Upgrading our instructions for authors.
作者信息
Schriger David L, Wears Robert L, Cooper Richelle J, Callaham Michael L
出版信息
Ann Emerg Med. 2003 Apr;41(4):565-7. doi: 10.1067/mem.2003.134.
PMID:12658258
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Upgrading our instructions for authors.更新我们给作者的指南。
Ann Emerg Med. 2003 Apr;41(4):565-7. doi: 10.1067/mem.2003.134.
2
[Advice for authors. Four principal reasons for manuscript rejection].[给作者的建议。稿件被拒的四个主要原因]
Perspect Infirm. 2006 Jan-Feb;3(3):35-9.
3
Do it right the first time: advice for cornea authors.一次做对：给角膜领域作者的建议。
Cornea. 2014 Sep;33(9):879. doi: 10.1097/ICO.0000000000000211.
4
If it's too good to be true, it probably is.如果好得令人难以置信，很可能就有问题。
Am J Nurs. 2009 Dec;109(12):7. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000365160.71471.42.
5
The role of editors, reviewers and authors in improving the journal quality.编辑、审稿人和作者在提高期刊质量方面的作用。
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2011 Jan;12(1):1-2. doi: 10.2459/JCM.0b013e3283426332.
6
Publishing in English-language journals.在英文期刊上发表文章。
Nurs Ethics. 2007 May;14(3):425-30. doi: 10.1177/0969733007075891.
7
Consider the source.考虑一下来源。
Am J Nurs. 2009 Apr;109(4):7. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000348565.33769.54.
8
How to review a paper for Heart.如何为《心脏》杂志审阅一篇论文。
Heart. 2015 Jan;101(1):3-4. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2014-307135.
9
Meaningful peer review is integral to quality science and should provide benefits to the authors and reviewers alike.有意义的同行评审是高质量科学不可或缺的一部分，应该对作者和评审人员都有益处。
Andrology. 2013 Jul;1(4):531-2. doi: 10.1111/j.2047-2927.2013.00105.x.
10
Reporting research results: recommendations for improving communication.报告研究结果：改善沟通的建议。
Ann Emerg Med. 2003 Apr;41(4):561-4. doi: 10.1067/mem.2003.135.
引用本文的文献
1
Content and communication: how can peer review provide helpful feedback about the writing?内容与交流：同行评审如何能就写作提供有益的反馈？
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Jan 31;8:3. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-3.
Zotero 插件