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 *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8316120)

  • 1. On looking at ourselves.
    Med J Aust; 1993 Jul; 159(1):6. PubMed ID: 8316120
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Journal evaluation: why and how?
    Satyanarayana K
    Indian J Gastroenterol; 1993 Apr; 12 Suppl 1():S5-8. PubMed ID: 8325673
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Publishing opportunities for nurses: a comparison of 92 U.S. journals.
    Swanson EA; McCloskey JC; Bodensteiner A
    Image J Nurs Sch; 1991; 23(1):33-8. PubMed ID: 2022386
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Towards the impact factor.
    Kevelaitis E; Grabauskas V
    Medicina (Kaunas); 2007; 43(2):91-5. PubMed ID: 17329942
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [How to make out misuse of statistics in manuscripts or papers quickly and accurately].
    Hu LP; Liu HG
    Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao; 2007 Jan; 5(1):97-100. PubMed ID: 17214946
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Case reports: can we improve?
    Childs JD
    J Orthop Sports Phys Ther; 2004 Feb; 34(2):44-6. PubMed ID: 15106663
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Peer review and the fate of manuscripts.
    Frey JJ
    Fam Med; 1985; 17(1):3. PubMed ID: 3843084
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Does editorial peer review work?
    Lock S
    Ann Intern Med; 1994 Jul; 121(1):60-1. PubMed ID: 8198351
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Enhancements in peer review of manuscripts by the Journal.
    Liesegang TJ
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2014 Jul; 158(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 24929824
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Making the most of peer review.
    Nat Neurosci; 2000 Jul; 3(7):629. PubMed ID: 10862686
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Art of Peer Review.
    Fraser D
    Neonatal Netw; 2018 Jul; 37(4):195-196. PubMed ID: 30567915
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Another man's poison.
    Hersh W
    MD Comput; 1993; 10(2):73-4. PubMed ID: 8469097
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Perfecting peer review?
    Nat Med; 2011 Jan; 17(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 21217648
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 15. A Vibrant Community of Readers, Authors and Reviewers: A Medical Editors' Necessity and a Challenge for Medical Education.
    Escada P; Donato H; Villanueva T
    Acta Med Port; 2019 Mar; 32(3):171-172. PubMed ID: 30946784
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Is Peer Review Still Anonymous?
    Ritchie AI; Polkey MI; Donaldson GC; Wedzicha JA
    Am J Respir Crit Care Med; 2018 Jul; 198(2):278-280. PubMed ID: 29537300
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Believing everything you read.
    Katerndahl DA
    Fam Pract Res J; 1991 Dec; 11(4):343-7. PubMed ID: 1767680
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Peer Review of Scholarly Work.
    Brandon D; McGrath JM
    Adv Neonatal Care; 2018 Dec; 18(6):423-424. PubMed ID: 30499821
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The undercover academic keeping tabs on 'predatory' publishing.
    Singh Chawla D
    Nature; 2018 Mar; 555(7697):422-423. PubMed ID: 29565386
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The peer review process: Giving and receiving advice.
    Jull G; Moore A
    Musculoskelet Sci Pract; 2019 Apr; 40():v. PubMed ID: 30773425
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.