SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Fraud and misconduct in science: the stem cell seduction
12 references·8 citing·44 second hop
Fraud and misconduct in science: the stem cell seduction (2009)Fraud and misconduct in science: the stem…Keeping plagiarism at bay—A salutary tale (2007)Keeping plagiarism at bay—A s…Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups (2006)Comparison of the Hirsch-inde…Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Why Most Published Research F…Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Why Most Published Research F…Contradicted and Initially Stronger Effects in Highly Cited Clinical Research (2005)Contradicted and Initially St…Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation (2005)Citation Analysis in Research…The significance of the peer review process against the background of bias: priority ratings of reviewers and editors and the prediction of citation, the role of geographical bias (2002)The significance of the peer …Regrets or no regrets? No regrets! The fate of rejected manuscripts (2000)Regrets or no regrets? No reg…Chance, concurrence, and clustering. Analysis of reviewers' recommendations on 1,000 submissions to the Journal of Clinical Investigation. (1994)Chance, concurrence, and clus…The Evolution of Editorial Peer Review (1990)The Evolution of Editorial Pe…Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism (1990)Peer Review in 18th-Century S…Peer review and publication. Presidential address before the 70th annual meeting of the American Society for Clinical Investigation, San Francisco, California, 30 April 1978. (1978)Peer review and publication. …The 1-h fraud detection challenge (2021)The 1-h fraud detection chall…Plagiarism Detection by Online Solutions (2017)Plagiarism Detection by Onlin…On (scientific) integrity: conceptual clarification (2017)On (scientific) integrity: co…Preventing Publication of Falsified and Fabricated Data: Roles of Scientists, Editors, Reviewers, and Readers (2016)Preventing Publication of Fal…Eyes wide open: reader and author responsibility in understanding the limits of peer review (2015)Eyes wide open: reader and au…A study exploring attributes and nature of the retracted literature on mental disorders (2015)A study exploring attributes …Stem-Cell Spin: Covering the Hwang Affair inScienceandNature (2011)Stem-Cell Spin: Covering the …Research Ethics II: Mentoring, Collaboration, Peer Review, and Data Management and Ownership (2010)Research Ethics II: Mentoring…THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DISEASES OF CHILDREN (1951)Discovering the News: A Social History of American Newspapers (1979)Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science (1988)The ups and downs of peer review (2007)Quantitative Research Methods, Study Quality, and Outcomes: The Case of Interaction Research (2011)A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review (2017)The Matthew Effect in Science (1968)Citation Analysis as a Tool in Journal Evaluation (1972)Scientist as Subject: The Psychological Imperative. (1978)The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigation (1991)Factors Influencing Publication of Research Results (1992)A Multilevel Modelling Approach to Investigating the Predictive Validity of Editorial Decisions: Do the Editors of a High Profile Journal Select Manuscripts that are Highly Cited After Publication? (2011)Publication bias in clinical research (1991)Discrepancies between Meta-Analyses and Subsequent Large Randomized, Controlled Trials (1997)Randomized, Controlled Trials, Observational Studies, and the Hierarchy of Research Designs (2000)Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2008)Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again (1982)Nepotism and sexism in peer-review (1997)Dissemination and publication of research findings: an updated review of related biases (2010)The rough guide to systematic reviews and meta-analyses. (2011)Measuring the bias against low-income country research: an Implicit Association Test (2017)Editorial Peer Review in Biomedical Publication (1990)How to write a paper for publication (2000)The Fate of Epidemiologic Manuscripts (2007)The predictive validity of peer review: A selective review of the judgmental forecasting qualities of peers, and implications for innovation in science (2010)An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output (2005)Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods (2005)Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research (2005)The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level (2007)The R- and AR-indices: Complementing the h-index (2007)A bibliometric analysis of social entrepreneurship (2015)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)False-Positive Psychology (2011)Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience (2013)Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science (2015)Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar (2007)A review of the literature on citation impact indicators (2016)Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories (2019)Effects of Editorial Peer Review (2002)Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (2007)The New Statistics (2013)The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate (2016)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2005Why Most Published Research Findings Are False10,571 cited
  • 2005Why Most Published Research Findings Are False4,755 cited
  • 2005Contradicted and Initially Stronger Effects in Highly Cited Clinical Research1,465 cited
  • 2005Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation1,390 cited
  • 2006Comparison of the Hirsch-index with standard bibliometric indicators and with peer judgment for 147 chemistry research groups619 cited
  • 1990Peer Review in 18th-Century Scientific Journalism350 cited
  • 1990The Evolution of Editorial Peer Review346 cited
  • 1978Peer review and publication. Presidential address before the 70th annual meeting of the American Society for Clinical Investigation, San Francisco, California, 30 April 1978.104 cited
  • 2002The significance of the peer review process against the background of bias: priority ratings of reviewers and editors and the prediction of citation, the role of geographical bias67 cited
  • 2000Regrets or no regrets? No regrets! The fate of rejected manuscripts47 cited
  • 2007Keeping plagiarism at bay—A salutary tale36 cited
  • 1994Chance, concurrence, and clustering. Analysis of reviewers' recommendations on 1,000 submissions to the Journal of Clinical Investigation.25 cited

Cited by

  • 2010Research Ethics II: Mentoring, Collaboration, Peer Review, and Data Management and Ownership32 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

2017
On (scientific) integrity: conceptual clarification
22 cited
  • 2017Plagiarism Detection by Online Solutions17 cited
  • 2021The 1-h fraud detection challenge13 cited
  • 2016Preventing Publication of Falsified and Fabricated Data: Roles of Scientists, Editors, Reviewers, and Readers11 cited
  • 2011Stem-Cell Spin: Covering the Hwang Affair inScienceandNature10 cited
  • 2015A study exploring attributes and nature of the retracted literature on mental disorders10 cited
  • 2015Eyes wide open: reader and author responsibility in understanding the limits of peer review9 cited