相似文献
1
Embracing the principles of the San Francisco Declaration of Research Assessment: Robert Balaban's editorial.秉持《旧金山科研评估宣言》的原则：罗伯特·巴拉班的社论。
J Gen Physiol. 2013 Sep;142(3):175. doi: 10.1085/jgp.201311077.
2
Dear DORA.亲爱的多拉。
EMBO Rep. 2013 Nov;14(11):947. doi: 10.1038/embor.2013.157.
3
Commentaries on peer review and the evolving journal.同行评审与不断发展的期刊述评
J Clin Psychiatry. 2009 Nov;70(11):1598. doi: 10.4088/JCP.09f05755whi.
4
The San Francisco declaration on research assessment.《旧金山科研评估宣言》
J Exp Biol. 2013 Jun 15;216(Pt 12):2163-4. doi: 10.1242/jeb.090779. Epub 2013 May 16.
5
The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment.《旧金山科研评估宣言》
Dis Model Mech. 2013 Jul;6(4):869-70. doi: 10.1242/dmm.012955. Epub 2013 May 20.
6
H-index and impact factors: assessing the clinical impact of researchers and specialist journals.H指数与影响因子：评估研究人员及专业期刊的临床影响力
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Dec;32(7):843-5. doi: 10.1002/uog.6266.
7
[The San Francisco Declaration--impact factor must not be used to assess an scientists contributions].[《旧金山宣言》——影响因子不得用于评估科学家的贡献]
Sheng Li Ke Xue Jin Zhan. 2013 Jun;44(3):161.
8
Biomedical publishing. Secretive and subjective, peer review proves resistant to study.生物医学出版。同行评审隐秘且主观，事实证明难以对其进行研究。
Science. 2013 Sep 20;341(6152):1331. doi: 10.1126/science.341.6152.1331.
9
Bias in the Peer Review Process: Can We Do Better?同行评审过程中的偏见：我们能否做得更好？
Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jun;133(6):1081-1083. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003260.
10
Anonymous but fully recognised.
Waste Manag. 2010 Jan;30(1):1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2009.10.010. Epub 2009 Nov 7.
引用本文的文献
1
Comprehensive Researcher Achievement Model (CRAM): a framework for measuring researcher achievement, impact and influence derived from a systematic literature review of metrics and models.综合研究者成就模型（CRAM）：一种用于衡量研究者成就、影响和作用的框架，源自对相关指标和模型的系统文献综述。
BMJ Open. 2019 Mar 30;9(3):e025320. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025320.
本文引用的文献
1
A perverted view of "impact".对“影响”的一种扭曲观点。
Science. 2013 Jun 14;340(6138):1265. doi: 10.1126/science.1240456.
Zotero 插件