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.
97 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8618511)
1. Revising the research record. Goodman NW Lancet; 1996 Feb; 347(8999):474. PubMed ID: 8618511 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Revising the research record. Horton R Lancet; 1995 Dec; 346(8990):1610-1. PubMed ID: 7500757 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Is lumping peer-reviewed case reports together with non-peer-reviewed comments for publication as letters to the editor appropriate? Cappell MS Am J Gastroenterol; 2010 Aug; 105(8):1901; author reply 1901-2. PubMed ID: 20686469 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. How to write a paper: revising your manuscript. Su'a B; MacFater WS; Hill AG ANZ J Surg; 2017 Mar; 87(3):195-197. PubMed ID: 27905185 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Writing a letter to the editor. Dotson B Am J Health Syst Pharm; 2013 Jan; 70(2):96-7. PubMed ID: 23292262 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Reviewer assistance: how important is the invitation letter? Berquist TH AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Sep; 203(3):467. PubMed ID: 25148147 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Predatory journals: Ban predators from the scientific record. Beall J Nature; 2016 Jun; 534(7607):326. PubMed ID: 27306178 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Scientific dialogue: vestige of the past or hope for the future? Kressel HY Radiology; 2011 Jan; 258(1):12-4. PubMed ID: 21222291 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Tackling waste in publishing through portable peer review. Bell GP; Kvajo M BMC Biol; 2018 Dec; 16(1):146. PubMed ID: 30558673 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The peer review process (aka peer reviewology). Yucha CB Biol Res Nurs; 2002 Oct; 4(2):71-2. PubMed ID: 12408212 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Journals: how to decide what's worth publishing. Jefferson T; Shashok K Nature; 2003 Jan; 421(6920):209-10. PubMed ID: 12529609 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Peer review should continue after publication. Liesegang TJ Am J Ophthalmol; 2010 Mar; 149(3):359-60. PubMed ID: 20172061 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. The hidden work of a journal editor. Kearney MH Res Nurs Health; 2018 Feb; 41(1):3-5. PubMed ID: 29360181 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Peer review and refereeing in science. Lore W East Afr Med J; 1995 May; 72(5):335-7. PubMed ID: 7555893 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Ensuring the quality of peer-review process. Afifi M Saudi Med J; 2006 Aug; 27(8):1253. PubMed ID: 16883466 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. [Significance of letters published in the Dutch Journal of Medicine, 1997/98]. Mahesh S; Kabos M; Walvoort HC; Overbeke AJ Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2001 Mar; 145(11):531-5. PubMed ID: 11284288 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The peer-review process in medical publishing: a reviewer's perspective. Sellke FW J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2003 Dec; 126(6):1683-5. PubMed ID: 14688671 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Dealing with Consequences of Irreproducibility and Modifying the Published Literature: Retractions versus Revisions. Glass DJ; Flier JS Cell Metab; 2017 Nov; 26(5):695-696. PubMed ID: 29117541 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Predatory publishing: What editors need to know. INANE Predatory Publishing Practices Collaborative CANNT J; 2015; 25(1):8-10. PubMed ID: 26882636 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]