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 *

141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35425627)

  • 21. Replication initiatives will not salvage the trustworthiness of psychology.
    Coyne JC
    BMC Psychol; 2016 May; 4(1):28. PubMed ID: 27245324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Informed Consent in Genome-Scale Research: What Do Prospective Participants Think?
    Trinidad SB; Fullerton SM; Bares JM; Jarvik GP; Larson EB; Burke W
    AJOB Prim Res; 2012 Jul; 3(3):3-11. PubMed ID: 23493836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. HARKing: hypothesizing after the results are known.
    Kerr NL
    Pers Soc Psychol Rev; 1998; 2(3):196-217. PubMed ID: 15647155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Lay public's understanding of equipoise and randomisation in randomised controlled trials.
    Robinson EJ; Kerr CE; Stevens AJ; Lilford RJ; Braunholtz DA; Edwards SJ; Beck SR; Rowley MG
    Health Technol Assess; 2005 Mar; 9(8):1-192, iii-iv. PubMed ID: 15763039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Evidence that nonsignificant results are sometimes preferred: Reverse P-hacking or selective reporting?
    Chuard PJC; Vrtílek M; Head ML; Jennions MD
    PLoS Biol; 2019 Jan; 17(1):e3000127. PubMed ID: 30682013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Research participants' perceptions and views on consent for biobank research: a review of empirical data and ethical analysis.
    D'Abramo F; Schildmann J; Vollmann J
    BMC Med Ethics; 2015 Sep; 16():60. PubMed ID: 26354520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A comparison of institutional review board professionals' and patients' views on consent for research on medical practices.
    Kraft SA; Cho MK; Constantine M; Lee SS; Kelley M; Korngiebel D; James C; Kuwana E; Meyer A; Porter K; Diekema D; Capron AM; Alicic R; Wilfond BS; Magnus D
    Clin Trials; 2016 Oct; 13(5):555-65. PubMed ID: 27257125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Survey on Open Science Practices in Functional Neuroimaging.
    Paret C; Unverhau N; Feingold F; Poldrack RA; Stirner M; Schmahl C; Sicorello M
    Neuroimage; 2022 Aug; 257():119306. PubMed ID: 35595201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Psychometrics Anonymous: Does a Transparent Data Sharing Policy Affect Data Collection?
    Eberlen JC; Nicaise E; Leveaux S; Mora YL; Klein O
    Psychol Belg; 2019 Sep; 59(1):373-392. PubMed ID: 31576230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Personal Motivations and Systemic Incentives: Scientists on Questionable Research Practices.
    Bruton SV; Medlin M; Brown M; Sacco DF
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2020 Jun; 26(3):1531-1547. PubMed ID: 31981051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Psychology's Replication Crisis and Clinical Psychological Science.
    Tackett JL; Brandes CM; King KM; Markon KE
    Annu Rev Clin Psychol; 2019 May; 15():579-604. PubMed ID: 30673512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Implications of the Credibility Revolution for Productivity, Creativity, and Progress.
    Vazire S
    Perspect Psychol Sci; 2018 Jul; 13(4):411-417. PubMed ID: 29961410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Optimizing the scientific study of suicide with open and transparent research practices.
    Carpenter TP; Law KC
    Suicide Life Threat Behav; 2021 Feb; 51(1):36-46. PubMed ID: 33624871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Questionable, Objectionable or Criminal? Public Opinion on Data Fraud and Selective Reporting in Science.
    Pickett JT; Roche SP
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2018 Feb; 24(1):151-171. PubMed ID: 28281156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A conceptual framework for understanding the perspectives on the causes of the science-practice gap in ecology and conservation.
    Bertuol-Garcia D; Morsello C; N El-Hani C; Pardini R
    Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc; 2018 May; 93(2):1032-1055. PubMed ID: 29160024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Questionable research practices among italian research psychologists.
    Agnoli F; Wicherts JM; Veldkamp CL; Albiero P; Cubelli R
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(3):e0172792. PubMed ID: 28296929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Qualitative Data Sharing: Participant Understanding, Motivation, and Consent.
    VandeVusse A; Mueller J; Karcher S
    Qual Health Res; 2022 Jan; 32(1):182-191. PubMed ID: 34847803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Macromolecular crowding: chemistry and physics meet biology (Ascona, Switzerland, 10-14 June 2012).
    Foffi G; Pastore A; Piazza F; Temussi PA
    Phys Biol; 2013 Aug; 10(4):040301. PubMed ID: 23912807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Replication concerns in sports and exercise science: a narrative review of selected methodological issues in the field.
    Mesquida C; Murphy J; Lakens D; Warne J
    R Soc Open Sci; 2022 Dec; 9(12):220946. PubMed ID: 36533197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Participant views and experiences of participating in HIV research in sub-Saharan Africa: a qualitative systematic review.
    Nalubega S; Evans C
    JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep; 2015 Jun; 13(5):330-420. PubMed ID: 26455613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.