Similar articles

• Evaluating the surgery literature: can standardizing peer-review today predict manuscript impact tomorrow?

  Sosa JA, Mehta P, Thomas DC, Berland G, Gross C, McNamara RL, Rosenthal R, Udelsman R, Bravata DM, Roman SA. Sosa JA, et al. Ann Surg. 2009 Jul;250(1):152-8. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181ad8905. Ann Surg. 2009. PMID: 19561471
• Peer review--still the well-functioning quality control and enhancer in scientific research.

  Isohanni M. Isohanni M. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2005 Sep;112(3):165-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2005.00601.x. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2005. PMID: 16095469 No abstract available.
• How do peer reviewers of journal articles perform? Evaluating the reviewers with a sham paper.

  Kumar PD. Kumar PD. J Assoc Physicians India. 1999 Feb;47(2):198-200. J Assoc Physicians India. 1999. PMID: 10999090
• [Quality control in clinical trials].

  Fukushima M. Fukushima M. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1996 Jan;23(2):172-82. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1996. PMID: 8611045 Review. Japanese.
• Institutional review board consideration of chart reviews, case reports, and observational studies.

  Neff MJ. Neff MJ. Respir Care. 2008 Oct;53(10):1350-3. Respir Care. 2008. PMID: 18811999 Review.