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.
4. Suggested reviewers: friends or foes? Zupanc GKH J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol; 2022 Jul; 208(4):463-466. PubMed ID: 35524786 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Conflicting interests involved in the process of publishing in biomedical journals. Igi R J BUON; 2015; 20(5):1373-7. PubMed ID: 26537088 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Does masking author identity improve peer review quality? A randomized controlled trial. PEER Investigators. Justice AC; Cho MK; Winker MA; Berlin JA; Rennie D JAMA; 1998 Jul; 280(3):240-2. PubMed ID: 9676668 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Recruitment of reviewers is becoming harder at some journals: a test of the influence of reviewer fatigue at six journals in ecology and evolution. Fox CW; Albert AYK; Vines TH Res Integr Peer Rev; 2017; 2():3. PubMed ID: 29451533 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [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]
10. What feedback do reviewers give when reviewing qualitative manuscripts? A focused mapping review and synthesis. Herber OR; Bradbury-Jones C; Böling S; Combes S; Hirt J; Koop Y; Nyhagen R; Veldhuizen JD; Taylor J BMC Med Res Methodol; 2020 May; 20(1):122. PubMed ID: 32423388 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Blind versus nonblind review: survey of selected medical journals. Cleary JD; Alexander B Drug Intell Clin Pharm; 1988; 22(7-8):601-2. PubMed ID: 3416750 [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. 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]
16. 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]
17. Fate of manuscripts declined by the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. Armstrong AW; Idriss SZ; Kimball AB; Bernhard JD J Am Acad Dermatol; 2008 Apr; 58(4):632-5. PubMed ID: 18249470 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Retrospective analysis of the quality of reports by author-suggested and non-author-suggested reviewers in journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models. Kowalczuk MK; Dudbridge F; Nanda S; Harriman SL; Patel J; Moylan EC BMJ Open; 2015 Sep; 5(9):e008707. PubMed ID: 26423855 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A retrospective analysis of submissions, acceptance rate, open peer review operations, and prepublication bias of the multidisciplinary open access journal Head & Face Medicine. Stamm T; Meyer U; Wiesmann HP; Kleinheinz J; Cehreli M; Cehreli ZC Head Face Med; 2007 Jun; 3():27. PubMed ID: 17562003 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Alphabetic bias in the selection of reviewers for the American Journal of Roentgenology. Richardson ML AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Dec; 191(6):W213-6. PubMed ID: 19020207 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]