318 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23254406)
1. The editors' guide for peer review of papers submitted to Endoscopy.
Dinis-Ribeiro M; Vakil N; Ponchon T
Endoscopy; 2013; 45(1):48-50. PubMed ID: 23254406
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Editors' note: New Board of International Consulting Editors (BICE).
Shader RI; Greenblatt DJ
J Clin Psychopharmacol; 2013 Feb; 33(1):44. PubMed ID: 23288228
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Conflict of interest in peer-reviewed medical journals: the World Association of Medical Editors' position on a challenging problem.
Ferris LE; Fletcher RH
Acad Med; 2010 May; 85(5):739-41. PubMed ID: 20520012
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Prepublication review of medical ethics research: cause for concern.
Landy DC; Coverdale JH; McCullough LB; Sharp RR
Acad Med; 2009 Apr; 84(4):495-7. PubMed ID: 19318788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Editors' malpractice: forward submitted letters (to the concerned authors), then reject them.
Rivera H
Account Res; 2009 Nov; 16(6):331-3. PubMed ID: 19866381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Developing new peer reviewers: tips for editors.
Ohler L
Nurse Author Ed; 2005; 15(4):7-9. PubMed ID: 16350891
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Challenges faced by editors.
Winter EM
J Sports Sci; 2011 Feb; 29(4):327-8. PubMed ID: 21259153
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Resident editors.
Sataloff RT
J Voice; 2011 Mar; 25(2):129. PubMed ID: 21353174
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Nurse editors' views on the peer review process.
Kearney MH; Freda MC
Res Nurs Health; 2005 Dec; 28(6):444-52. PubMed ID: 16287058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [How strict should editors be? Nothing is done for the sake of errors].
Eklund J
Lakartidningen; 2004 Dec; 101(51-52):4250. PubMed ID: 15658596
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Editors and publishing: integrity, trust and faith.
Freshwater D
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs; 2006 Feb; 13(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 16441386
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Advertising in dermatology journals: journals' and journal editors' policies, practices, and attitudes.
Bartus CL; Katz KA
J Am Acad Dermatol; 2006 Jul; 55(1):116-22. PubMed ID: 16781302
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Quality and peer review of research: an adjudicating role for editors.
Newton DP
Account Res; 2010 May; 17(3):130-45. PubMed ID: 20461569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A vision for the European journal of clinical investigation: note from the new editors.
Ioannidis JP; Tatsioni A; Karassa FB
Eur J Clin Invest; 2010 Jan; 40(1):1-3. PubMed ID: 20055893
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Characteristics of peer reviewed clinical medicine journals.
Eldredge J
Med Ref Serv Q; 1999; 18(2):13-26. PubMed ID: 10557841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Survey of conflict-of-interest disclosure policies of ophthalmology journals.
Anraku A; Jin YP; Trope GE; Buys YM
Ophthalmology; 2009 Jun; 116(6):1093-6. PubMed ID: 19376583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. What is your opinion on the "medical ethics of medical journal editors"?
Phaosavasdi S; Taneepanichskul S; Tannirandorn Y; Thamkhantho M; Prugsapong C; Phupong V; Karnjanapitak A
J Med Assoc Thai; 2005 Aug; 88(8):1163-4. PubMed ID: 16404851
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Bad papers by Caveman.
J Cell Sci; 2005 Mar; 118(Pt 6):1103-4. PubMed ID: 15764593
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Journal editorial policies, animal welfare, and the 3Rs.
Osborne NJ; Payne D; Newman ML
Am J Bioeth; 2009 Dec; 9(12):55-9. PubMed ID: 20013503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. On editorial practice and peer review.
Shahar E
J Eval Clin Pract; 2007 Aug; 13(4):699-701. PubMed ID: 17683318
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
