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 *

129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 39373042)

  • 1. The Importance of Peer Review.
    Parse RR
    Nurs Sci Q; 2024 Oct; 37(4):309. PubMed ID: 39373042
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Are peer reviewers encouraged to use reporting guidelines? A survey of 116 health research journals.
    Hirst A; Altman DG
    PLoS One; 2012; 7(4):e35621. PubMed ID: 22558178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A scoping review protocol on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals.
    Glonti K; Cauchi D; Cobo E; Boutron I; Moher D; Hren D
    BMJ Open; 2017 Oct; 7(10):e017468. PubMed ID: 29061619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Navigating manuscript assessment: The new practitioner's guide to primary literature peer review.
    Smith DV; Stokes LB; Marx K; Aitken SL
    J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2019 Jan; 25(1):94-100. PubMed ID: 29498322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Tips for writing and publishing an article.
    Nahata MC
    Ann Pharmacother; 2008 Feb; 42(2):273-7. PubMed ID: 18212252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A different method of teaching peer review systems.
    Lightfoot JT
    Am J Physiol; 1998 Jun; 274(6 Pt 2):S57-61. PubMed ID: 9841565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Accuracy in detecting inadequate research reporting by early career peer reviewers using an online CONSORT-based peer-review tool (COBPeer) versus the usual peer-review process: a cross-sectional diagnostic study.
    Chauvin A; Ravaud P; Moher D; Schriger D; Hopewell S; Shanahan D; Alam S; Baron G; Regnaux JP; Crequit P; Martinez V; Riveros C; Le Cleach L; Recchioni A; Altman DG; Boutron I
    BMC Med; 2019 Nov; 17(1):205. PubMed ID: 31744489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Peer Review of a Manuscript Submission: A How-To Guide for Effective and Efficient Commentary.
    Allen LA; Ho PM
    Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes; 2017 Dec; 10(12):. PubMed ID: 29237748
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Improving the peer-review process from the perspective of an author and reviewer.
    Faggion CM
    Br Dent J; 2016 Feb; 220(4):167-8. PubMed ID: 26917302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Peer review of medical journals: safeguarding the patient.
    D'Ambrosia R
    Orthopedics; 1990 May; 13(5):505. PubMed ID: 2352898
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Peer review: A critical cog in the scholarship wheel.
    Zavod RM
    Curr Pharm Teach Learn; 2018; 10(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 29248064
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The Value and Process of Peer Review.
    Dunn D
    AORN J; 2018 Jun; 107(6):661-664. PubMed ID: 29851050
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. On peer review.
    Nativio DG
    J Am Acad Nurse Pract; 1991; 3(1):1. PubMed ID: 2007055
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Submission of articles to Vaccine: a fast and fair peer review process.
    de Hon F; Poland GA
    Vaccine; 2013 Jul; 31(32):3207-8. PubMed ID: 23726824
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. How does peer review work?
    Aaron L
    Radiol Technol; 2008; 79(6):553-4. PubMed ID: 18650531
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Quality in peer review.
    Commun Biol; 2019; 2():352. PubMed ID: 31552304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Minimizing the three stages of publication bias.
    Chalmers TC; Frank CS; Reitman D
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1392-5. PubMed ID: 2406473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The history and practice of peer review.
    Chapelle FH
    Ground Water; 2014; 52(1):1. PubMed ID: 24266884
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Refereed journals.
    Shaughnessy AF
    J Am Board Fam Pract; 1989; 2(4):292-3. PubMed ID: 2801200
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.