; 2007 Mar; 60(3):95, 97. PubMed ID: 17460850
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. How does peer review work?
    Aaron L
    Radiol Technol; 2008; 79(6):553-4. PubMed ID: 18650531
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Perfecting peer review?
    Nat Med; 2011 Jan; 17(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 21217648
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Peer review time: how late is late in a small medical journal?
    Kljaković-Gaspić M; Hren D; Marusić A; Marusić M
    Arch Med Res; 2003; 34(5):439-43. PubMed ID: 14602513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Referees: their roles, rights, and responsibilities.
    Pitkin RM
    Obstet Gynecol; 1993 Sep; 82(3):464. PubMed ID: 8355955
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Peer review.
    Oldham RK
    Mol Biother; 1992 Mar; 4(1):2-3. PubMed ID: 1627269
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Nursing journals and the use of technologies such as social networking.
    Wilson D
    Nurs Prax N Z; 2011 Nov; 27(3):2-3. PubMed ID: 22375374
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Peer review.
    Rosenfeld RM
    Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2007 Aug; 137(2):179-81. PubMed ID: 17666237
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Virtual video issue: a new way to look at the most-accessed articles in ACS Nano and Nano Letters.
    Tierney HL; Weiss PS
    ACS Nano; 2011 Mar; 5(3):1565-6. PubMed ID: 21417491
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Reviewing refereeing.
    Nat Cell Biol; 2011 Feb; 13(2):109. PubMed ID: 21283117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [Review of manuscripts].
    Lock S
    Med Clin (Barc); 1992 Feb; 98(8):304-5. PubMed ID: 1560718
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Overuse of impact factors suppresses controversial ideas.
    Gillis JM
    Nat Neurosci; 1999 Feb; 2(2):101. PubMed ID: 10195188
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. JMIG goes interactive.
    Corson SL
    J Minim Invasive Gynecol; 2011; 18(4):415. PubMed ID: 21777831
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. How to cope with manuscript rejection.
    Peregrin T
    J Am Diet Assoc; 2007 Feb; 107(2):190, 192-3. PubMed ID: 17258951
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The refereed journal: prestige in professional publication.
    Clayton BC; Boyle K
    Nurs Outlook; 1981 Sep; 29(9):531-4. PubMed ID: 6912449
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Biomedical review articles: what editors want from authors and peer reviewers.
    Squires BP
    CMAJ; 1989 Aug; 141(3):195-7. PubMed ID: 2752346
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.