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 *

338 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27539762)

  • 1. Reviewing a Manuscript: Disparity Amongst Peer Reviewers' Priorities from Basic Health Sciences and Clinicians.
    Baig S; Ahmed S; Attique H
    J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2016 Aug; 26(8):677-80. PubMed ID: 27539762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Editorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care?
    Kravitz RL; Franks P; Feldman MD; Gerrity M; Byrne C; Tierney WM
    PLoS One; 2010 Apr; 5(4):e10072. PubMed ID: 20386704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A survey of orthopaedic journal editors determining the criteria of manuscript selection for publication.
    Hing CB; Higgs D; Hooper L; Donell ST; Song F
    J Orthop Surg Res; 2011 Apr; 6():19. PubMed ID: 21527007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Are Reviewers' Scores Influenced by Citations to Their Own Work? An Analysis of Submitted Manuscripts and Peer Reviewer Reports.
    Schriger DL; Kadera SP; von Elm E
    Ann Emerg Med; 2016 Mar; 67(3):401-406.e6. PubMed ID: 26518378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Ethical concerns of nursing reviewers: an international survey.
    Broome M; Dougherty MC; Freda MC; Kearney MH; Baggs JG
    Nurs Ethics; 2010 Nov; 17(6):741-8. PubMed ID: 21097972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Peering Into Peer Review:
    Provenzale JM; Buch K; Filippi CG; Gaskill-Shipley M; Hacein-Bey L; Soares BP
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Jan; 214(1):45-49. PubMed ID: 31670589
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Getting published well requires fulfilling editors' and reviewers' needs and desires.
    Schoenwolf GC
    Dev Growth Differ; 2013 Dec; 55(9):735-43. PubMed ID: 24131034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Peer Review and Medical Journals.
    Nugent K; Peterson CJ
    J Prim Care Community Health; 2024; 15():21501319241252235. PubMed ID: 38682542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Study design, originality and overall consistency influence acceptance or rejection of manuscripts submitted to the Journal.
    Turcotte C; Drolet P; Girard M
    Can J Anaesth; 2004; 51(6):549-56. PubMed ID: 15197116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Views on the peer review system of biomedical journals: an online survey of academics from high-ranking universities.
    Ho RC; Mak KK; Tao R; Lu Y; Day JR; Pan F
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2013 Jun; 13():74. PubMed ID: 23758823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Statistical reviewing policies of medical journals: caveat lector?
    Goodman SN; Altman DG; George SL
    J Gen Intern Med; 1998 Nov; 13(11):753-6. PubMed ID: 9824521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Reviewers' Responses to Medical Research Articles.
    Sohail S; Akhtar J
    J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2019 Jan; 29(1):29-32. PubMed ID: 30630565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Editors, reviewers and the work of the editorial board.
    Foster A
    Vet Dermatol; 2013 Oct; 24(5):477-8. PubMed ID: 24025019
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. How do reviewers affect the final outcome? Comparison of the quality of peer review and relative acceptance rates of submitted manuscripts.
    Kurihara Y; Colletti PM
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Sep; 201(3):468-70. PubMed ID: 23971437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Structured peer review: pilot results from 23 Elsevier journals.
    Malički M; Mehmani B
    PeerJ; 2024; 12():e17514. PubMed ID: 38948202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Online survey of nursing journal peer reviewers: indicators of quality in manuscripts.
    Dougherty MC; Freda MC; Kearney MH; Baggs JG; Broome M
    West J Nurs Res; 2011 Jun; 33(4):506-21. PubMed ID: 21078915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An overview of the peer review process in biomedical sciences.
    Miller E; James Weightman M; Basu A; Amos A; Brakoulias V
    Australas Psychiatry; 2024 Jun; 32(3):247-251. PubMed ID: 38327220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [The Editorial Advisory Committee].
    Reyes H
    Rev Med Chil; 1996 Dec; 124(12):1421-2. PubMed ID: 9334474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Reviewing the reviewers: comparison of review quality and reviewer characteristics at the American Journal of Roentgenology.
    Kliewer MA; Freed KS; DeLong DM; Pickhardt PJ; Provenzale JM
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2005 Jun; 184(6):1731-5. PubMed ID: 15908521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.