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 *

231 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7613564)

  • 1. Avoiding the question approach: making direct comments in manuscript reviews.
    Johnson SH
    Nurse Author Ed; 1995; 5(3):7-10. PubMed ID: 7613564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. You're a published author!
    Wachs JE; Williamson G; Moore PV; Roy D; Childre F
    AAOHN J; 2010 Jun; 58(6):233-6. PubMed ID: 20677718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Tips for manuscript reviewers.
    Davidhizar R; Bechtel GA
    Nurse Author Ed; 2003; 13(3):1-4. PubMed ID: 12841086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Quality of manuscript reviews in nursing research.
    Henly SJ; Dougherty MC
    Nurs Outlook; 2009; 57(1):18-26. PubMed ID: 19150263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Revision of manuscripts for scholarly publication.
    Dowd SB; McElveny C
    Radiol Technol; 1997; 69(1):47-54. PubMed ID: 9323765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Revising a manuscript: ten principles to guide success for publication.
    Provenzale JM
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Dec; 195(6):W382-7. PubMed ID: 21098168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Duplicate publication, Part 2: A case analysis.
    Johnson SH
    Nurse Author Ed; 2002; 12(4):7-8. PubMed ID: 12374002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Does exchanging comments of Indian and non-Indian reviewers improve the quality of manuscript reviews?
    Das Sinha S; Sahni P; Nundy S
    Natl Med J India; 1999; 12(5):210-3. PubMed ID: 10613000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of reviewers selected by editors and reviewers suggested by authors.
    Rivara FP; Cummings P; Ringold S; Bergman AB; Joffe A; Christakis DA
    J Pediatr; 2007 Aug; 151(2):202-5. PubMed ID: 17643779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Nurse editors' views on the peer review process.
    Kearney MH; Freda MC
    Res Nurs Health; 2005 Dec; 28(6):444-52. PubMed ID: 16287058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Scientific composition and review of manuscripts for publication in peer-reviewed dental journals.
    Bayne SC; McGivney GP; Mazer SC
    J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Feb; 89(2):201-18. PubMed ID: 12616242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Publishing your findings.
    King KM; Price PM
    Can J Cardiovasc Nurs; 2003; 13(2):46-8. PubMed ID: 12802838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2008 Dec; 133 Suppl 7():S225-46. PubMed ID: 19034813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. After the critique: revise and resubmit your manuscript.
    Valente S
    Nurse Author Ed; 2005; 15(3):1-3. PubMed ID: 16189960
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Revising a book chapter written by a previous author.
    Tamburri LM; Hix CD; Sole ML
    Nurse Author Ed; 2002; 12(3):7-9. PubMed ID: 12092431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Caveats in the proficient preparation of an APA-style research manuscript for publication.
    Cash TF
    Body Image; 2009 Jan; 6(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 19059816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.