Sentences with phrase «review about your paper»

For the papers written by the paper writing services, there are qualitative critiques available over the internet, who would analyze your paper and give an honest and useful review about your paper.

All the complaints on other reviews about paper cups are all unjustified.

Not exact matches

The Center for American Progress reviewed 30 case studies in 11 of the most relevant research papers on the costs of employee turnover and found that it costs businesses about one - fifth of a worker's salary to replace that worker.

Our analysis reviews 30 case studies in 11 research papers published between 1992 and 2007 that provide estimates of the cost of turnover, finding that businesses spend about one - fifth of an employee's annual salary to replace that worker.

Unlike current studies about Facebook, which are conducted in conjunction with the company's product team, Facebook will not be able to review these academic papers before they are published.

August 27, 2012 at 2:31 pm Report abuse Bill T. OK, I'll play,»... they just keep running into trouble about 2012 years ago...», cite just ONE peer reviewed paper indicating that the apparent positions of stars in the sky are not calculable past the year 0 C.E. (your discussion is garbled but this appears to be your claim).

In the Student Review, an alternative and unofficial school paper, Brooks poked fun at university policies, interviewed polygamists, wrote about gay issues and simply didn't shy away from matters most people were afraid to talk about.

Please send information relating to any current research, publications or working papers on fathers that you have written which you feel Lewis & Lamb might not know about and which should go into a review.

In another article about the effects of running compression socks I reviewed multiple papers investigating of the effects of wearing compression socks during runs and during recovery.

Personally, I find it rather ironic that you're lecturing the blog author on the rigor of language, when, faced with the need to support the claims made by a documentary that has faced absolutely no real standards of intellectual rigor or merit (the kind of evidence you apparently find convincing), you have so far managed to produce a study with a sample size too small to conclude anything, a review paper that basically summarized well known connections between vaginal and amniotic flora and poor outcomes in labor and birth before attempting to rescue what would have been just another OB review article with a few attention grabbing sentences about long term health implications, and a review article published in a trash journal.

On a day when the media's influence in politics is the number one topic of conversation, politics.co.uk reviews what the papers have been saying about Gordon Brown's leader's speech.

About to watch your paper review!!!

The science and technology committee raised several concerns about the standard of the peer - review process in scientific papers, calling for greater recognition of the work involved, which many in the scientific community consider a burden.

The new owner of the Niagara Falls Reporter and the paper's now - former movie reviewer traded verbal barbs over the owner's desire not to publish reviews about movies «where women are alpha and men are beta.»

While reviewing the Sunday papers on the BBC News Channel on Saturday night, I also wondered about the intentions of Hackney North and Stoke Newington MP, Diane Abbott.

Michael Howard was reviewing the papers on Andrew Marr's AM this Sunday and the barbed comments in his direction from other guests about the grammar schools fiasco and his refusal to say anything, he just gave a grimacing wincing smile, told us all.

Since we are talking about reading papers, let's continue with a literature review.

And have you read a recent peer - reviewed paper that you would like to write about?

Asked to write a review about weapons systems across the animal kingdom, he dug into the file cabinets full of papers on the subject that he had collected over the years.

Toilet Paper Holder: Many of our favorite selections on this list of reviews include a toilet paper holder, eliminating one more thing you have to worry about as you Paper Holder: Many of our favorite selections on this list of reviews include a toilet paper holder, eliminating one more thing you have to worry about as you paper holder, eliminating one more thing you have to worry about as you shop.

Wager says you should expect a review to take you 4 to 5 hours, on average, depending on how long the paper is, how difficult it is to read, and whether you have to consult the literature about the researchers» study methods.

«Almost none of the water that we're talking about would be drinkable right out of the seafloor — there would have to be processing done,» said Ward Sanford, a U.S. Geological Survey hydrologist who reviewed the paper.

The reviews themselves were not remarkable: mostly favourable, with some suggestions about how to improve the papers.

Have you recently read a peer - reviewed paper that you want to write about?

Editors may have papers under review that rely on a published result; if it's being called into question, editors need to know about it, he adds.

But Alice can still recover the information about the state of that electron, the team reports in a paper in press at Physical Review Letters.

These might include information about your own availability, related work being reviewed at other journals (from your lab or other labs), or the names of other scientists who are working on the same problem and so would have a conflict of interest in reviewing your paper.

PLoS Pathogens says it did notify the other corresponding author, Joseph DeRisi of the University of California, San Francisco — with whom editors had corresponded during the submission and review of the paper — about the impending retraction in a 27 August e-mail; when DeRisi didn't reply, the editors retracted on their own.

