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: 25123615)

  • 1. How would you recognise a good review?
    Perkins D
    Aust J Rural Health; 2014 Aug; 22(4):143-4. PubMed ID: 25123615
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. What can CCR do for you?
    Potash J; Anderson KC
    Clin Cancer Res; 2010 Aug; 16(16):4069-70. PubMed ID: 20682715
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. How does peer review work?
    Aaron L
    Radiol Technol; 2008; 79(6):553-4. PubMed ID: 18650531
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Support for peer review.
    Nat Immunol; 2010 Dec; 11(12):1063. PubMed ID: 21079625
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Peer review perspective for early career psychiatrists.
    Gelenberg AJ
    J Clin Psychiatry; 2009 Nov; 70(11):1599. PubMed ID: 20031101
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Submission of articles to Vaccine: a fast and fair peer review process.
    de Hon F; Poland GA
    Vaccine; 2013 Jul; 31(32):3207-8. PubMed ID: 23726824
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Registered reports: prospective peer review emphasizes science over spin.
    Wilkinson J; Pellicer A; Niederberger C
    Fertil Steril; 2019 May; 111(5):831-832. PubMed ID: 30955845
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Peer review in early career: just say yes!
    Roy-Byrne PP
    J Clin Psychiatry; 2009 Nov; 70(11):1602-3. PubMed ID: 20031104
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Peer review by early career psychiatrists: an opportunity for development.
    Gross AF; Wiechers IR; Stern TA
    J Clin Psychiatry; 2009 Nov; 70(11):1600-1. PubMed ID: 20031102
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The art of peer review.
    Oumeish OY
    Skinmed; 2008; 7(1):8-9. PubMed ID: 18174795
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. More than 1000 new manuscripts in 2017.
    Glimelius B
    Acta Oncol; 2018 Feb; 57(2):174-175. PubMed ID: 29303398
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Peer review processes at the Health Information and Libraries Journal.
    Grant MJ
    Health Info Libr J; 2018 Dec; 35(4):263-264. PubMed ID: 30499172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Increasing challenges for an effective peer-review process.
    Hak DJ; Giannoudis P; Mauffrey C
    Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol; 2016 Feb; 26(2):117-8. PubMed ID: 26724808
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Celebrating the quality of our referees.
    Forsythe ID
    J Physiol; 2017 Oct; 595(20):6369-6370. PubMed ID: 28884466
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sizing up research.
    Rothman KJ
    Lancet; 2001 Mar; 357(9259):890. PubMed ID: 11265993
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Integrity of this journal.
    Perel ML
    Implant Dent; 2015 Apr; 24(2):131. PubMed ID: 25706265
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Journal peer review. The need for a research agenda.
    Bailar JC; Patterson K
    N Engl J Med; 1985 Mar; 312(10):654-7. PubMed ID: 3974641
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Can scientific quality be quantified?
    Loscalzo J
    Circulation; 2011 Mar; 123(9):947-50. PubMed ID: 21382902
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Opening up Peer Review.
    DePellegrin TA; Johnston M
    Genetics; 2020 Nov; 216(3):619-620. PubMed ID: 33158984
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals.
    Smith R
    J R Soc Med; 2006 Apr; 99(4):178-82. PubMed ID: 16574968
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.