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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35016571)

  • 1. Are highly ranked dental journals at risk of editorial bias? An examination of information on the reporting of peer-review practices.
    Faggion CM
    Account Res; 2023 Dec; 30(7):459-470. PubMed ID: 35016571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Conflict of Interest Disclosure Policies and Practices in Peer-reviewed Biomedical Journals.
    Cooper RJ; Gupta M; Wilkes MS; Hoffman JR
    J Gen Intern Med; 2006 Dec; 21(12):1248-52. PubMed ID: 17105524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Role of editorial and peer review processes in publication bias: analysis of drug trials submitted to eight medical journals.
    van Lent M; Overbeke J; Out HJ
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(8):e104846. PubMed ID: 25118182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Prospective analyses of sex/gender-related publication decisions in general medical journals: editorial rejection of population-based women's reproductive physiology.
    Kalidasan D; Goshtasebi A; Chrisler J; Brown HL; Prior JC
    BMJ Open; 2022 Feb; 12(2):e057854. PubMed ID: 35217542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Watching the watchers: A report on the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by editors and editorial board members of dental journals.
    Faggion CM
    Eur J Oral Sci; 2021 Dec; 129(6):e12823. PubMed ID: 34879169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Journal policies and editors' opinions on peer review.
    Hamilton DG; Fraser H; Hoekstra R; Fidler F
    Elife; 2020 Nov; 9():. PubMed ID: 33211009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Acceptance rates for manuscripts submitted to veterinary peer-reviewed journals in 2012.
    Lamb CR; Adams CA
    Equine Vet J; 2015 Nov; 47(6):736-40. PubMed ID: 25302854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Challenges in peer review: how to guarantee the quality and transparency of the editorial process in scientific journals.
    Candal-Pedreira C; Rey-Brandariz J; Varela-Lema L; Pérez-Ríos M; Ruano-Ravina A
    An Pediatr (Engl Ed); 2023 Jul; 99(1):54-59. PubMed ID: 37349245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A survey of orthopaedic journal editors determining the criteria of manuscript selection for publication.
    Hing CB; Higgs D; Hooper L; Donell ST; Song F
    J Orthop Surg Res; 2011 Apr; 6():19. PubMed ID: 21527007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Structured peer review: pilot results from 23 Elsevier journals.
    Malički M; Mehmani B
    PeerJ; 2024; 12():e17514. PubMed ID: 38948202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Views of Iranian medical journal editors on medical research publication.
    Etemadi A; Raiszadeh F; Alaeddini F; Azizi F
    Saudi Med J; 2004 Jan; 25(1 Suppl):S29-33. PubMed ID: 14968189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Incidence and nature of unblinding by authors: our experience at two radiology journals with double-blinded peer review policies.
    Katz DS; Proto AV; Olmsted WW
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Dec; 179(6):1415-7. PubMed ID: 12438028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Journal response types and times: the outcomes of manuscripts finalised for submission by the University of the Free State School of Medicine medical editor, South Africa.
    Joubert G; Mulder T; Steinberg WJ; Botes J
    Pan Afr Med J; 2020; 36():212. PubMed ID: 32963678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Peer Review and Medical Journals.
    Nugent K; Peterson CJ
    J Prim Care Community Health; 2024; 15():21501319241252235. PubMed ID: 38682542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Survey of conflict-of-interest disclosure policies of ophthalmology journals.
    Anraku A; Jin YP; Trope GE; Buys YM
    Ophthalmology; 2009 Jun; 116(6):1093-6. PubMed ID: 19376583
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.