These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
12. Commentary: new guidelines for NIH peer review: improving the system or undermining it? Spiegel AM Acad Med; 2010 May; 85(5):746-8. PubMed ID: 20520019 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Research funding: peer review at NIH. Scarpa T Science; 2006 Jan; 311(5757):41. PubMed ID: 16400135 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Biomedical research. NIH plans new grants for innovative minds. Kaiser J Science; 2003 Aug; 301(5635):902. PubMed ID: 12920271 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Support for the NIH public access policy. Rogawski MA; Suber P Science; 2006 Sep; 313(5793):1572. PubMed ID: 16973859 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. NIH consultant finds little evidence of bias against clinical researchers. Brainard J Chron High Educ; 2005 Mar; 51(28):A23. PubMed ID: 15835080 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Facts about the National Center for Nursing Research. Cowan MJ Cardiovasc Nurs; 1992; 28(2):9-15. PubMed ID: 1739962 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Research funding. NIH in the post-doubling era: realities and strategies. Zerhouni EA Science; 2006 Nov; 314(5802):1088-90. PubMed ID: 17110557 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Shortening of NIH RO1 grant applications: your response is important. Nairn RS; Sweasy JB DNA Repair (Amst); 2007 Jan; 6(1):1-2. PubMed ID: 17157082 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. National Institutes of Health. Changes in peer review target young scientists, heavyweights. Kaiser J Science; 2008 Jun; 320(5882):1404. PubMed ID: 18556519 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]