182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34100409)
1. An audit of the editorial process at the
Fernandes GJ; Pai SA
Indian J Cancer; 2021; 58(2):165-170. PubMed ID: 34100409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Analysis of submissions, editorial and peer-review process, and outcome of manuscripts submitted to the
Gupta V; Bhatia R; Pathak M; Ramam M
Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol; 2020; 86(5):519-525. PubMed ID: 32167071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
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. Making the First Cut: An Analysis of Academic Medicine Editors' Reasons for Not Sending Manuscripts Out for External Peer Review.
Meyer HS; Durning SJ; Sklar DP; Maggio LA
Acad Med; 2018 Mar; 93(3):464-470. PubMed ID: 28767495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of reports from referees chosen by authors or journal editors in the peer review process.
Earnshaw JJ; Farndon JR; Guillou PJ; Johnson CD; Murie JA; Murray GD
Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 2000 Apr; 82(4 Suppl):133-5. PubMed ID: 10889776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Study design, originality and overall consistency influence acceptance or rejection of manuscripts submitted to the Journal.
Turcotte C; Drolet P; Girard M
Can J Anaesth; 2004; 51(6):549-56. PubMed ID: 15197116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The fate of triaged and rejected manuscripts.
Zoccali C; Amodeo D; Argiles A; Arici M; D'arrigo G; Evenepoel P; Fliser D; Fox J; Gesualdo L; Jadoul M; Ketteler M; Malyszko J; Massy Z; Mayer G; Ortiz A; Sever M; Vanholder R; Vinck C; Wanner C; Więcek A
Nephrol Dial Transplant; 2015 Dec; 30(12):1947-50. PubMed ID: 26597920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparative study on the turnaround time of article processing in dermatology journals: A need for improvement of this aspect in Indian journals.
Manjunath S; Bhattacharjee R; Razmi TM; Narang T; Vinay K
Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol; 2020; 86(5):526-530. PubMed ID: 32372759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluating the BMJ guidelines for economic submissions: prospective audit of economic submissions to BMJ and The Lancet.
Jefferson T; Smith R; Yee Y; Drummond M; Pratt M; Gale R
JAMA; 1998 Jul; 280(3):275-7. PubMed ID: 9676680
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Duration of the editorial process of the Atención Primaria journal].
Jiménez Villa J
Aten Primaria; 1999 May; 23 Suppl 1():29-32. PubMed ID: 10408134
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Reasons for Manuscript Rejection After Peer Review From the Journal Headache.
Hesterman CM; Szperka CL; Turner DP
Headache; 2018 Nov; 58(10):1511-1518. PubMed ID: 30011058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Write a scientific paper (WASP): Editor's perspective of submissions and dealing with editors.
Cuschieri S; Vassallo J
Early Hum Dev; 2019 Feb; 129():93-95. PubMed ID: 30578111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The fate of epidemiologic manuscripts: a study of papers submitted to epidemiology.
Hall SA; Wilcox AJ
Epidemiology; 2007 Mar; 18(2):262-5. PubMed ID: 17301708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Distinguishing Predatory from Reputable Publishing Practices.
Happe LE
J Manag Care Spec Pharm; 2020 Aug; 26(8):956-960. PubMed ID: 32715959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. How to reply to referees' comments when submitting manuscripts for publication.
Williams HC
J Am Acad Dermatol; 2004 Jul; 51(1):79-83. PubMed ID: 15243528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Peer review at the Health Information and Libraries Journal.
Grant MJ
Health Info Libr J; 2014 Dec; 31(4):251-3. PubMed ID: 25443027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [The recognition of peer reviewers activity: the potential promotion of a virtuous circle.].
Pierno A; Fruscio R; Bellani G
Recenti Prog Med; 2017 Sep; 108(9):355-359. PubMed ID: 28901342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
