Literature DB >> 28148641

The "new realities" of peer review.

Bill J Yates1.   

Abstract

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28148641      PMCID: PMC5338619          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00058.2017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


× No keyword cloud information.
  5 in total

1.  NIH mulls rules for validating key results.

Authors:  Meredith Wadman
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Let's make peer review scientific.

Authors:  Drummond Rennie
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Reporting standards: Rigid guidelines may restrict research.

Authors:  Richard Morris
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Peer review: Close inspection.

Authors:  Quirin Schiermeier
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2016-05-12       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research.

Authors:  Story C Landis; Susan G Amara; Khusru Asadullah; Chris P Austin; Robi Blumenstein; Eileen W Bradley; Ronald G Crystal; Robert B Darnell; Robert J Ferrante; Howard Fillit; Robert Finkelstein; Marc Fisher; Howard E Gendelman; Robert M Golub; John L Goudreau; Robert A Gross; Amelie K Gubitz; Sharon E Hesterlee; David W Howells; John Huguenard; Katrina Kelner; Walter Koroshetz; Dimitri Krainc; Stanley E Lazic; Michael S Levine; Malcolm R Macleod; John M McCall; Richard T Moxley; Kalyani Narasimhan; Linda J Noble; Steve Perrin; John D Porter; Oswald Steward; Ellis Unger; Ursula Utz; Shai D Silberberg
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 49.962

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.