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 *

101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37153334)

  • 1. Author and Reviewers' Needless Conflict.
    Kadam D
    Indian J Plast Surg; 2023 Apr; 56(2):97-98. PubMed ID: 37153334
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Impact of Reviewers' Creditworthiness on Consumers' Purchase Intention in Edge Path: Implications for the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.
    Limei C; Wei L
    Front Public Health; 2020; 8():619263. PubMed ID: 33363100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Dealing with conflicting reviewers' comments.
    Johnson SH
    Nurse Author Ed; 1996; 6(4):1-3. PubMed ID: 8868722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Perceptions of conflict of interest disclosures among peer reviewers.
    Lippert S; Callaham ML; Lo B
    PLoS One; 2011; 6(11):e26900. PubMed ID: 22073216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Peer review: Risk and risk tolerance.
    Gallo SA; Schmaling KB
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(8):e0273813. PubMed ID: 36026494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Are reviewers suggested by authors as good as those chosen by editors? Results of a rater-blinded, retrospective study.
    Wager E; Parkin EC; Tamber PS
    BMC Med; 2006 May; 4():13. PubMed ID: 16734897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Some hints about the reviewers' ethical dilemmas].
    Rumboldt Z
    Acta Med Croatica; 2008 Dec; 62(5):443-6. PubMed ID: 19382625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Attitudes toward blinding of peer review and perceptions of efficacy within a small biomedical specialty.
    Jagsi R; Bennett KE; Griffith KA; DeCastro R; Grace C; Holliday E; Zietman AL
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2014 Aug; 89(5):940-946. PubMed ID: 25035195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Reviewers' perceptions of the peer review process for a medical education journal.
    Snell L; Spencer J
    Med Educ; 2005 Jan; 39(1):90-7. PubMed ID: 15612905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Reviewers' Responses to Medical Research Articles.
    Sohail S; Akhtar J
    J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2019 Jan; 29(1):29-32. PubMed ID: 30630565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Masking author identity in peer review: what factors influence masking success? PEER Investigators.
    Cho MK; Justice AC; Winker MA; Berlin JA; Waeckerle JF; Callaham ML; Rennie D
    JAMA; 1998 Jul; 280(3):243-5. PubMed ID: 9676669
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Characteristics of Peer Review Reports: Editor-Suggested Versus Author-Suggested Reviewers.
    Shopovski J; Bolek C; Bolek M
    Sci Eng Ethics; 2020 Apr; 26(2):709-726. PubMed ID: 31209769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Responding to reviewers' comments as part of writing for publication.
    Happell B
    Nurse Res; 2011; 18(4):23-7. PubMed ID: 21853889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of institutional prestige on reviewers' recommendations and editorial decisions.
    Garfunkel JM; Ulshen MH; Hamrick HJ; Lawson EE
    JAMA; 1994 Jul; 272(2):137-8. PubMed ID: 8015125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Reviewers' comments.
    J Appl Behav Anal; 1973; 6(3):532-9. PubMed ID: 16795437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effect of revealing authors' conflicts of interests in peer review: randomized controlled trial.
    John LK; Loewenstein G; Marder A; Callaham ML
    BMJ; 2019 Nov; 367():l5896. PubMed ID: 31694810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Peer review in medical journals: Beyond quality of reports towards transparency and public scrutiny of the process.
    Vercellini P; Buggio L; Viganò P; Somigliana E
    Eur J Intern Med; 2016 Jun; 31():15-9. PubMed ID: 27129625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Peer reviewers equally critique theory, method, and writing, with limited effect on the final content of accepted manuscripts.
    Stephen D
    Scientometrics; 2022; 127(6):3413-3435. PubMed ID: 35431366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.