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 *

171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29188015)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF; Ovelman C; McGuire W
    Early Hum Dev; 2020 Nov; 150():105191. PubMed ID: 33036834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.
    Osborne SR; Alston LV; Bolton KA; Whelan J; Reeve E; Wong Shee A; Browne J; Walker T; Versace VL; Allender S; Nichols M; Backholer K; Goodwin N; Lewis S; Dalton H; Prael G; Curtin M; Brooks R; Verdon S; Crockett J; Hodgins G; Walsh S; Lyle DM; Thompson SC; Browne LJ; Knight S; Pit SW; Jones M; Gillam MH; Leach MJ; Gonzalez-Chica DA; Muyambi K; Eshetie T; Tran K; May E; Lieschke G; Parker V; Smith A; Hayes C; Dunlop AJ; Rajappa H; White R; Oakley P; Holliday S
    Med J Aust; 2020 Dec; 213 Suppl 11():S3-S32.e1. PubMed ID: 33314144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. The limitations to our understanding of peer review.
    Tennant JP; Ross-Hellauer T
    Res Integr Peer Rev; 2020; 5():6. PubMed ID: 32368354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other Large Language Models in scholarly peer review.
    Hosseini M; Horbach SPJM
    Res Sq; 2023 Feb; ():. PubMed ID: 36865238
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Fighting reviewer fatigue or amplifying bias? Considerations and recommendations for use of ChatGPT and other large language models in scholarly peer review.
    Hosseini M; Horbach SPJM
    Res Integr Peer Rev; 2023 May; 8(1):4. PubMed ID: 37198671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.
    Crider K; Williams J; Qi YP; Gutman J; Yeung L; Mai C; Finkelstain J; Mehta S; Pons-Duran C; Menéndez C; Moraleda C; Rogers L; Daniels K; Green P
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2022 Feb; 2(2022):. PubMed ID: 36321557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A Learned Society's Perspective on Publishing.
    Suzuki K; Edelson A; Iversen LL; Hausmann L; Schulz JB; Turner AJ
    J Neurochem; 2016 Oct; 139 Suppl 2():17-23. PubMed ID: 27534728
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Innovative Strategies for Peer Review.
    Barroga E
    J Korean Med Sci; 2020 May; 35(20):e138. PubMed ID: 32449322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. How to improve scientific peer review: Four schools of thought.
    Waltman L; Kaltenbrunner W; Pinfield S; Woods HB
    Learn Publ; 2023 Jul; 36(3):334-347. PubMed ID: 38504796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Blacklists and Whitelists To Tackle Predatory Publishing: a Cross-Sectional Comparison and Thematic Analysis.
    Strinzel M; Severin A; Milzow K; Egger M
    mBio; 2019 Jun; 10(3):. PubMed ID: 31164459
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A study of innovative features in scholarly open access journals.
    Björk BC
    J Med Internet Res; 2011 Dec; 13(4):e115. PubMed ID: 22173122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 16. Engagement With and Acceptability of Digital Media Platforms for Use in Improving Health Behaviors Among Vulnerable Families: Systematic Review.
    Eppes EV; Augustyn M; Gross SM; Vernon P; Caulfield LE; Paige DM
    J Med Internet Res; 2023 Feb; 25():e40934. PubMed ID: 36735286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Current market rates for scholarly publishing services.
    Grossmann A; Brembs B
    F1000Res; 2021; 10():20. PubMed ID: 34316354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Conflicts of interest in medical science: peer usage, peer review and 'CoI consultancy'.
    Charlton BG
    Med Hypotheses; 2004; 63(2):181-6. PubMed ID: 15236772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.