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 *

204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24167778)

  • 1. Citations and the h index of soil researchers and journals in the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar.
    Minasny B; Hartemink AE; McBratney A; Jang HJ
    PeerJ; 2013; 1():e183. PubMed ID: 24167778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals.
    Kulkarni AV; Aziz B; Shams I; Busse JW
    JAMA; 2009 Sep; 302(10):1092-6. PubMed ID: 19738094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Croatian Medical Journal citation score in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar.
    Sember M; Utrobicić A; Petrak J
    Croat Med J; 2010 Apr; 51(2):99-103. PubMed ID: 20401951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Google Scholar and the h-index in biomedicine: the popularization of bibliometric assessment].
    Cabezas-Clavijo A; Delgado-López-Cózar E
    Med Intensiva; 2013; 37(5):343-54. PubMed ID: 23517697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The difference in referencing in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar.
    Anker MS; Hadzibegovic S; Lena A; Haverkamp W
    ESC Heart Fail; 2019 Dec; 6(6):1291-1312. PubMed ID: 31886636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Do bibliometric findings differ between Medline, Google Scholar and Web of Science? Bibliometry of publications after oral presentation to the 2013 and 2014 French Society of Arthroscopy (SFA) Congresses.
    Villatte G; Marcheix PS; Antoni M; Devos P; Descamps S; Boisgard S; Erivan R
    Orthop Traumatol Surg Res; 2020 Dec; 106(8):1469-1473. PubMed ID: 33153959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science.
    Bakkalbasi N; Bauer K; Glover J; Wang L
    Biomed Digit Libr; 2006 Jun; 3():7. PubMed ID: 16805916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation rates: a case study of medical physics and biomedical engineering: what gets cited and what doesn't?
    Trapp J
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2016 Dec; 39(4):817-823. PubMed ID: 27578318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Citation Analysis of the Korean Journal of Urology From Web of Science, Scopus, Korean Medical Citation Index, KoreaMed Synapse, and Google Scholar.
    Huh S
    Korean J Urol; 2013 Apr; 54(4):220-8. PubMed ID: 23614057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Part II: Should the h-index be modified? An analysis of the m-quotient, contemporary h-index, authorship value, and impact factor.
    Khan NR; Thompson CJ; Taylor DR; Gabrick KS; Choudhri AF; Boop FR; Klimo P
    World Neurosurg; 2013 Dec; 80(6):766-74. PubMed ID: 23886815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Half a century of ANALES DE PEDIATRÍA. Evolution of its main bibliometric indicators in the Web of Science and Scopus international databases].
    González de Dios J; Alonso-Arroyo A; Aleixandre-Benavent R
    An Pediatr (Engl Ed); 2019 Mar; 90(3):194.e1-194.e11. PubMed ID: 30777718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The impact factor of an open access journal does not contribute to an article's citations.
    Chua SK; Qureshi AM; Krishnan V; Pai DR; Kamal LB; Gunasegaran S; Afzal MZ; Ambawatta L; Gan JY; Kew PY; Winn T; Sood S
    F1000Res; 2017; 6():208. PubMed ID: 28649365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [New bibliometric indicators for the scientific literature: an evolving panorama].
    La Torre G; Sciarra I; Chiappetta M; Monteduro A
    Clin Ter; 2017; 168(2):e65-e71. PubMed ID: 28383616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Bibliometric top ten healthcare-related ChatGPT publications in the first ChatGPT anniversary.
    Sallam M
    Narra J; 2024 Aug; 4(2):e917. PubMed ID: 39280327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses.
    Falagas ME; Pitsouni EI; Malietzis GA; Pappas G
    FASEB J; 2008 Feb; 22(2):338-42. PubMed ID: 17884971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Impact factor and other indices to assess science, scientists and scientific journals.
    Satyanarayana K
    Indian J Physiol Pharmacol; 2010; 54(3):197-212. PubMed ID: 21409860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Measuring academic performance for healthcare researchers with the H index: which search tool should be used?
    Patel VM; Ashrafian H; Almoudaris A; Makanjuola J; Bucciarelli-Ducci C; Darzi A; Athanasiou T
    Med Princ Pract; 2013; 22(2):178-83. PubMed ID: 22964880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Bibliometric analysis of anaesthesia journal editorial board members: correlation between journal impact factor and the median h-index of its board members.
    Pagel PS; Hudetz JA
    Br J Anaesth; 2011 Sep; 107(3):357-61. PubMed ID: 21700614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: a case study of the h-index in nursing.
    De Groote SL; Raszewski R
    Nurs Outlook; 2012; 60(6):391-400. PubMed ID: 22748758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A bibliometric analysis of research productivity of emergency medicine researchers in South Korea.
    Choi J; You JS; Joo YS; Kong T; Ko DR; Chung SP
    Clin Exp Emerg Med; 2016 Dec; 3(4):245-251. PubMed ID: 28168231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.