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 *

188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23449238)

  • 1. A systematic review of peer review for scientific manuscripts.
    Larson BP; Chung KC
    Hand (N Y); 2012 Mar; 7(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 23449238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.
    Osborne SR; Alston LV; Bolton KA; Whelan J; Reeve E; Wong Shee A; Browne J; Walker T; Versace VL; Allender S; Nichols M; Backholer K; Goodwin N; Lewis S; Dalton H; Prael G; Curtin M; Brooks R; Verdon S; Crockett J; Hodgins G; Walsh S; Lyle DM; Thompson SC; Browne LJ; Knight S; Pit SW; Jones M; Gillam MH; Leach MJ; Gonzalez-Chica DA; Muyambi K; Eshetie T; Tran K; May E; Lieschke G; Parker V; Smith A; Hayes C; Dunlop AJ; Rajappa H; White R; Oakley P; Holliday S
    Med J Aust; 2020 Dec; 213 Suppl 11():S3-S32.e1. PubMed ID: 33314144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Librarians as methodological peer reviewers for systematic reviews: results of an online survey.
    Grossetta Nardini HK; Batten J; Funaro MC; Garcia-Milian R; Nyhan K; Spak JM; Wang L; Glover JG
    Res Integr Peer Rev; 2019; 4():23. PubMed ID: 31798974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Statistical reviewers improve reporting in biomedical articles: a randomized trial.
    Cobo E; Selva-O'Callagham A; Ribera JM; Cardellach F; Dominguez R; Vilardell M
    PLoS One; 2007 Mar; 2(3):e332. PubMed ID: 17389922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Practical Tips of English Expressions for Non-Native English-Speaking Peer Reviewers.
    Lee M
    Vasc Specialist Int; 2021 Jul; 37():23. PubMed ID: 34282058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A retrospective analysis of submissions, acceptance rate, open peer review operations, and prepublication bias of the multidisciplinary open access journal Head & Face Medicine.
    Stamm T; Meyer U; Wiesmann HP; Kleinheinz J; Cehreli M; Cehreli ZC
    Head Face Med; 2007 Jun; 3():27. PubMed ID: 17562003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Analysis of the Revision Process by American Journal of Roentgenology Reviewers and Section Editors: Metrics of Rejected Manuscripts and Their Final Disposition.
    Cejas C
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jun; 208(6):1181-1184. PubMed ID: 28350482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF; Ovelman C; McGuire W
    Early Hum Dev; 2020 Nov; 150():105191. PubMed ID: 33036834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Is Biomedical Research Protected from Predatory Reviewers?
    Al-Khatib A; Teixeira da Silva JA
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2019 Feb; 25(1):293-321. PubMed ID: 28905258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.
    Allen D; Gillen E; Rixson L
    JBI Libr Syst Rev; 2009; 7(3):80-129. PubMed ID: 27820426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A scoping review on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals.
    Glonti K; Cauchi D; Cobo E; Boutron I; Moher D; Hren D
    BMC Med; 2019 Jun; 17(1):118. PubMed ID: 31217033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Re: Journal Standards - Editor's reply.
    Jolly PD
    N Z Vet J; 2003 Aug; 51(4):199. PubMed ID: 16032326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effect on peer review of telling reviewers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: randomised controlled trial.
    van Rooyen S; Delamothe T; Evans SJ
    BMJ; 2010 Nov; 341():c5729. PubMed ID: 21081600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Improving the peer review of narrative literature reviews.
    Byrne JA
    Res Integr Peer Rev; 2016; 1():12. PubMed ID: 29451529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A descriptive analysis of the characteristics and the peer review process of systematic review protocols published in an open peer review journal from 2012 to 2017.
    Rombey T; Allers K; Mathes T; Hoffmann F; Pieper D
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Mar; 19(1):57. PubMed ID: 30866832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Impact Factors and Prediction of Popular Topics in a Journal.
    Nielsen MB; Seitz K
    Ultraschall Med; 2016 Aug; 37(4):343-5. PubMed ID: 27490462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Peer influence in adolescent drinking behaviour: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of stochastic actor-based modeling studies.
    Ivaniushina V; Titkova V; Alexandrov D
    BMJ Open; 2019 Jul; 9(7):e028709. PubMed ID: 31326933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.