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 *

355 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30797567)

  • 1. Peer Review Bias: A Critical Review.
    Haffar S; Bazerbachi F; Murad MH
    Mayo Clin Proc; 2019 Apr; 94(4):670-676. PubMed ID: 30797567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Ensuring the Quality, Fairness, and Integrity of Journal Peer Review: A Possible Role of Editors.
    Resnik DB; Elmore SA
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2016 Feb; 22(1):169-88. PubMed ID: 25633924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A systematic review highlights a knowledge gap regarding the effectiveness of health-related training programs in journalology.
    Galipeau J; Moher D; Campbell C; Hendry P; Cameron DW; Palepu A; Hébert PC
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Mar; 68(3):257-65. PubMed ID: 25510373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. How to write a perfect scientific manuscript.
    Rylski B
    Eur J Cardiothorac Surg; 2015 Aug; 48(2):179. PubMed ID: 26069240
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Peer review.
    Twaij H; Oussedik S; Hoffmeyer P
    Bone Joint J; 2014 Apr; 96-B(4):436-41. PubMed ID: 24692607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Bruce R; Chauvin A; Trinquart L; Ravaud P; Boutron I
    BMC Med; 2016 Jun; 14(1):85. PubMed ID: 27287500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Truth in Science Publishing: A Personal Perspective.
    Südhof TC
    PLoS Biol; 2016 Aug; 14(8):e1002547. PubMed ID: 27564858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Coached Peer Review: Developing the Next Generation of Authors.
    Sidalak D; Purdy E; Luckett-Gatopoulos S; Murray H; Thoma B; Chan TM
    Acad Med; 2017 Feb; 92(2):201-204. PubMed ID: 27191842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An overview of the peer review process in biomedical sciences.
    Miller E; James Weightman M; Basu A; Amos A; Brakoulias V
    Australas Psychiatry; 2024 Jun; 32(3):247-251. PubMed ID: 38327220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Peer review in medical journals: Beyond quality of reports towards transparency and public scrutiny of the process.
    Vercellini P; Buggio L; Viganò P; Somigliana E
    Eur J Intern Med; 2016 Jun; 31():15-9. PubMed ID: 27129625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Peer review practices in biomedical literature: a time for change?
    Mahawar KK; Kejariwal D; Malviya A; Birla R; Viswanath YK
    Asian J Surg; 2009 Oct; 32(4):240-6. PubMed ID: 19892628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The Editing Process-From the Personal to the Professional.
    Katz A
    Oncol Nurs Forum; 2019 Jul; 46(4):395-396. PubMed ID: 31225834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Taking a peek into the editor's office.
    Nat Cell Biol; 2018 Oct; 20(10):1101. PubMed ID: 30258125
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

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

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.