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 *

361 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29226979)

  • 1. It Is Time to Re-Evaluate the Peer Review Process for Preclinical Research.
    Bhattacharya R; Ellis LM
    Bioessays; 2018 Jan; 40(1):. PubMed ID: 29226979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Peer review for biomedical publications: we can improve the system.
    Stahel PF; Moore EE
    BMC Med; 2014 Sep; 12():179. PubMed ID: 25270270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Systematic review of the effectiveness of training programs in writing for scholarly publication, journal editing, and manuscript peer review (protocol).
    Galipeau J; Moher D; Skidmore B; Campbell C; Hendry P; Cameron DW; Hébert PC; Palepu A
    Syst Rev; 2013 Jun; 2():41. PubMed ID: 23773340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Scientific reporting guidelines].
    Nylenna M
    Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2009 Nov; 129(22):2340. PubMed ID: 19935931
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Peering Into the Peer Review Process and Acknowledging Those Who Do It Well.
    Ramstrand N; Fatone S; Dillon MP; Hafner BJ
    Prosthet Orthot Int; 2019 Jun; 43(3):247-249. PubMed ID: 31172882
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The contemporary landscape of journal publishing.
    McKenna L
    Collegian; 2016; 23(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 27188033
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The importance of being earnest in post-publication review: scientific fraud and the scourges of anonymity and excuses.
    Stebbing J; Sanders DA
    Oncogene; 2018 Feb; 37(6):695-696. PubMed ID: 29035386
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Making sure corrections don't vanish online.
    Shim EH; Parekh V
    Nature; 2005 Mar; 434(7029):18; discussion 18. PubMed ID: 15744271
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Journals submit to scrutiny of their peer-review process.
    Giles J
    Nature; 2006 Jan; 439(7074):252. PubMed ID: 16421533
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Preface: Scientific Premise and Rigors in Scientific Research, Peer Review, Editing and Publishing.
    Zhang R
    Curr Cancer Drug Targets; 2017; 17(1):2. PubMed ID: 28067174
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Standards to improve the reporting of clinical trials in acupuncture.
    Hopewell S
    Acupunct Med; 2010 Jun; 28(2):63. PubMed ID: 20615857
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Standards in the face of uncertainty--peer review is flawed and under-researched, but the best we have.
    Mertens S; Baethge C
    Dtsch Arztebl Int; 2012 Dec; 109(51-52):900-2. PubMed ID: 23372614
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Data publishing and scientific journals: the future of the scientific paper in a world of shared data.
    De Schutter E
    Neuroinformatics; 2010 Oct; 8(3):151-3. PubMed ID: 20835853
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Peer review of human studies run amok: a break in the fiduciary relation between scientists and the public.
    Feldstein Ewing SW; Saitz R
    Evid Based Med; 2015 Feb; 20(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 25121564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Translation of the scientific method... Peer review.
    Scarfe WC
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2010 Apr; 109(4):485-7. PubMed ID: 20176497
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The Peer Review Process: Past, Present, and Future.
    Drozdz JA; Ladomery MR
    Br J Biomed Sci; 2024; 81():12054. PubMed ID: 38952614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Journals should set a new standard in transparency.
    Dellavalle RP; Lundahl K; Freeman SR; Schilling LM
    Nature; 2007 Jan; 445(7126):364. PubMed ID: 17251958
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Peer review: issues in physical medicine and rehabilitation.
    Wagner AK; Boninger ML; Levy C; Chan L; Gater D; Kirby RL
    Am J Phys Med Rehabil; 2003 Oct; 82(10):790-802. PubMed ID: 14508411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The peer review process (aka peer reviewology).
    Yucha CB
    Biol Res Nurs; 2002 Oct; 4(2):71-2. PubMed ID: 12408212
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.