Crossref Citations

This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

Burnard, Philip and Hannigan, Ben 2001. Reviewing the review process: towards good practice in the peer review of manuscripts submitted to nursing journals. Nurse Education Today, Vol. 21, Issue. 3, p. 238.

Møller, Anders Pape and Jennions, Michael D. 2001. Testing and adjusting for publication bias. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Vol. 16, Issue. 10, p. 580.

El-Munshid, Hassan A. 2001. Evaluation of Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Annals of Saudi Medicine, Vol. 21, Issue. 5-6, p. 275.

Melero, R. and López-Santoveña, F. 2001. Referees’ Attitudes toward Open Peer Review and Electronic Transmission of Papers. Food Science and Technology International, Vol. 7, Issue. 6, p. 521.

Lawson, Edward E 2001. To Mask or Not-To-Mask. Journal of Perinatology, Vol. 21, Issue. 4, p. 213.

Lemann, Jacob 2002. Serving as a reviewer. Kidney International, Vol. 62, Issue. 3, p. 1081.

Posey, L. Michael 2002. Changes in JAPhA’s Peer Review System. Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association (1996), Vol. 42, Issue. 1, p. 8.

Wilkinson, Greg 2003. Editing the British Journal of Psychiatry. Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale, Vol. 12, Issue. 1, p. 5.

Eldredge, Jonathan D. 2003. The Randomised Controlled Trial design: unrecognized opportunities for health sciences librarianship. Health Information and Libraries Journal, Vol. 20, Issue. s1, p. 34.

Wilkinson, Greg 2003. Fare thee well — the Editor's last words. British Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 182, Issue. 6, p. 465.

Berghmans, T. Meert, A.P. Mascaux, C. Paesmans, M. Lafitte, J.J. and Sculier, J.P. 2003. Citation indexes do not reflect methodological quality in lung cancer randomised trials. Annals of Oncology, Vol. 14, Issue. 5, p. 715.

Dawson, Deborah 2004. Editorial. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, Vol. 20, Issue. 2, p. 59.

Bence, Valerie and Oppenheim, Charles 2004. The Influence of Peer Review on the Research Assessment Exercise. Journal of Information Science, Vol. 30, Issue. 4, p. 347.

Hewings, Martin 2004. An ?important contribution? or ?tiresome reading?? A study of evaluation in peer reviews of journal article submissions. Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol. 1, Issue. 3, p. 247.

PIOLAT, A and VAUCLAIR, J 2004. Le processus d'expertise éditoriale avant et avec Internet. Pratiques Psychologiques, Vol. 10, Issue. 3, p. 255.

Stamm, Thomas 2005. Head & Face Medicine – a new journal for 'intra-interdisciplinary' science. Why? When? Where?. Head & Face Medicine, Vol. 1, Issue. 1,

Kearney, Margaret H. and Freda, Margaret Comerford 2005. Nurse editors' views on the peer review process. Research in Nursing & Health, Vol. 28, Issue. 6, p. 444.

Kundzewicz, Zbigniew W. and Koutsoyiannis, Demetris 2005. Editorial—The peer-review system: prospects and challenges. Hydrological Sciences Journal, Vol. 50, Issue. 4,

Dellavalle, Robert P. 2006. Cultivating peer review. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, Vol. 55, Issue. 6, p. 1113.

Jefferson, T Rudin, M Brodney Folse, S Davidoff, F and Jefferson, Tom 2006. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.