There's no shortage of places to publish original research papers about pathogens and immunity, but a new peer - reviewed journal on those topics has a unique author - friendly mandate: to reduce the submission process to a matter of minutes, and initial reviews to just a few days.

When concerns were raised about the proliferation of papers published in poor - quality journals, UGC announced that it would change its performance metrics and compile a list of peer - reviewed journals in which researchers would need to publish.

Publishers big and small are producing hundreds of free - to - read, peer - reviewed online journals that charge authors fees ranging from about $ 500 to $ 3000 per paper.

In January 2014, they published a paper in Physical Review Letters (PRL) presenting new ideas about how to induce a strange but interesting state in graphene — one where it appears as if particles inside it have a fraction of an electron's charge.

Of the 796 papers manually reviewed by the Ioannidis team that contained empirical data, only 111 reported effect sizes and only 18 reported confidence intervals (a measure of the uncertainty about the magnitude of the effect).

The review paper covers earliest hominid evolution, from about 6 to 1.6 million years ago.

Marquès and his team were so bemused by their result that they buried the data in a research paper that was ostensibly about the possibility of finding tetraneutrons in the future (Physical Review C, vol 65, p 44006).

The new paper about Fermi's gamma - ray detection has been submitted to The Astrophysical Journal and is currently undergoing peer review.

Rice University physicist Tom KillianThe team's findings, which are summarized in the PRL paper and a companion theoretical study appearing this week in Physical Review A (PRA), reveal something new about the basic nature of matter, Killian said.

With concerns about the potential uses of this research in mind, the research paper describing these results was specially reviewed by Science's editors, and Smolke and her co-authors say they are committed to open discussions about careful and responsible advancement of this research.

Suggestions to read in today's digest are: a review about microbiological methods applied in studies following the deepwater horizon oil spill by S.Zhang, a paper by W. Pootakham on dynamics of coral ‐ associated microbiomes during a thermal bleaching event and a paper by X. Jiang on a novel auxotrophic interaction among soil microbes.

seems to be incompatible with the statement from his Annual review paper from 2000 (see abstract below) that: «The average surface temperature of the continents has increased by about 1.0 K over the past 5 centuries; half of this increase has occurred in the twentieth century alone.»

An addendum to the previous review, in which the authors examine the hypothesis in light of a retracted paper about the mechanics of autoreactive T - cells.

She is registred to the National Order of Biologists in the province of Palermo; collaboration in research project from 2012 to 2015 at the Department of Biopathology and Biotechnology, University of Palermo, focusing the study on the identification of molecules capable to modulate intracellular metabolic pathways for the prevention and treatment of infectious, tumor and degenerative disease, in collaboration with Prof. Angela Santoni, University of Rome; collaboration in research project in 2011 at the hospital «Villa Sofia Cervello» of Palermo to study methods can cure the genetic defect that causes thalassemia through genetic engineering; she studies different mechanisms of the differentiation and the activation of human gammadelta T cells as effector cells of the immune response against cancer and infectious diseases; she investigates about the identification and development of biomarkers of resistance and susceptibility to Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection; Valentina Orlando has published 13 papers in peer reviewed journals and 3 comunications at national and international congress.

The advantages of a preprint journal club over a journal club reviewing published papers are 1) lab members read the latest material (often posted within the previous week or two), 2) they feel that reviewing a paper is not an empty exercise (because the paper is already published), but something that actually helps people, 3) they learn about improving manuscripts, and 4) authors get more feedback.

As for peer review, it means only that reasonably qualified scientists examined the manuscript and recommended changes to improve the paper, or recommended that the paper be rejected; the journal editor has to make a determination about the merits of the paper based largely, but not entirely on the reviewers» comments (the editor has some discretion in deciding to accept or reject — his / her reputation as an editor, and the reputation of the journal, depend on sound editorial judgments).

Here's a handy review paper about Be stars you might like.

If you want to know more about our research, please take a look at this review paper: Goddi et al., International Journal of Modern Physics D, Volume 26, Issue 2, id.

learned last month that his 2010 review paper about nanoparticles in refrigeration systems had been retracted, he was concerned

The latest version of the Sensor Fish — a small tubular device filled with sensors that analyze the physical stresses fish experience — measures more forces, costs about 80 percent less and can be used in more hydro structures than its predecessor, according to a paper published today in the American Institute of Physics» Review of Scientific Instruments.

The Keck Observatory telescopes are the most scientifically productive on Earth, responsible for gathering data used in about 300 peer - reviewed scientific papers per year — almost one per night.

The device's latest version costs about 80 percent less and can be used in more hydro structures than its predecessor, according to a paper published in the journal Review of Scientific Instruments.