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.
25. Equal contributions and credit: an emerging trend in the characterization of authorship in major anaesthesia journals during a 10-yr period. Li Z; Sun YM; Wu FX; Yang LQ; Lu ZJ; Yu WF PLoS One; 2013; 8(8):e71430. PubMed ID: 23940753 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Editors and authors: two halves of a whole. Borus JF Acad Psychiatry; 2014 Apr; 38(2):224-5. PubMed ID: 24477900 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Reporting of interventions in randomised trials: an audit of journal instructions to authors. Hoffmann T; English T; Glasziou P Trials; 2014 Jan; 15():20. PubMed ID: 24422788 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Meaningful peer review is integral to quality science and should provide benefits to the authors and reviewers alike. Carrell DT; Rajpert-De Meyts E Andrology; 2013 Jul; 1(4):531-2. PubMed ID: 23785017 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. [Authors, reviewers, editors: the rules of the game]. Garcia AM Gac Sanit; 2001; 15(4):294-5. PubMed ID: 11578557 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Publishing systematic reviews in ophthalmology: new guidance for authors. Li T; Bartley GB Ophthalmology; 2014 Feb; 121(2):438-9. PubMed ID: 24484735 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. The gender imbalance in academic medicine: a study of female authorship in the United Kingdom. Sidhu R; Rajashekhar P; Lavin VL; Parry J; Attwood J; Holdcroft A; Sanders DS J R Soc Med; 2009 Aug; 102(8):337-42. PubMed ID: 19679736 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Upon Further Review: Peer Process Vital to Publishing. Katz A Oncol Nurs Forum; 2016 Nov; 43(6):675-676. PubMed ID: 27768133 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Responsible dissemination of scholarly work in radiology. Dowd SB; Schulz DL Radiol Technol; 1996; 67(5):407-14. PubMed ID: 8726987 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Disparities in the geographical distribution of authorship between invited and peer reviewed papers. Carson DP; Eagles JM Scott Med J; 1999 Oct; 44(5):149-51. PubMed ID: 10629912 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Footnotes, acknowledgments, and authorship: toward greater responsibility, accountability, and transparency. Liesegang TJ; Bartley GB Am J Ophthalmol; 2014 Dec; 158(6):1103-4. PubMed ID: 25457700 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Trends in Authorship of Articles in Major Ophthalmology Journals by Gender, 2002-2014. Mimouni M; Zayit-Soudry S; Segal O; Barak Y; Nemet AY; Shulman S; Geffen N Ophthalmology; 2016 Aug; 123(8):1824-1828. PubMed ID: 27221734 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review. Van Rooyen S; Godlee F; Evans S; Smith R; Black N J Gen Intern Med; 1999 Oct; 14(10):622-4. PubMed ID: 10571708 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]