Checklists to detect potential predatory biomedical journals: a systematic review
- Standort
-
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek Frankfurt am Main
- ISSN
-
1741-7015
- Umfang
-
Online-Ressource
- Sprache
-
Englisch
- Anmerkungen
-
online resource.
- Erschienen in
-
Checklists to detect potential predatory biomedical journals: a systematic review ; volume:18 ; number:1 ; day:18 ; month:5 ; year:2020 ; pages:1-20 ; date:12.2020
BMC medicine ; 18, Heft 1 (18.5.2020), 1-20, 12.2020
- Urheber
-
Cukier, Samantha
Helal, Lucas
Rice, Danielle B.
Pupkaite, Justina
Ahmadzai, Nadera
Wilson, Mitchell
Skidmore, Becky
Lalu, Manoj M.
Moher, David
- Beteiligte Personen und Organisationen
-
SpringerLink (Online service)
- DOI
-
10.1186/s12916-020-01566-1
- URN
-
urn:nbn:de:101:1-2020072616124490353418
- Rechteinformation
-
Open Access; Der Zugriff auf das Objekt ist unbeschränkt möglich.
- Letzte Aktualisierung
-
14.08.2025, 10:55 MESZ
Datenpartner
Dieses Objekt wird bereitgestellt von:
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. Bei Fragen zum Objekt wenden Sie sich bitte an den Datenpartner.
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. Bei Fragen zum Objekt wenden Sie sich bitte an den Datenpartner.
Beteiligte
- Cukier, Samantha
- Helal, Lucas
- Rice, Danielle B.
- Pupkaite, Justina
- Ahmadzai, Nadera
- Wilson, Mitchell
- Skidmore, Becky
- Lalu, Manoj M.
- Moher, David
- SpringerLink (Online service)
Ähnliche Objekte (12)
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers
Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review
A scoping review on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals
Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to Authors'
Randomized trials published in some Chinese journals: how many are randomized?
Erratum to: Thanks to all those who reviewed for systematic reviews in 2014
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials
Happy birthday: we are one year old
All in the Family: systematic reviews, rapid reviews, scoping reviews, realist reviews, and more
Developing a guideline for clinical trial protocol content: Delphi consensus survey
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers
Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review
A scoping review on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals
Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to Authors'
Randomized trials published in some Chinese journals: how many are randomized?
Erratum to: Thanks to all those who reviewed for systematic reviews in 2014
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials
Happy birthday: we are one year old
All in the Family: systematic reviews, rapid reviews, scoping reviews, realist reviews, and more
Developing a guideline for clinical trial protocol content: Delphi consensus survey
CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Reporting guidelines: doing better for readers
Potential predatory and legitimate biomedical journals: can you tell the difference? A cross-sectional comparison
Evaluations of the uptake and impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and extensions: a scoping review
A scoping review on the roles and tasks of peer reviewers in the manuscript review process in biomedical journals
Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal 'Instructions to Authors'
Randomized trials published in some Chinese journals: how many are randomized?
Erratum to: Thanks to all those who reviewed for systematic reviews in 2014
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomized trials
Happy birthday: we are one year old
All in the Family: systematic reviews, rapid reviews, scoping reviews, realist reviews, and more
Developing a guideline for clinical trial protocol content: Delphi consensus survey