260 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35698009)
21. Fate of articles rejected by Indian Pediatrics.
Dewan P; Gupta P; Shah D
Indian Pediatr; 2010 Dec; 47(12):1031-5. PubMed ID: 21220799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. 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]
23. A retrospective study investigating requests for self-citation during open peer review in a general medicine journal.
Peebles E; Scandlyn M; Hesp BR
PLoS One; 2020; 15(8):e0237804. PubMed ID: 32817699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Predictors of publication: characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals.
Lee KP; Boyd EA; Holroyd-Leduc JM; Bacchetti P; Bero LA
Med J Aust; 2006 Jun; 184(12):621-6. PubMed ID: 16803442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping.
Siler K; Lee K; Bero L
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2015 Jan; 112(2):360-5. PubMed ID: 25535380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. 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]
27. The Use of Reporting Guidelines in Rheumatology: A Cross-Sectional Study of Over 850 Manuscripts Published in 5 Major Rheumatology Journals.
Barajas-Ochoa A; Cisneros-Barrios A; Ramirez-Trejo M; Ramos-Remus C
J Rheumatol; 2023 Jul; 50(7):939-943. PubMed ID: 36642441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Author perception of peer review: impact of review quality and acceptance on satisfaction.
Weber EJ; Katz PP; Waeckerle JF; Callaham ML
JAMA; 2002 Jun; 287(21):2790-3. PubMed ID: 12038913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. 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]
30. Relationship between quality and editorial leadership of biomedical research journals: a comparative study of Italian and UK journals.
Matarese V
PLoS One; 2008 Jul; 3(7):e2512. PubMed ID: 18596938
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. Fate of manuscripts rejected by a non-English-language general medical journal: a retrospective cohort study.
Vinther S; Rosenberg J
BMJ Open; 2011 Aug; 1(1):e000147. PubMed ID: 22021776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Are Reviewers' Scores Influenced by Citations to Their Own Work? An Analysis of Submitted Manuscripts and Peer Reviewer Reports.
Schriger DL; Kadera SP; von Elm E
Ann Emerg Med; 2016 Mar; 67(3):401-406.e6. PubMed ID: 26518378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The distribution of forensic journals, reflections on authorship practices, peer-review and role of the impact factor.
Jones AW
Forensic Sci Int; 2007 Jan; 165(2-3):115-28. PubMed ID: 16784827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance: 2017/2018 in review.
Manning WJ
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson; 2019 Dec; 21(1):79. PubMed ID: 31884956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Statistical reviewers improve reporting in biomedical articles: a randomized trial.
Cobo E; Selva-O'Callagham A; Ribera JM; Cardellach F; Dominguez R; Vilardell M
PLoS One; 2007 Mar; 2(3):e332. PubMed ID: 17389922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Adherence to reporting guidelines increases the number of citations: the argument for including a methodologist in the editorial process and peer-review.
Vilaró M; Cortés J; Selva-O'Callaghan A; Urrutia A; Ribera JM; Cardellach F; Basagaña X; Elmore M; Vilardell M; Altman D; González JA; Cobo E
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2019 May; 19(1):112. PubMed ID: 31151417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Acceptance rate and reasons for rejection of manuscripts submitted to Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound during 2012.
Lamb CR; Mai W
Vet Radiol Ultrasound; 2015; 56(1):103-8. PubMed ID: 24798652
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Fate of manuscripts declined by the British Journal of Surgery.
Wijnhoven BP; Dejong CH
Br J Surg; 2010 Mar; 97(3):450-4. PubMed ID: 20099256
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. The effect of peer review on the improvement of rejected manuscripts.
Crijns TJ; Ottenhoff JSE; Ring D
Account Res; 2021 Nov; 28(8):517-527. PubMed ID: 33393365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
