288 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9371080)
1. Qualitative research articles: information for authors and peer reviewers.
Rowan M; Huston P
CMAJ; 1997 Nov; 157(10):1442-6. PubMed ID: 9371080
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The qualitative research methodology.
Saddler D
Gastroenterol Nurs; 2008; 31(1):72-4. PubMed ID: 18300830
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. How to critique qualitative research articles.
Forchuk C; Roberts J
Can J Nurs Res; 1993; 25(4):47-55; quiz 56. PubMed ID: 10603806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. How to assess rigour . . . or not in qualitative papers.
Sale JE
J Eval Clin Pract; 2008 Oct; 14(5):912-3. PubMed ID: 19018925
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Advice on writing an abstract for a scientific meeting and on the evaluation of abstracts by selection committees.
Taboulet P
Eur J Emerg Med; 2000 Mar; 7(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 10839383
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Critiquing research for use in practice.
Dale JC
J Pediatr Health Care; 2005; 19(3):183-6. PubMed ID: 15867836
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Upgrading our instructions for authors.
Schriger DL; Wears RL; Cooper RJ; Callaham ML
Ann Emerg Med; 2003 Apr; 41(4):565-7. PubMed ID: 12658258
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Thinking both inside and outside the box on measurement articles.
Froman RD; Schmitt MH
Res Nurs Health; 2003 Oct; 26(5):335-6. PubMed ID: 14579254
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Peer review of nursing research proposals.
Lindquist RD; Tracy MF; Treat-Jacobson D
Am J Crit Care; 1995 Jan; 4(1):59-65. PubMed ID: 7894558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Advice for authors. Four principal reasons for manuscript rejection].
Clarke SP
Perspect Infirm; 2006; 3(3):35-9. PubMed ID: 16480058
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Quality of published articles in CAJM.
Nystrom L
Cent Afr J Med; 1998 Oct; 44(10):264-5. PubMed ID: 10101438
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Anatomy of a research paper.
Branson RD
Respir Care; 2004 Oct; 49(10):1222-8. PubMed ID: 15447807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Understanding and critiquing qualitative research papers.
Lee P
Nurs Times; 2006 Jul 18-24; 102(29):30-2. PubMed ID: 16895246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Simplifying the process of research review for the novice researcher.
Callihan D
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs; 2008; 35(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 18199936
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Publishing in English-language journals.
Davis AJ; Tschudin V
Nurs Ethics; 2007 May; 14(3):425-30. PubMed ID: 17459824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reviewing peer review: the three reviewers you meet at submission time.
Clarke SP
Can J Nurs Res; 2006 Dec; 38(4):5-9. PubMed ID: 17342873
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Preparing and presenting a research poster.
Wipke-Tevis DD; Williams DA
J Vasc Nurs; 2002 Dec; 20(4):138-42. PubMed ID: 12469074
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Critical appraisal. 8. Appraising qualitative research.
Thompson C
NT Learn Curve; 1999 Nov; 3(9):7-9. PubMed ID: 10827680
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Standardising the methodology of research into chronic wounds.
Fletcher J
Prof Nurse; 2003 Apr; 18(8):455-7. PubMed ID: 12715538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
