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.
3. Post-publication review could aid skills and quality. Gibson TA Nature; 2007 Jul; 448(7152):408. PubMed ID: 17653166 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Peer-review system could gain from author feedback. Korngreen A Nature; 2005 Nov; 438(7066):282. PubMed ID: 16292281 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Why are people reluctant to join in open review? Liu SV Nature; 2007 Jun; 447(7148):1052. PubMed ID: 17597736 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Communication: Use multimedia in grant applications. Doran MR; Lott WB; Doran SE Nature; 2014 Jan; 505(7483):291. PubMed ID: 24429618 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. A Commitment to Gender Diversity in Peer Review. Narasimhan SD Cell; 2019 Sep; 179(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 31526486 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The trouble with replication. Giles J Nature; 2006 Jul; 442(7101):344-7. PubMed ID: 16871184 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Discourse among referees and editors would help. Lahiri DK Nature; 2006 Feb; 439(7078):784. PubMed ID: 16482130 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Harnessing value of dispersed critiques. Goldacre B Nature; 2011 Feb; 470(7333):175. PubMed ID: 21307921 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. All parties on edge as NIH delays open-access briefing. Check E Nature; 2005 Jan; 433(7023):182. PubMed ID: 15662377 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Making research accessible: National Institutes of Health (NIH) public access and PNAS open access policies. Cozzarelli NR Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2005 Apr; 102(15):5303. PubMed ID: 15809413 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]