Thanks to the Reviewers of the Neurointervention.

07:00 EST 14th February 2020 | BioPortfolio

Summary of "Thanks to the Reviewers of the Neurointervention."

No Summary Available


Journal Details

This article was published in the following journal.

Name: Neurointervention
ISSN: 2093-9043


DeepDyve research library

PubMed Articles [208 Associated PubMed Articles listed on BioPortfolio]

Laboratory Predictors of Contrast-Induced Nephropathy After Neurointervention: a Prospective 3-Year Observational Study.

The purpose of this study was to assess the natural course of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) and to determine the predictive abilities of preprocedural high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP)...

A Shorter Invitation Period for Manuscript Reviewers: Impact on Time to Completion of Reviews.

The objective of this article was to study the effect of decreasing the time allowed an () reviewer to consider an invitation to review on time for two invitees to accept an invitation and time for b...

Usefulness of a Novel Technique to Make Up for a Deficiency in Transradial Neurointervention with a 6-Fr Simmonds Guiding Sheath: Original Experience with "Subclavian Artery Anchoring" Technique.

The benefits of the right transradial approach for anterior circulation lesions with a 6-Fr Simmonds guiding sheath have been reported; however, this technique was anatomically challenging in type I a...

Error rates of human reviewers during abstract screening in systematic reviews.

Automated approaches to improve the efficiency of systematic reviews are greatly needed. When testing any of these approaches, the criterion standard of comparison (gold standard) is usually human rev...

Training patients to review scientific reports for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: an observational study.

The peer review of completed Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) funded research includes reviews from patient reviewers (patients, caregivers, and patient advocates). Very little is ...

Clinical Trials [19 Associated Clinical Trials listed on BioPortfolio]

Community Members as Reviewers of Medical Journal Manuscripts

Manuscripts submitted to medical journals are typically reviewed by physicians or researchers, with no input from patients or other community members. However, involvement of community mem...

Web-based Tool to Improve the Assessment of Reporting (COBPeer)

The peer review process is a cornerstone of biomedical research publication. Despite being essential, the assessment of the completeness of the reporting and the identification of switched...

Testing for the Presence of Authorship Bias in Peer Review

No consensus exists among biomedical journals on the subject of blinding during the peer review process. Some journals attempt to remove all identifiers of authorship from potential manusc...

A Study to Evaluate the DAISe System During Neurointervention for Acute Ischemic Stroke

This purpose study is to demonstrate the safety and performance of the DAISe System used to remove clot in the brain during a stroke. This study will assess how well the device removes clo...

Efficacy of 1540 Nanometer Erbium Glass Laser to Improve Benign Dermatofibromas

This study is to find a more effective treatment for itchy, painful or unsightly dermatofibromas, that will improve symptoms of itch and/or pain and/or improve the appearance of dermatofib...

Medical and Biotech [MESH] Definitions

The influence of study results on the chances of publication and the tendency of investigators, reviewers, and editors to submit or accept manuscripts for publication based on the direction or strength of the study findings. Publication bias has an impact on the interpretation of clinical trials and meta-analyses. Bias can be minimized by insistence by editors on high-quality research, thorough literature reviews, acknowledgement of conflicts of interest, modification of peer review practices, etc.

Quick Search

DeepDyve research library

Searches Linking to this Article