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 *

78 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28295420)

  • 1. Title: Loose ends 2: Limiting manuscript revision from the reviewer perspective.
    Bioessays; 2017 Apr; 39(4):. PubMed ID: 28295420
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Peer review at the American Journal of Roentgenology: how reviewer and manuscript characteristics affected editorial decisions on 196 major papers.
    Kliewer MA; DeLong DM; Freed K; Jenkins CB; Paulson EK; Provenzale JM
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2004 Dec; 183(6):1545-50. PubMed ID: 15547189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Do readers and peer reviewers agree on manuscript quality?
    Justice AC; Berlin JA; Fletcher SW; Fletcher RH; Goodman SN
    JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):117-9. PubMed ID: 8015119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The role of the manuscript reviewer in the peer review process.
    Polak JF
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Sep; 165(3):685-8. PubMed ID: 7645496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Poor title--poor manuscript?
    Gjersvik P; Gulbrandsen P; Aasheim ET; Nylenna M
    Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2013 Dec; 133(23-24):2475-7. PubMed ID: 24326496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Modified transfemoral approach to revision arthroplasty with uncemented modular revision stems.
    Fink B; Grossmann A
    Oper Orthop Traumatol; 2007 Mar; 19(1):32-55. PubMed ID: 17345026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Time-saving tips for preparing your manuscript: strategies for acceptance on the first attempt!
    Hotter AN
    Nurse Author Ed; 1998; 8(1):1-3. PubMed ID: 9582785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Metrics for Original Research Articles in the AJR: From First Submission to Final Publication.
    Rosenkrantz AB; Harisinghani M
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Jun; 204(6):1152-6. PubMed ID: 26001223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Proximal translation of > 1 mm within the first two years of revision total hip arthroplasty correctly predicts whether or not an acetabular component is loose in 80% of cases: a case-control study with confirmed intra-operative outcomes.
    Kim YS; Abrahams JM; Callary SA; De Ieso C; Costi K; Howie DW; Solomon LB
    Bone Joint J; 2017 Apr; 99-B(4):465-474. PubMed ID: 28385935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Role of the manuscript reviewer.
    Peh WC; Ng KH
    Singapore Med J; 2009 Oct; 50(10):931-3; quiz 934. PubMed ID: 19907880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Improving the peer-review process from the perspective of an author and reviewer.
    Faggion CM
    Br Dent J; 2016 Feb; 220(4):167-8. PubMed ID: 26917302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Revision of loose cementless femoral prostheses to larger porous coated components.
    Engh CA; Culpepper WJ; Kassapidis E
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 1998 Feb; (347):168-78. PubMed ID: 9520886
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Polyethylene wear in prosthetic hips with loose components.
    Kesteris U; Hardinge K; Ilchmann T; Wingstrand H
    J Arthroplasty; 2003 Jan; 18(1):10-5. PubMed ID: 12555176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reviewing an Original Research Manuscript for the International Journal of Exercise Science: A Guide for Students and Professionals.
    Simpson KJ
    Int J Exerc Sci; 2008; 1(2):43-49. PubMed ID: 27182294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Isolated acetabular liner exchange compared with complete acetabular component revision in revision of primary uncemented acetabular components: a study of 1649 revisions from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.
    Lie SA; Hallan G; Furnes O; Havelin LI; Engesaeter LB
    J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2007 May; 89(5):591-4. PubMed ID: 17540741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A peek behind the curtain: peer review and editorial decision making at Stroke.
    Sposato LA; Ovbiagele B; Johnston SC; Fisher M; Saposnik G;
    Ann Neurol; 2014 Aug; 76(2):151-8. PubMed ID: 25043350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [A guide to the peer review of scientific papers].
    Giunta RE; Prommersberger KJ
    Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir; 2012 Aug; 44(4):193-7. PubMed ID: 22836956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of a reviewer-prompting strategy on timely manuscript reviews.
    Caruso M; Kennedy CH
    J Appl Behav Anal; 2004; 37(4):523-6. PubMed ID: 15669412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Stem fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty: a comparative analysis.
    Fehring TK; Odum S; Olekson C; Griffin WL; Mason JB; McCoy TH
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2003 Nov; (416):217-24. PubMed ID: 14646764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.