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 *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28174305)

  • 21. In praise of peer reviewers and the peer review process.
    Peternelj-Taylor C
    J Forensic Nurs; 2010; 6(4):159-61. PubMed ID: 21114756
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Double-blind peer review.
    Nat Chem Biol; 2015 Apr; 11(4):237. PubMed ID: 25785416
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Publish or be damned.
    Herbert RD
    Aust J Physiother; 2004; 50(4):203-4. PubMed ID: 15574108
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Rebooting review.
    Nat Biotechnol; 2015 Apr; 33(4):319. PubMed ID: 25850037
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica Trainee Advisory Board: education, mentoring, and experience with the editorial process.
    McCarthy MJ; Tyrka AR
    Acta Psychiatr Scand; 2015 Dec; 132(6):429-30. PubMed ID: 26372406
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. What's your rejection fraction?
    Pearlman AS
    J Am Soc Echocardiogr; 2009 Mar; 22(3):314-5. PubMed ID: 19258178
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. How to review a paper: suggestions from the editors of Surgery and the Journal of Surgical Research.
    McFadden DW; LeMaire SA; Sarr MG; Behrns KE
    J Surg Res; 2017 Jul; 215():264-268. PubMed ID: 28622935
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Logging The BMJ's "patient journey".
    Richards T; Snow R; Schroter S
    BMJ; 2015 Aug; 351():h4396. PubMed ID: 26283221
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. There's a time to be critical.
    Nature; 2011 May; 473(7347):253. PubMed ID: 21593816
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Civil, sensible, and constructive peer review in APS journals.
    Raff H; Brown D
    Physiol Genomics; 2013 Aug; 45(15):629-30. PubMed ID: 23695886
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Scientific letters.
    Henly SJ
    Nurs Res; 2008; 57(5):301. PubMed ID: 18794713
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Looking inwards.
    Nat Rev Microbiol; 2013 Mar; 11(3):143. PubMed ID: 23536932
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Scientific record: Class uncorrected errors as misconduct.
    Kamoun S; Zipfel C
    Nature; 2016 Mar; 531(7593):173. PubMed ID: 26961649
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. PTJ Adopts a new process for review of RCTs.
    Craik RL
    Phys Ther; 2012 May; 92(5):642-3. PubMed ID: 22550307
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Reproducibility: A tragedy of errors.
    Allison DB; Brown AW; George BJ; Kaiser KA
    Nature; 2016 Feb; 530(7588):27-9. PubMed ID: 26842041
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Hitting the bull's eye rather than shooting yourself between the eyes.
    Froman RD
    Res Nurs Health; 2008 Oct; 31(5):399-401. PubMed ID: 18613067
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Reviewer development: new initiatives.
    Berquist TH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Jan; 204(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 25539228
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The review process.
    Partridge C
    Physiother Res Int; 2004; 9(3):iv-v. PubMed ID: 15560667
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Peer review of NZMJ articles: issues raised after publication of the viewpoint article on Janet Frame.
    Frizelle FA
    N Z Med J; 2007 Oct; 120(1264):U2788; discussion U2787. PubMed ID: 17972995
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.