Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.12688/f1000research.7342.1 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.12688/f1000research.7342.1 C4669999!4669999 !26675931     free     free     free Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=26675931 &cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215 Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\26675931 .jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117       F1000Res 2015 ; 4 (ä): 1244 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=26675931 |t=2015. On the pitfalls of peer review |pdf=|usr=}}{{26675931 }} gab.com Text On the pitfalls of peer review JO: F1000Res http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26675931 #FOAvip The review process of academic, scientific research and its basic tenets is considered, thereby distinguishing between (i) reviewing of manuscripts to be published in the scientific literature, (ii) reviewing of research proposals to be financed by funding agencies, (iii) reviewing of educational or research institutions with respect to their proper functioning, and (iv) reviewing of scientists with the aim of appointing or tenuring faculty. Twit Text FOAVip On the pitfalls of peer review ????F1000Res http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26675931 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=26675931 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|26675931 }}</ref> On the pitfalls of peer review #MMPMID26675931 van Gunsteren W F1000Res 2015[]; 4 (ä): 1244 PMID26675931 show ga The review process of academic, scientific research and its basic tenets is considered, thereby distinguishing between (i) reviewing of manuscripts to be published in the scientific literature, (ii) reviewing of research proposals to be financed by funding agencies, (iii) reviewing of educational or research institutions with respect to their proper functioning, and (iv) reviewing of scientists with the aim of appointing or tenuring faculty. äOn the pitfalls of peer review (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing