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 *

243 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9850221)

  • 1. Peer review and editorial decision-making.
    Howard L; Wilkinson G
    Br J Psychiatry; 1998 Aug; 173():110-3; discussion 114-5. PubMed ID: 9850221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Write a scientific paper (WASP): Editor's perspective of submissions and dealing with editors.
    Cuschieri S; Vassallo J
    Early Hum Dev; 2019 Feb; 129():93-95. PubMed ID: 30578111
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Editorial peer reviewers' recommendations at a general medical journal: are they reliable and do editors care?
    Kravitz RL; Franks P; Feldman MD; Gerrity M; Byrne C; Tierney WM
    PLoS One; 2010 Apr; 5(4):e10072. PubMed ID: 20386704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Peer review in a small and a big medical journal: case study of the Croatian Medical Journal and the Lancet.
    Marusić A; Lukić IK; Marusić M; McNamee D; Sharp D; Horton R
    Croat Med J; 2002 Jun; 43(3):286-9. PubMed ID: 12035133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Manuscript Review at the Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition: The Impact of Reviewers on Editor Decisions.
    Kumar P; Ravindra A; Wang Y; Belli DC; Heyman MB; Gupta SK
    J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr; 2021 Nov; 73(5):567-571. PubMed ID: 34173794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Peer-review and editorial process of the Ethiopian Medical Journal: ten years assessment of the status of submitted manuscripts.
    Enquselassie F
    Ethiop Med J; 2013 Apr; 51(2):95-103. PubMed ID: 24079153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A peek behind the curtain: peer review and editorial decision making at Stroke.
    Sposato LA; Ovbiagele B; Johnston SC; Fisher M; Saposnik G;
    Ann Neurol; 2014 Aug; 76(2):151-8. PubMed ID: 25043350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The relationship between a reviewer's recommendation and editorial decision of manuscripts submitted for publication in obstetrics.
    Vintzileos AM; Ananth CV; Odibo AO; Chauhan SP; Smulian JC; Oyelese Y
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Dec; 211(6):703.e1-5. PubMed ID: 24983685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reviewer selection biases editorial decisions on manuscripts.
    Hausmann L; Schweitzer B; Middleton FA; Schulz JB
    J Neurochem; 2018 Jan; ():. PubMed ID: 29377133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Analysis of submissions, editorial and peer-review process, and outcome of manuscripts submitted to the
    Gupta V; Bhatia R; Pathak M; Ramam M
    Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol; 2020; 86(5):519-525. PubMed ID: 32167071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Pitfalls and successes of peer review in neurosurgery.
    Laws ER; Pait TG; Jane JA
    J Neurosurg; 1997 Dec; 87(6):972-6. PubMed ID: 9384415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effect of acceptance or rejection on the author's evaluation of peer review of medical manuscripts.
    Garfunkel JM; Lawson EE; Hamrick HJ; Ulshen MH
    JAMA; 1990 Mar; 263(10):1376-8. PubMed ID: 2304217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Differences in review quality and recommendations for publication between peer reviewers suggested by authors or by editors.
    Schroter S; Tite L; Hutchings A; Black N
    JAMA; 2006 Jan; 295(3):314-7. PubMed ID: 16418467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. What Does It Take to Change an Editor's Mind? Identifying Minimally Important Difference Thresholds for Peer Reviewer Rating Scores of Scientific Articles.
    Callaham M; John LK
    Ann Emerg Med; 2018 Sep; 72(3):314-318.e2. PubMed ID: 29310871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An audit of the editorial process at the
    Fernandes GJ; Pai SA
    Indian J Cancer; 2021; 58(2):165-170. PubMed ID: 34100409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Characteristics of peer reviewed clinical medicine journals.
    Eldredge J
    Med Ref Serv Q; 1999; 18(2):13-26. PubMed ID: 10557841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Making the First Cut: An Analysis of Academic Medicine Editors' Reasons for Not Sending Manuscripts Out for External Peer Review.
    Meyer HS; Durning SJ; Sklar DP; Maggio LA
    Acad Med; 2018 Mar; 93(3):464-470. PubMed ID: 28767495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [What do reviewers look for in 'original articles' submitted for publication in the Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde?].
    Tjon MJ; Sang F; Overbeke AJ; Lockefeer JH
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1996 Nov; 140(47):2349-52. PubMed ID: 8984399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.