212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33393365)
1. The effect of peer review on the improvement of rejected manuscripts.
Crijns TJ; Ottenhoff JSE; Ring D
Account Res; 2021 Nov; 28(8):517-527. PubMed ID: 33393365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Fate of manuscripts declined by the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
Armstrong AW; Idriss SZ; Kimball AB; Bernhard JD
J Am Acad Dermatol; 2008 Apr; 58(4):632-5. PubMed ID: 18249470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Analysis of the Revision Process by American Journal of Roentgenology Reviewers and Section Editors: Metrics of Rejected Manuscripts and Their Final Disposition.
Cejas C
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jun; 208(6):1181-1184. PubMed ID: 28350482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Peer-review and editorial process of the Ethiopian Medical Journal: ten years assessment of the status of submitted manuscripts.
Enquselassie F
Ethiop Med J; 2013 Apr; 51(2):95-103. PubMed ID: 24079153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Outcomes of rejected Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology manuscripts.
Silberzweig JE; Khorsandi AS
J Vasc Interv Radiol; 2008 Nov; 19(11):1620-3. PubMed ID: 18693043
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Peer review is an effective screening process to evaluate medical manuscripts.
Abby M; Massey MD; Galandiuk S; Polk HC
JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):105-7. PubMed ID: 8015116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The outcome of manuscripts submitted to the American Journal of Ophthalmology between 2002 and 2003.
Liesegang TJ; Shaikh M; Crook JE
Am J Ophthalmol; 2007 Apr; 143(4):551-60. PubMed ID: 17276380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Are Reviewers' Scores Influenced by Citations to Their Own Work? An Analysis of Submitted Manuscripts and Peer Reviewer Reports.
Schriger DL; Kadera SP; von Elm E
Ann Emerg Med; 2016 Mar; 67(3):401-406.e6. PubMed ID: 26518378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of the quality and subsequent performance of manuscripts rejected by Clinical Rheumatology: a research report.
Barajas-Ochoa A; Cisneros-Barrios A; Ramos-Remus C
Clin Rheumatol; 2022 Aug; 41(8):2541-2551. PubMed ID: 35698009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The role of the manuscript reviewer in the peer review process.
Polak JF
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Sep; 165(3):685-8. PubMed ID: 7645496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. What happens to medical articles submitted in Spanish that are not accepted for publication?
Matías-Guiu JA; García-Ramos R; Castellanos M; Martínez-Vila E; Matías-Guiu J
Neurologia; 2013 May; 28(4):205-11. PubMed ID: 22795919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The fate of manuscripts rejected by a general medical journal.
Ray J; Berkwits M; Davidoff F
Am J Med; 2000 Aug; 109(2):131-5. PubMed ID: 10967154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Assessing peer review by gauging the fate of rejected manuscripts: the case of the Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation.
Casnici N; Grimaldo F; Gilbert N; Dondio P; Squazzoni F
Scientometrics; 2017; 113(1):533-546. PubMed ID: 29056789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Biomedical journal speed and efficiency: a cross-sectional pilot survey of author experiences.
Wallach JD; Egilman AC; Gopal AD; Swami N; Krumholz HM; Ross JS
Res Integr Peer Rev; 2018; 3():1. PubMed ID: 29451557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Manuscript rejection: how to submit a revision and tips on being a good peer reviewer.
Kotsis SV; Chung KC
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2014 Apr; 133(4):958-964. PubMed ID: 24675196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. What is submitted and what gets accepted in Indian Pediatrics: analysis of submissions, review process, decision making, and criteria for rejection.
Gupta P; Kaur G; Sharma B; Shah D; Choudhury P
Indian Pediatr; 2006 Jun; 43(6):479-89. PubMed ID: 16820657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Fate of manuscripts previously rejected by the American Journal of Neuroradiology: a follow-up analysis.
McDonald RJ; Cloft HJ; Kallmes DF
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol; 2009 Feb; 30(2):253-6. PubMed ID: 19001539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Editorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care?
Kravitz RL; Franks P; Feldman MD; Gerrity M; Byrne C; Tierney WM
PLoS One; 2010 Apr; 5(4):e10072. PubMed ID: 20386704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Who benefits from peer review? An analysis of the outcome of 100 requests for review by Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.
Loonen MP; Hage JJ; Kon M
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2005 Oct; 116(5):1461-72; discussion 1473-5. PubMed ID: 16217496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Blinded vs. unblinded peer review of manuscripts submitted to a dermatology journal: a randomized multi-rater study.
Alam M; Kim NA; Havey J; Rademaker A; Ratner D; Tregre B; West DP; Coleman WP
Br J Dermatol; 2011 Sep; 165(3):563-7. PubMed ID: 21623749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
