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.
115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33608678)
41. Does research participation make a difference in residency training? Macknin JB; Brown A; Marcus RE Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2014 Jan; 472(1):370-6. PubMed ID: 23975249 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Discharge destination's effect on bounce-back risk in Black, White, and Hispanic acute ischemic stroke patients. Kind AJ; Smith MA; Liou JI; Pandhi N; Frytak JR; Finch MD Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2010 Feb; 91(2):189-95. PubMed ID: 20159120 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Potentially coercive self-citation by peer reviewers: a cross-sectional study. Thombs BD; Levis AW; Razykov I; Syamchandra A; Leentjens AF; Levenson JL; Lumley MA J Psychosom Res; 2015 Jan; 78(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 25300537 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. I am not a scientist, I am a number. Bourne PE; Fink JL PLoS Comput Biol; 2008 Dec; 4(12):e1000247. PubMed ID: 19112480 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. 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]
46. Hunting for Pearls: A Qualitative Analysis of the Reflections of Students Creating Psychiatric Podcasts. Brew-Girard E; Brown R; Salter E; Hattersley C; Hodge O; Leonard X; Macdonald K; Mupanemunda G; Quinn M; Rahman J; Roberts A; Skuse K; Tran M; De Souza S Adv Med Educ Pract; 2023; 14():1157-1166. PubMed ID: 37869504 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Does the pressure to fill journal quotas bias evaluation?: Evidence from publication delays and rejection rates. Park B; Sohn E; Kim S PLoS One; 2020; 15(8):e0236927. PubMed ID: 32780771 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Rules to be adopted for publishing a scientific paper. Picardi N Ann Ital Chir; 2016; 87():1-3. PubMed ID: 28474609 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Problems with traditional science publishing and finding a wider niche for post-publication peer review. Teixeira da Silva JA; Dobránszki J Account Res; 2015; 22(1):22-40. PubMed ID: 25275622 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Reviewer Blinding in Peer Review: Perspectives From Reviewers at Three Stages of Their Careers. Gupta V; Coburn NG; Detsky AS Ann Surg; 2020 Jul; 272(1):42-43. PubMed ID: 32482980 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. So You Want To Be A Reviewer. Vogt HB; Huber VC; Hansen KA S D Med; 2017 Mar; 70(3):127-133. PubMed ID: 28813775 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. The relationship between a reviewer's recommendation and editorial decision of manuscripts submitted for publication in obstetrics. Vintzileos AM; Ananth CV; Odibo AO; Chauhan SP; Smulian JC; Oyelese Y Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Dec; 211(6):703.e1-5. PubMed ID: 24983685 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. 'You never said my peer review was confidential' - scientist challenges publisher. Schiermeier Q Nature; 2017 Jan; 541(7638):446. PubMed ID: 28128270 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. How to bounce back from a PhD-project failure. Forrester N Nature; 2022 Jul; 607(7918):407-409. PubMed ID: 35831589 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
56. Can editors save peer review from peer reviewers? D'Andrea R; O'Dwyer JP PLoS One; 2017; 12(10):e0186111. PubMed ID: 29016678 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. How many manuscripts should I peer review per year? Fernandez-Llimos F; Salgado TM; Tonin FS; Pharm Pract (Granada); 2020; 18(1):1804. PubMed ID: 32161628 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. 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]
59. Retrospective analysis of the quality of reports by author-suggested and non-author-suggested reviewers in journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models. Kowalczuk MK; Dudbridge F; Nanda S; Harriman SL; Patel J; Moylan EC BMJ Open; 2015 Sep; 5(9):e008707. PubMed ID: 26423855 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Quality science and quality assurance: observations of an environmental scientist. Hughes TJ Qual Assur; 1999; 7(4):225-35. PubMed ID: 11191123 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]