相似文献
1
Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: here's a proposal for editors that may help reduce publication bias.关于发表偏倚研究中的发表偏倚综述：以下是一项给编辑们的建议，或许有助于减少发表偏倚。
BMJ. 2005 Sep 17;331(7517):638. doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7517.638-a.
2
Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: mandatory publication of data may help.关于发表偏倚研究中的发表偏倚综述：强制公开数据可能会有所帮助。
BMJ. 2005 Sep 17;331(7517):638. doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7517.638-b.
3
Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: meta-research on publication bias does not help transfer research results to patient care.关于发表偏倚研究中的发表偏倚综述：对发表偏倚的元研究无助于将研究结果转化为患者护理。
BMJ. 2005 Sep 17;331(7517):638. doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7517.638.
4
Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: systematic review is needed.关于发表偏倚研究中的发表偏倚综述：需要进行系统综述。
BMJ. 2005 Sep 17;331(7517):638. doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7517.638-c.
5
Review of publication bias in studies on publication bias: studies on publication bias are probably susceptible to the bias they study.关于发表偏倚研究中的发表偏倚综述：关于发表偏倚的研究可能易受其所研究的偏倚影响。
BMJ. 2005 Sep 17;331(7517):637-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7517.637-c.
6
Multi-authors' self-citation: a further impact factor bias?多位作者的自引：另一种影响因子偏差？
Cortex. 2008 Oct;44(9):1139-45. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2008.07.001. Epub 2008 Jul 6.
7
Systematic review of publication bias in studies on publication bias.关于发表偏倚研究中发表偏倚的系统评价。
BMJ. 2005 Aug 20;331(7514):433-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38478.497164.F7. Epub 2005 Jun 3.
8
The significance of the peer review process against the background of bias: priority ratings of reviewers and editors and the prediction of citation, the role of geographical bias.同行评审过程在偏见背景下的意义：评审人员和编辑的优先级评级以及引文预测、地域偏见的作用。
Cardiovasc Res. 2002 Dec;56(3):339-46. doi: 10.1016/s0008-6363(02)00712-5.
9
Assessment of publication bias in dental specialty journals.评估牙科学专业期刊中的发表偏倚。
J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2010 Dec;10(4):207-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2010.09.014.
10
Picking your peers.挑选你的同行。
J Invest Dermatol. 2006 Jul;126(7):1429-30. doi: 10.1038/sj.jid.5700387.
引用本文的文献
1
Incentives for Research Effort: An Evolutionary Model of Publication Markets with Double-Blind and Open Review.研究努力的激励因素：具有双盲评审和公开评审的出版市场演化模型
Comput Econ. 2023;61(4):1433-1476. doi: 10.1007/s10614-022-10250-w. Epub 2022 Apr 8.
2
Results Blind Science Publishing.结果：盲科学出版。 （此译文不太符合正常逻辑，因为原英文表述比较简短模糊，可能是特定语境下的内容，仅按字面翻译如此。）
Basic Appl Soc Psych. 2017;39(5):239-246. doi: 10.1080/01973533.2017.1336093. Epub 2017 Nov 8.
3
The perceived feasibility of methods to reduce publication bias.降低发表偏倚方法的感知可行性。
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 24;12(10):e0186472. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186472. eCollection 2017.
4
Barriers to and facilitators of interventions to counter publication bias: thematic analysis of scholarly articles and stakeholder interviews.应对发表偏倚干预措施的障碍与促进因素：学术文章及利益相关者访谈的主题分析
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Nov 13;14:551. doi: 10.1186/s12913-014-0551-z.
5
Role of editorial and peer review processes in publication bias: analysis of drug trials submitted to eight medical journals.编辑和同行评审过程在发表偏倚中的作用：对提交给八家医学期刊的药物试验的分析
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 12;9(8):e104846. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0104846. eCollection 2014.
6
Invited commentary: Off-roading with social epidemiology--exploration, causation, translation.特邀评论：社会流行病学的越野之旅——探索、因果关系、转化。
Am J Epidemiol. 2013 Sep 15;178(6):858-63. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwt145. Epub 2013 Sep 5.
本文引用的文献
1
Systematic review of publication bias in studies on publication bias.关于发表偏倚研究中发表偏倚的系统评价。
BMJ. 2005 Aug 20;331(7514):433-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38478.497164.F7. Epub 2005 Jun 3.
2
Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on meta-analyses.发表偏倚对荟萃分析影响的实证评估。
BMJ. 2000 Jun 10;320(7249):1574-7. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7249.1574.
Zotero 插件