145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1152879)
1. Visceral viewpoints. Goals and controls - grants and contracts.
Spiro HM
N Engl J Med; 1975 Sep; 293(11):545-7. PubMed ID: 1152879
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The training of manpower needed for biomedical research.
Braunwald E
N Engl J Med; 1975 Feb; 292(6):290-3. PubMed ID: 1110707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. National Institutes of Health. Panel weighs starter R01 grants.
Kaiser J
Science; 2004 Jun; 304(5679):1891. PubMed ID: 15218117
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Peer review reviewed.
Mehl JW
Fed Proc; 1975 Aug; 34(9):i-iv. PubMed ID: 1149887
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. National Institutes of Health. Grants 'below payline' rise to help new investigators.
Kaiser J
Science; 2009 Sep; 325(5948):1607. PubMed ID: 19779159
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Editorial: Judicium parium.
Fishman AP
N Engl J Med; 1974 Jan; 290(2):105-6. PubMed ID: 4808447
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Nurturing the biomedical research enterprise.
Wyngaarden JB
P R Health Sci J; 1986 Aug; 5(2):43-50. PubMed ID: 3823360
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Biomedical politics. NIH roiled by inquiries over grants hit list.
Kaiser J
Science; 2003 Oct; 302(5646):758. PubMed ID: 14593135
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Biomedical research. Stimulus funding elicits a tidal wave of 'challenge grants'.
Kaiser J
Science; 2009 May; 324(5929):867. PubMed ID: 19443754
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Letter: The National Institutes of Health grants peer review study team.
Looney GL
Am J Chin Med (Gard City N Y); 1976; 4(2):201-3. PubMed ID: 937242
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The National Institutes of Health yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
Fredrickson DS
Public Health Rep; 1978; 93(6):642-7. PubMed ID: 362469
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Management operations of the National Cancer Institute that influence the governance of science.
Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1984 May; 64():1-139. PubMed ID: 6749243
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Rethinking grant review.
Nat Neurosci; 2008 Feb; 11(2):119. PubMed ID: 18227790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Research funding.
FASEB J; 1991 Sep; 5(12):2741-2. PubMed ID: 1916097
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Grants: fuel that feeds research.
Lawrence SV
Bull Am Coll Physicians; 1978 Jan; 19(1):18-22, 24-6. PubMed ID: 10236122
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Washington report: a conversation with Vincent T. DeVita, Jr., M.D.. Interview by Daniel S. Greenberg.
DeVita VT
N Engl J Med; 1980 Oct; 303(17):1014-6. PubMed ID: 7412849
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Proposal for public archive draws support, criticism.
Travis K
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2004 Oct; 96(19):1416. PubMed ID: 15467028
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Peer review of research project grants by NIH study sections: report of the Committee on National Medical Policy, American Society for Clinical Investigation.
Bondurant S
Clin Res; 1977 Dec; 25(5):297-305. PubMed ID: 10304718
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
