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 *

151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27673310)

  • 1. Single-blind vs Double-blind Peer Review in the Setting of Author Prestige.
    Okike K; Hug KT; Kocher MS; Leopold SS
    JAMA; 2016 Sep; 316(12):1315-6. PubMed ID: 27673310
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Manuscripts: to blind, or not to blind, that is the question.
    Rogers LF
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Dec; 179(6):1373. PubMed ID: 12438019
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The fallacy of double-blinded peer review.
    Liebeskind DS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Nov; 181(5):1422; author reply 1422-3. PubMed ID: 14573448
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Double-blind review: the paw print is a giveaway.
    Naqvi KR
    Nature; 2008 Mar; 452(7183):28. PubMed ID: 18322504
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Double-blind review: easy to guess in specialist fields.
    Lane D
    Nature; 2008 Mar; 452(7183):28. PubMed ID: 18322503
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Double-blind review: let diversity reign.
    O'Hara B
    Nature; 2008 Mar; 452(7183):28. PubMed ID: 18322502
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Who stands to lose from double-blind review?
    Garvalov BK
    Nature; 2008 Mar; 452(7183):28. PubMed ID: 18322505
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Incidence and nature of unblinding by authors: our experience at two radiology journals with double-blinded peer review policies.
    Katz DS; Proto AV; Olmsted WW
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Dec; 179(6):1415-7. PubMed ID: 12438028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors.
    Budden AE; Tregenza T; Aarssen LW; Koricheva J; Leimu R; Lortie CJ
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2008 Jan; 23(1):4-6. PubMed ID: 17963996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Use of double-blind peer review to increase author diversity.
    Darling ES
    Conserv Biol; 2015 Feb; 29(1):297-9. PubMed ID: 25039807
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Where does the author belong?
    Haugen TB
    Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2012 Aug; 132(14):1581-2. PubMed ID: 22875105
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review.
    Tomkins A; Zhang M; Heavlin WD
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2017 Nov; 114(48):12708-12713. PubMed ID: 29138317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Double-blind peer review].
    Fenyvesi T
    Orv Hetil; 2002 Feb; 143(5):245-8. PubMed ID: 11875838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. More about peer review: is it time for double-blind reviews?
    Klein JR
    Nat Immunol; 2001 Oct; 2(10):892. PubMed ID: 11577338
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Does double-blind review benefit female authors?
    Webb TJ; O'Hara B; Freckleton RP
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2008 Jul; 23(7):351-3; author reply 353-4. PubMed ID: 18450323
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Peer-review system could gain from author feedback.
    Korngreen A
    Nature; 2005 Nov; 438(7066):282. PubMed ID: 16292281
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Working double-blind.
    Nature; 2008 Feb; 451(7179):605-6. PubMed ID: 18256621
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Author! Author!
    Papalkar D; Francis IC
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2005 Apr; 89(4):518-9. PubMed ID: 15774936
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Digital identifiers could keep up with authors' moves.
    Aerts R
    Nature; 2008 Jul; 454(7204):575. PubMed ID: 18668082
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The garbage collectors: could a particular sector of author-pays journals become silently acknowledged collectors of scientific waste?
    Moore A
    Bioessays; 2009 Aug; 31(8):821. PubMed ID: 19609967
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.