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 *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28580134)

  • 1. What is open peer review? A systematic review.
    Ross-Hellauer T
    F1000Res; 2017; 6():588. PubMed ID: 28580134
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers.
    Ross-Hellauer T; Deppe A; Schmidt B
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(12):e0189311. PubMed ID: 29236721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Open peer review at four STEM journals: an observational overview.
    Ford E
    F1000Res; 2015; 4():6. PubMed ID: 25767695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The measurement and monitoring of surgical adverse events.
    Bruce J; Russell EM; Mollison J; Krukowski ZH
    Health Technol Assess; 2001; 5(22):1-194. PubMed ID: 11532239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Guidelines for open peer review implementation.
    Ross-Hellauer T; Görögh E
    Res Integr Peer Rev; 2019; 4():4. PubMed ID: 30858990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Student and educator experiences of maternal-child simulation-based learning: a systematic review of qualitative evidence protocol.
    MacKinnon K; Marcellus L; Rivers J; Gordon C; Ryan M; Butcher D
    JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep; 2015 Jan; 13(1):14-26. PubMed ID: 26447004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Eyes wide open: reader and author responsibility in understanding the limits of peer review.
    Benson PJ
    Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2015 Oct; 97(7):487-9. PubMed ID: 26414359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Ten considerations for open peer review.
    Schmidt B; Ross-Hellauer T; van Edig X; Moylan EC
    F1000Res; 2018; 7():969. PubMed ID: 30135731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A retrospective analysis of submissions, acceptance rate, open peer review operations, and prepublication bias of the multidisciplinary open access journal Head & Face Medicine.
    Stamm T; Meyer U; Wiesmann HP; Kleinheinz J; Cehreli M; Cehreli ZC
    Head Face Med; 2007 Jun; 3():27. PubMed ID: 17562003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Problems with traditional science publishing and finding a wider niche for post-publication peer review.
    Teixeira da Silva JA; Dobránszki J
    Account Res; 2015; 22(1):22-40. PubMed ID: 25275622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Publishing peer review materials.
    Beck J; Funk K; Harrison M; McEntyre J; Breen J; Collings A; Donohoe P; Evans M; Flintoft L; Hamelers A; Hurst P; Lemberger T; Lin J; O'Connor N; Parkin M; Parker S; Rodgers P; Skipper M; Stoner M
    F1000Res; 2018; 7():1655. PubMed ID: 30416719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) consensus on science with treatment recommendations for pediatric and neonatal patients: pediatric basic and advanced life support.
    International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation
    Pediatrics; 2006 May; 117(5):e955-77. PubMed ID: 16618790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Science peer review for the 21st century: Assessing scientific consensus for decision-making while managing conflict of interests, reviewer and process bias.
    Kirman CR; Simon TW; Hays SM
    Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2019 Apr; 103():73-85. PubMed ID: 30634024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A descriptive analysis of the characteristics and the peer review process of systematic review protocols published in an open peer review journal from 2012 to 2017.
    Rombey T; Allers K; Mathes T; Hoffmann F; Pieper D
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 Mar; 19(1):57. PubMed ID: 30866832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review.
    Tennant JP; Dugan JM; Graziotin D; Jacques DC; Waldner F; Mietchen D; Elkhatib Y; B Collister L; Pikas CK; Crick T; Masuzzo P; Caravaggi A; Berg DR; Niemeyer KE; Ross-Hellauer T; Mannheimer S; Rigling L; Katz DS; Greshake Tzovaras B; Pacheco-Mendoza J; Fatima N; Poblet M; Isaakidis M; Irawan DE; Renaut S; Madan CR; Matthias L; Nørgaard Kjær J; O'Donnell DP; Neylon C; Kearns S; Selvaraju M; Colomb J
    F1000Res; 2017; 6():1151. PubMed ID: 29188015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. An overview of innovations in the external peer review of journal manuscripts.
    Woods HB; Brumberg J; Kaltenbrunner W; Pinfield S; Waltman L
    Wellcome Open Res; 2022; 7():82. PubMed ID: 36879926
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2008 Dec; 133 Suppl 7():S225-46. PubMed ID: 19034813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The state of the art in peer review.
    Tennant JP
    FEMS Microbiol Lett; 2018 Oct; 365(19):. PubMed ID: 30137294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Systematic and open identification of researchers and authors: focus on open researcher and contributor ID.
    Gasparyan AY; Akazhanov NA; Voronov AA; Kitas GD
    J Korean Med Sci; 2014 Nov; 29(11):1453-6. PubMed ID: 25408574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.