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 *

356 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30908515)

  • 1. How to identify peer-reviewed publications: Open-identity labels in scholarly book publishing.
    Kulczycki E; Rozkosz EA; Engels TCE; Guns R; Hołowiecki M; Pölönen J
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(3):e0214423. PubMed ID: 30908515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Uptake and Impact of a Label for Peer-Reviewed Books.
    Vandewalle E; Guns R; Engels TCE
    Front Res Metr Anal; 2021; 6():746452. PubMed ID: 35059553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Reference accuracy: authors', reviewers', editors', and publishers' contributions.
    Barroga EF
    J Korean Med Sci; 2014 Dec; 29(12):1587-9. PubMed ID: 25469055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Scientific Authors in a Changing World of Scholarly Communication: What Does the Future Hold?
    Baffy G; Burns MM; Hoffmann B; Ramani S; Sabharwal S; Borus JF; Pories S; Quan SF; Ingelfinger JR
    Am J Med; 2020 Jan; 133(1):26-31. PubMed ID: 31419421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Best practices for scholarly authors in the age of predatory journals.
    Beall J
    Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2016 Feb; 98(2):77-9. PubMed ID: 26829665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 'Predatory' open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics.
    Shen C; Björk BC
    BMC Med; 2015 Oct; 13():230. PubMed ID: 26423063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Ensuring Quality and Status: Peer Review Practices in Kriterium, A Portal for Quality-Marked Monographs and Edited Volumes in Swedish SSH.
    Hammarfelt B; Hammar I; Francke H
    Front Res Metr Anal; 2021; 6():740297. PubMed ID: 34778695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Rewarding peer reviewers: maintaining the integrity of science communication.
    Gasparyan AY; Gerasimov AN; Voronov AA; Kitas GD
    J Korean Med Sci; 2015 Apr; 30(4):360-4. PubMed ID: 25829801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. What feedback do reviewers give when reviewing qualitative manuscripts? A focused mapping review and synthesis.
    Herber OR; Bradbury-Jones C; Böling S; Combes S; Hirt J; Koop Y; Nyhagen R; Veldhuizen JD; Taylor J
    BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 May; 20(1):122. PubMed ID: 32423388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Same review quality in open versus blinded peer review in "Ugeskrift for Læger".
    Vinther S; Nielsen OH; Rosenberg J; Keiding N; Schroeder TV
    Dan Med J; 2012 Aug; 59(8):A4479. PubMed ID: 22849979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Scholarly publishing depends on peer reviewers.
    Fernandez-Llimos F;
    Pharm Pract (Granada); 2018; 16(1):1236. PubMed ID: 29619142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Does masking author identity improve peer review quality? A randomized controlled trial. PEER Investigators.
    Justice AC; Cho MK; Winker MA; Berlin JA; Rennie D
    JAMA; 1998 Jul; 280(3):240-2. PubMed ID: 9676668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Recent Issues in Medical Journal Publishing and Editing Policies: Adoption of Artificial Intelligence, Preprints, Open Peer Review, Model Text Recycling Policies, Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing 4th Version, and Country Names in Titles.
    Huh S
    Neurointervention; 2023 Mar; 18(1):2-8. PubMed ID: 36720475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Publishing in Oncology Nursing: A Look to the Past, Present, and Future.
    Schulmeister L
    Semin Oncol Nurs; 2018 Nov; 34(4):329-337. PubMed ID: 30270140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. What I learned from predatory publishers.
    Beall J
    Biochem Med (Zagreb); 2017 Jun; 27(2):273-278. PubMed ID: 28694718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 20. Limited online training opportunities exist for scholarly peer reviewers.
    Willis JV; Cobey KD; Ramos J; Chow R; Ng JY; Alayche M; Moher D
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2023 Sep; 161():65-73. PubMed ID: 37421994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.