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.
2. Fortifying the external peer review: an editorial perspective. Sohail S J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2015 Jan; 25(1):2-3. PubMed ID: 25604359 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Publish or Perish: Five Steps to Navigating a Less Painful Peer Review. Lange CA; Hammes SR Endocrinology; 2021 Mar; 162(3):. PubMed ID: 33516156 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [From the Cochrane Library: the use of peer review is still under discussion]. Stijntjes F; Veeken H Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2008 Apr; 152(16):934-7. PubMed ID: 18561790 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Taking a peek into the editor's office. Nat Cell Biol; 2018 Oct; 20(10):1101. PubMed ID: 30258125 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Journals' instructions to authors: A cross-sectional study across scientific disciplines. Malički M; Aalbersberg IJ; Bouter L; Ter Riet G PLoS One; 2019; 14(9):e0222157. PubMed ID: 31487331 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Quality and peer review of research: an adjudicating role for editors. Newton DP Account Res; 2010 May; 17(3):130-45. PubMed ID: 20461569 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The matter of standards. III. The editorial process. Wilkins AS Bioessays; 2008 Nov; 30(11-12):1037-9. PubMed ID: 18937297 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Update on the Manuscript Peer Review Process. Elmore SA Toxicol Pathol; 2017 Dec; 45(8):1028-1031. PubMed ID: 29145784 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Evidence-based medicine and the peer review process: complementary or at odds? Fisher CG; Vaccaro AR Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2012 Jan; 37(1):E1-2. PubMed ID: 22179321 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. How to review a paper for Heart. Otto CM Heart; 2015 Jan; 101(1):3-4. PubMed ID: 25502328 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. What are the Characteristics of an Excellent Review of Scientific Articles? Rochitte CE; Mesquita CT Arq Bras Cardiol; 2018 Feb; 110(2):106-108. PubMed ID: 29561986 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. What happens to your submission at Australasian Journal on Ageing? Parkinson L; Sims J Australas J Ageing; 2017 Jun; 36(2):87-88. PubMed ID: 28635096 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. On Strengthening the MCP Editorial Leadership. Burlingame AL Mol Cell Proteomics; 2016 Jul; 15(7):2214-6. PubMed ID: 27281785 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Peer Review in Transplantation. Hutchinson JA Transplantation; 2015 Sep; 99(9):1746-8. PubMed ID: 26308410 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. European Urology: serving our readership through systematic peer review, use of reporting standards, and encouragement of postpublication review. Catto JW; Cooperberg MR; Cornu JN; Gratzke C; Novara G; Shariat SF; Vickers A Eur Urol; 2015 Feb; 67(2):188-90. PubMed ID: 25175422 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Building an ARC to Grant Success: The Aims Review Committee. Nigrovic PA Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken); 2017 Apr; 69(4):459-461. PubMed ID: 27696715 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]