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 *

455 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28282657)

  • 21. The importance of no evidence.
    Nat Hum Behav; 2019 Mar; 3(3):197. PubMed ID: 30953022
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Quality and peer review of research: an adjudicating role for editors.
    Newton DP
    Account Res; 2010 May; 17(3):130-45. PubMed ID: 20461569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. So, You Want to Improve Your Plastic Surgery Papers? Introducing PRS' Friendly EQUATOR Reporting Guidelines.
    Rohrich RJ; Weinstein A
    Plast Reconstr Surg; 2015 Jul; 136(1):205-208. PubMed ID: 25829154
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Peer review and the nursing literature.
    Dougherty MC
    Nurs Res; 2009; 58(2):73. PubMed ID: 19289927
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Conflicts of interest for medical publishers and editors: protecting the integrity of scientific scholarship.
    Desai SS; Shortell CK
    J Vasc Surg; 2011 Sep; 54(3 Suppl):59S-63S. PubMed ID: 21872119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. On peer review.
    Schuklenk U
    Bioethics; 2015 Feb; 29(2):ii-iii. PubMed ID: 25586285
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Being a Great Reviewer: Remembering the "Why".
    Moliterno DJ
    JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2018 Oct; 11(20):2130-2131. PubMed ID: 30336820
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Editorial: peer reviewers make it all possible at Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®.
    Leopold SS
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2015 Dec; 473(12):3693-4. PubMed ID: 26463568
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Investigation of scientific fraud. Statements from the Swedish Research Council not sufficiently normative].
    Werkö L
    Lakartidningen; 2006 Oct 25-31; 103(43):3288-91. PubMed ID: 17117661
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Editorial: CORR's New Peer-Reviewer Tool-Useful for More Than Peer Reviews.
    Leopold SS
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2016 Nov; 474(11):2321-2322. PubMed ID: 27577066
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Upgrading our instructions for authors.
    Schriger DL; Wears RL; Cooper RJ; Callaham ML
    Ann Emerg Med; 2003 Apr; 41(4):565-7. PubMed ID: 12658258
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Restoring integrity to the scientific literature: lowering the bar to raise our standards.
    Gordon SE
    J Gen Physiol; 2014 Dec; 144(6):495-7. PubMed ID: 25422501
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Beautification and fraud.
    Nat Cell Biol; 2006 Feb; 8(2):101-2. PubMed ID: 16450003
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Highlights of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine's 2009-2010 information for authors.
    Neal JM; Baker JD
    Reg Anesth Pain Med; 2009; 34(5):438-9. PubMed ID: 19749587
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. What are the Characteristics of an Excellent Review of Scientific Articles?
    Rochitte CE; Mesquita CT
    Arq Bras Cardiol; 2018 Feb; 110(2):106-108. PubMed ID: 29561986
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. On Strengthening the MCP Editorial Leadership.
    Burlingame AL
    Mol Cell Proteomics; 2016 Jul; 15(7):2214-6. PubMed ID: 27281785
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Peer review of scientific manuscripts should be open and referees' bias should be accounted for].
    Thörn A
    Lakartidningen; 2004 Oct; 101(44):3458. PubMed ID: 15560663
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Why we should reward peer reviewers.
    Maffia P
    Cardiovasc Res; 2018 Apr; 114(5):e30-e31. PubMed ID: 29590390
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A statement on ethics from the HEART Group.
    Ector H; Lancellotti P; Roberts WC; Wenger NK; Moss AJ; Smith ER; Borer JS; Eagle KA; Freedman J; Krum H; Lang C; Remme WJ; Piper HM; White CJ; Loscalzo J; Marbán E; Sobel BE; Roberts R; Rahimtoola SH; Camm AJ; Van de Werf F; Swedberg K; Timmis AD; Stone KS; Zipes DP; Iosselani DG; Taylor AJ; Rosen MR; Grines CL; DeMaria AN; Narula J; King SB; Wagner GS; Saksena S; Pearlman AS; Bodnar E; Emery RW; Cohn LH; van der Wall EE; Abdulla RI; Lesch M; Alfonso F; Ekroth R
    JACC Cardiovasc Imaging; 2008 May; 1(3):410-2. PubMed ID: 19356460
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.