Similar articles

• Peers review, editors decide, and then, what?

  Schachat AP. Schachat AP. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007 Apr;143(4):677-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.01.023. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007. PMID: 17386274 No abstract available.
• Who'd be a referee?

  [No authors listed] [No authors listed] Nat Nanotechnol. 2008 Mar;3(3):119. doi: 10.1038/nnano.2008.61. Nat Nanotechnol. 2008. PMID: 18654473 No abstract available.
• Editor's report.

  Elliott A. Elliott A. Nucl Med Commun. 2008 Jan;29(1):1-3. doi: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3282f4758e. Nucl Med Commun. 2008. PMID: 18049090 No abstract available.
• New developments in the use of citation analysis in research evaluation.

  Moed HF. Moed HF. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz). 2009 Jan-Feb;57(1):13-8. doi: 10.1007/s00005-009-0001-5. Epub 2009 Feb 14. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz). 2009. PMID: 19219533 Review.
• The distribution of forensic journals, reflections on authorship practices, peer-review and role of the impact factor.

  Jones AW. Jones AW. Forensic Sci Int. 2007 Jan 17;165(2-3):115-28. doi: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.05.013. Epub 2006 Jun 19. Forensic Sci Int. 2007. PMID: 16784827 Review.