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.
131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24279071)
1. The blogification of science. Carney KK J Calif Dent Assoc; 2013 Sep; 41(9):653-4. PubMed ID: 24279071 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Disruption to science in developing countries. Barcinski MA Nature; 2003 May; 423(6939):480. PubMed ID: 12774097 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Where did the scientific method go? Noseda M; McLean GR Nat Biotechnol; 2008 Jan; 26(1):28-9. PubMed ID: 18183010 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Response to Where did the scientific method go? Nat Biotechnol; 2008 Jan; 26(1):29. PubMed ID: 18183012 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. The importance of peer review. Poland GA Vaccine; 2013 Jan; 31(4):567-83. PubMed ID: 23298688 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. In pursuit of a quality journal. Hanley KJ N Y State Dent J; 2014 Jan; 80(1):4-5. PubMed ID: 24654360 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Translation of the scientific method... Peer review. Scarfe WC Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2010 Apr; 109(4):485-7. PubMed ID: 20176497 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Medical reviews and the importance of being a "peer" in science. Beritic T Isr J Med Sci; 1996 Jul; 32(7):573-5. PubMed ID: 8756988 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Meaningful peer review is integral to quality science and should provide benefits to the authors and reviewers alike. Carrell DT; Rajpert-De Meyts E Andrology; 2013 Jul; 1(4):531-2. PubMed ID: 23785017 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The scientific journal in the post-truth era. Casson RJ; Al-Qureshi S Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2020 Mar; 48(2):153-154. PubMed ID: 32173987 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Predatory journals and their effects on scientific research community. Habibzadeh F; Simundic AM Biochem Med (Zagreb); 2017 Jun; 27(2):270-272. PubMed ID: 28694717 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Open science. Bjerkestrand S Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2013 Apr; 133(7):729. PubMed ID: 23588159 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. [Is it worthwhile to be a reviewer for a medical-scientific journal?]. Shoenfeld Y; Shemer J; Keren G Harefuah; 2009 Dec; 148(12):824. PubMed ID: 20088435 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Spotlight on "peer-review": the noble foundation of scientific research. Bhandari S Indian Heart J; 2008; 60(2):159-60. PubMed ID: 19218730 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Rigor of peer review and the standing of a journal. Tobin MJ Am J Respir Crit Care Med; 2002 Oct; 166(8):1013-4. PubMed ID: 12379538 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Peer review and the nursing literature. Dougherty MC Nurs Res; 2009; 58(2):73. PubMed ID: 19289927 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Challenges for the evaluation of scientific literature: peer review. Coimbra CE Cad Saude Publica; 2003; 19(5):1225, 1224. PubMed ID: 14666204 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. In scientific publishing at the article level, effort matters more than journal impact factors: hard work and co-authors overshadow journal venue in acquiring citations. Winker K Bioessays; 2011 Jun; 33(6):400-2. PubMed ID: 21538415 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]