135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31095526)
1. Anatomy of Constructive Peer Review.
Horner RD; Lines LM
Med Care; 2019 Jun; 57(6):399-400. PubMed ID: 31095526
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Peer review and refereeing in science.
Lore W
East Afr Med J; 1995 May; 72(5):335-7. PubMed ID: 7555893
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Peer review should continue after publication.
Liesegang TJ
Am J Ophthalmol; 2010 Mar; 149(3):359-60. PubMed ID: 20172061
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Structure and format of peer-reviewed scientific manuscripts.
Manske PR
J Hand Surg Am; 2006 Sep; 31(7):1051-5. PubMed ID: 16945702
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Publishing collaborative studies between academics and industry.
Sterk PJ; Larsson K; Naeije R; Costabel U
Eur Respir J; 1997 Nov; 10(11):2441-2. PubMed ID: 9426074
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Journals: how to decide what's worth publishing.
Jefferson T; Shashok K
Nature; 2003 Jan; 421(6920):209-10. PubMed ID: 12529609
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Enhancements in peer review of manuscripts by the Journal.
Liesegang TJ
Am J Ophthalmol; 2014 Jul; 158(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 24929824
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. [The process of external peer review of manuscripts submitted for publication to Enfermería Clínica].
Moreno-Casbas T; Fuentelsaz-Gallego C; Ruzafa-Martínez M; Puigblanqué-Reyes E
Enferm Clin; 2008; 18(5):229-31. PubMed ID: 18840330
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The review process.
Lambert CE
Nurs Health Sci; 2002 Dec; 4(4):139-40. PubMed ID: 12406199
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Ruling out Ingelfinger?
Horton R
Lancet; 1996 May; 347(9013):1423-4. PubMed ID: 8676623
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. A suggested code of conduct for editors of peer-reviewed journals.
Glover D
J Wound Care; 2006 Feb; 15(2):85-6. PubMed ID: 16521599
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Peering into peer review.
Nat Microbiol; 2019 Jul; 4(7):1065. PubMed ID: 31222174
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. [To improve transparency of biomedical publications].
Watine J; Friedberg B
Ann Biol Clin (Paris); 2004; 62(1):5-6. PubMed ID: 15047484
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. CONSORT and beyond.
Blackstone EH
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2006 Aug; 132(2):229-32. PubMed ID: 16872939
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The novelty bubble.
Leroux JC
J Control Release; 2018 May; 278():140-141. PubMed ID: 29604310
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Manuscript processing 101: problems and solutions.
DiBartola S; Hinchcliff K
J Vet Intern Med; 1999; 13(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 10052055
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Manual Therapy adopts mandatory reporting guidelines for publishing.
Cook C; Jull G; Moore A
Man Ther; 2014 Oct; 19(5):365-6. PubMed ID: 25090975
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. A review of the review process.
Dye L
J Med Toxicol; 2007 Dec; 3(4):143-5. PubMed ID: 18072166
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
