生物医学审稿和全球交流国际会议介绍

[1] Purcell GP,Davidoff F.Changes during peer review: character-izing the evolution of a c1inical paper.In: Proceedings of the In-ternational Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and GlobalCommunications. Prague . 1997

[2] Lundberg GD,Paul M,Fritz H.A comparison of the opinionsof recognized experts and ordinary readers as to what topics ageneral medical should address.In: Proceedings of the Interna-tional Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Globl Communications. Prague . 1997

[3] Drenth JPH.Professors responsible for increase in authorship.In: Proceedtogs of the International Congress on Biomedical PeerReview and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[4] van Rooyen S,Godlee F,Evans S,et al.The effect of blindingand unmasking on the quality of peer review f a randomized controlled trial.In: Proceedings of the International Congress OnBiomedical Peer Review and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[5] Godlee F,Gale CR,Martyn CN.The effect on the quality of pe-er review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their re-portst a randomized controlled trial.In: Proceedings of the Inter-national Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Global Communicalions. Prague . 1997

[6] Justice AC. Cho M K. Winker MA,et al.Masking author iden-tity in peer review: does it improve peer-review quality? InProceedings of the International Congress on Biomedical PeerReview and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[7] Link AM.Papers submitted from outside and inside the UnitedStates: an analysis of reviewer bias.In: Proceeditns of the International Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[8] Garrow J,Butterfield M,Marshall J,et al.Amateur editors.In:Proceedings of the International Congress on Biomedical PeerReview and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[9] Flanagin F,Phillips S,Fontanarosa P,et al.Honorary authors,ghost authors, and medical writers in peer-reviewed medicaljournals.In: Proceedings of Ihe International Congress onBiomedical Peer Review and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[10] Chrke M.Chalmers 1 The quality of discussion sections in reports of controlled trials published by five leading general medi-cal journals In:Proceedings of the International Congress onBiomedical Peer Review and Global Communications. Prague .

[1] Purcell GP,Davidoff F.Changes during peer review: character-izing the evolution of a c1inical paper.In: Proceedings of the In-ternational Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and GlobalCommunications. Prague . 1997

[2] Lundberg GD,Paul M,Fritz H.A comparison of the opinionsof recognized experts and ordinary readers as to what topics ageneral medical should address.In: Proceedings of the Interna-tional Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Globl Communications. Prague . 1997

[3] Drenth JPH.Professors responsible for increase in authorship.In: Proceedtogs of the International Congress on Biomedical PeerReview and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[4] van Rooyen S,Godlee F,Evans S,et al.The effect of blindingand unmasking on the quality of peer review f a randomized controlled trial.In: Proceedings of the International Congress OnBiomedical Peer Review and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[5] Godlee F,Gale CR,Martyn CN.The effect on the quality of pe-er review of blinding reviewers and asking them to sign their re-portst a randomized controlled trial.In: Proceedings of the Inter-national Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Global Communicalions. Prague . 1997

[6] Justice AC. Cho M K. Winker MA,et al.Masking author iden-tity in peer review: does it improve peer-review quality? InProceedings of the International Congress on Biomedical PeerReview and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[7] Link AM.Papers submitted from outside and inside the UnitedStates: an analysis of reviewer bias.In: Proceeditns of the International Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[8] Garrow J,Butterfield M,Marshall J,et al.Amateur editors.In:Proceedings of the International Congress on Biomedical PeerReview and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[9] Flanagin F,Phillips S,Fontanarosa P,et al.Honorary authors,ghost authors, and medical writers in peer-reviewed medicaljournals.In: Proceedings of Ihe International Congress onBiomedical Peer Review and Global Communications. Prague . 1997

[10] Chrke M.Chalmers 1 The quality of discussion sections in reports of controlled trials published by five leading general medi-cal journals In:Proceedings of the International Congress onBiomedical Peer Review and Global Communications. Prague .