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 *

211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9707997)

  • 1. [The evaluation of medical research].
    Malacara JM
    Rev Invest Clin; 1997; 49(4):303-8. PubMed ID: 9707997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Common statistical and research design problems in manuscripts submitted to high-impact psychiatry journals: what editors and reviewers want authors to know.
    Harris AH; Reeder R; Hyun JK
    J Psychiatr Res; 2009 Oct; 43(15):1231-4. PubMed ID: 19435635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Study design, originality and overall consistency influence acceptance or rejection of manuscripts submitted to the Journal.
    Turcotte C; Drolet P; Girard M
    Can J Anaesth; 2004; 51(6):549-56. PubMed ID: 15197116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The factors considered by editors of plastic surgery journals in evaluating submitted manuscripts.
    Caulfield RH; Maleki-Tabrizi A; Pleat JM; Tyler MP
    Aesthetic Plast Surg; 2008 Mar; 32(2):353-8. PubMed ID: 18058163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The pattern of publishing previously rejected articles in selected journals.
    Whitman N; Eyre S
    Fam Med; 1985; 17(1):26-8. PubMed ID: 3843082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Early editorial manuscript screening versus obligate peer review: a randomized trial.
    Johnston SC; Lowenstein DH; Ferriero DM; Messing RO; Oksenberg JR; Hauser SL
    Ann Neurol; 2007 Apr; 61(4):A10-2. PubMed ID: 17444512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparison of authors publishing in two groups of U.S. medical journals.
    Weller AC
    Bull Med Libr Assoc; 1996 Jul; 84(3):359-66. PubMed ID: 8883984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Fate of manuscripts declined by the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
    Armstrong AW; Idriss SZ; Kimball AB; Bernhard JD
    J Am Acad Dermatol; 2008 Apr; 58(4):632-5. PubMed ID: 18249470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of cardiovascular grant-in-aid applications by peer review: influence of internal and external reviewers and committees.
    Hodgson C
    Can J Cardiol; 1995 Nov; 11(10):864-8. PubMed ID: 7489524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Reviewing scientific manuscripts: how much statistical knowledge should a reviewer really know?
    Morton JP
    Adv Physiol Educ; 2009 Mar; 33(1):7-9. PubMed ID: 19261753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Journal policy on ethics in scientific publication.
    Callaham ML
    Ann Emerg Med; 2003 Jan; 41(1):82-9. PubMed ID: 12514687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Shared responsibility in expert review of original articles].
    Shashok K
    Rev Neurol; 1997 Dec; 25(148):1946-50. PubMed ID: 9528039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [The reviewers' review].
    Rabinerson D; Horowitz E; Peled Y
    Harefuah; 2006 Aug; 145(8):587-91, 630. PubMed ID: 16983843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Evaluation of social relevance of applied health research: a rough indicator may be the significance of publishing in national professional journals].
    Bouter LM; Knottnerus JA
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Jun; 144(24):1178-83. PubMed ID: 10876699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Author perception of peer review.
    Gibson M; Spong CY; Simonsen SE; Martin S; Scott JR
    Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Sep; 112(3):646-52. PubMed ID: 18757664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Conflicts of interest in medical science: peer usage, peer review and 'CoI consultancy'.
    Charlton BG
    Med Hypotheses; 2004; 63(2):181-6. PubMed ID: 15236772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. How do peer reviewers of journal articles perform? Evaluating the reviewers with a sham paper.
    Kumar PD
    J Assoc Physicians India; 1999 Feb; 47(2):198-200. PubMed ID: 10999090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Publication ethics.
    Morton NS
    Paediatr Anaesth; 2009 Oct; 19(10):1011-3. PubMed ID: 19619189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.