References

• 2000Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting20,612 cited
• 1999Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement4,828 cited
• 1990How to write and publish a scientific paper569 cited
• 1999Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers'recommendations: a randomised trial415 cited
• 2004The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a fifty-year survey.364 cited
• 1994Manuscript Quality before and after Peer Review and Editing at Annals of Internal Medicine324 cited
• 1999Peer Review in Health Sciences268 cited
• 1998What Makes a Good Reviewer and a Good Review for a General Medical Journal?266 cited
• 2003Impartial Judgment by the “Gatekeepers” of Science: Fallibility and Accountability in the Peer Review Process199 cited
• 2003The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Group.133 cited
• 2002How I Review an Original Scientific Article117 cited
• 1999Writing and Publishing in Medicine70 cited
• 1994Reviewer bias: a blinded experimental study.57 cited
• 2003Peer review time: how late is late in a small medical journal?21 cited