151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28341526)
21. Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports.
Bordage G
Acad Med; 2001 Sep; 76(9):889-96. PubMed ID: 11553504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. A comparison of reviewers selected by editors and reviewers suggested by authors.
Rivara FP; Cummings P; Ringold S; Bergman AB; Joffe A; Christakis DA
J Pediatr; 2007 Aug; 151(2):202-5. PubMed ID: 17643779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Dear author--advice from a retiring editor.
Samet JM
Am J Epidemiol; 1999 Sep; 150(5):433-6. PubMed ID: 10472941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Publishing in a peer-reviewed journal.
Downer M
Community Dent Health; 2003 Mar; 20(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 12688596
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Who reviews the reviewers? Feasibility of using a fictitious manuscript to evaluate peer reviewer performance.
Baxt WG; Waeckerle JF; Berlin JA; Callaham ML
Ann Emerg Med; 1998 Sep; 32(3 Pt 1):310-7. PubMed ID: 9737492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The structure of a neurosurgical manuscript.
Altinörs N
Acta Neurochir Suppl; 2002; 83():115-20. PubMed ID: 12442631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. [Advice for authors. Four principal reasons for manuscript rejection].
Clarke SP
Perspect Infirm; 2006; 3(3):35-9. PubMed ID: 16480058
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Peer review in the Croatian Medical Journal from 1992 to 1996.
Marusić A; Mestrović T; Petrovecki M; Marusić M
Croat Med J; 1998 Mar; 39(1):3-9. PubMed ID: 9475799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Role of Authors in the Medical Manuscripts.
Ahmed I
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2024 Jun; 34(6):744. PubMed ID: 38840366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Editorial: Pity the editor?
Hildner F
Chest; 1974 Sep; 66(3):224. PubMed ID: 4423114
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. The hidden research paper.
Horton R
JAMA; 2002 Jun; 287(21):2775-8. PubMed ID: 12038909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Reply Paper.
Simmons MP
PLoS Comput Biol; 2015 Oct; 11(10):e1004536. PubMed ID: 26448197
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. How to assess the probability of acceptance of your new neuropsychological manuscript.
Dellatolas G
Cortex; 2002 Jun; 38(3):426-7. PubMed ID: 12146675
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. The Purpose of Journal Peer Review Is to Make Articles Better.
Lubowitz JH; Rossi MJ; Matzkin E
Arthroscopy; 2024 Jul; 40(7):1955. PubMed ID: 38604390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Does it take too much time to publish in the JPD? - Our peer-review process.
Rosenstiel S
J Prosthet Dent; 2024 Jun; 131(6):987. PubMed ID: 38714455
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. How to get your paper published.
Fried PW; Wechsler AS
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2001 Apr; 121(4 Suppl):S3-7. PubMed ID: 11279437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Reflections of a former editor.
Baue AE
Arch Surg; 1993 Dec; 128(12):1305-14. PubMed ID: 8250702
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Editorial: Editorial preceptorship.
Soffer A
Chest; 1974 Sep; 66(3):221-2. PubMed ID: 4423082
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. How to present research data consistently in a scientific paper.
Laniado M
Eur Radiol; 1996; 6(2):S16-8. PubMed ID: 8797992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Requirements for manuscript submission: what every author needs to know and comply with to facilitate the review process.
Karabulut N
Diagn Interv Radiol; 2015; 21(2):93-5. PubMed ID: 25751887
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
