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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

449 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12625356)

  • 41. Due process protection.
    Hallum JV; Hadley SW
    Nature; 1990 Sep; 347(6289):116. PubMed ID: 2395466
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Do researchers learn to overlook misbehavior?
    Heitman E; Anestidou L; Olsen C; Bulger RE
    Hastings Cent Rep; 2005; 35(5):49. PubMed ID: 16295264
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Misconduct annotations.
    Pascal CB
    Science; 1996 Nov; 274(5290):1066-7. PubMed ID: 8966577
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Change in fraud review proposed.
    Culliton BJ
    Nature; 1992 Mar; 356(6366):191. PubMed ID: 1313150
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. The United States Government scientific misconduct regulations and the handling of issues related to research integrity.
    Price AR
    J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol; 1993; 3 Suppl 1():253-64. PubMed ID: 9857309
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. US Government inquiry bodies dismiss scientific misconduct charges against AIDS researchers.
    Marwick C
    JAMA; 1993 Dec; 270(22):2665-6. PubMed ID: 8133572
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Imanishi-Kari still in limbo.
    Nature; 1994 Mar; 368(6466):1-2. PubMed ID: 8107875
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Scientific misconduct cases revealed.
    Palca J
    Science; 1990 Apr; 248(4953):297. PubMed ID: 2326642
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Improving the scientific misconduct hearing process.
    Parrish DM
    JAMA; 1997 Apr 23-30; 277(16):1315-9. PubMed ID: 9109472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Both accused researchers and whistle-blowers stay anonymous when no misconduct is found.
    Maloney DM
    Hum Res Rep; 2005 Jul; 20(7):8. PubMed ID: 16270443
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Bill would force journals to follow misconduct rules.
    Anderson C
    Nature; 1992 May; 357(6373):7. PubMed ID: 1315423
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Tie funding to research integrity.
    Titus S; Bosch X
    Nature; 2010 Jul; 466(7305):436-7. PubMed ID: 20651673
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. The scientific misconduct process: a scientist's view from the inside.
    Youngner JS
    JAMA; 1998 Jan; 279(1):62-4. PubMed ID: 9424047
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. NIH misconduct probes draw legal complaints.
    Culliton BJ
    Science; 1990 Jul; 249(4966):240-2. PubMed ID: 2374923
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. HHS proposes revised regulations on misconduct in research.
    Shalev M
    Lab Anim (NY); 2004 Jun; 33(6):12-3. PubMed ID: 15179427
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Misconduct: the stars who fell to earth.
    Dalton R
    Nature; 2002 Dec 19-26; 420(6917):728-9. PubMed ID: 12490902
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Journals as policemen.
    Nature; 1992 May; 357(6373):2. PubMed ID: 1315418
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Misconduct finding in the Gallo case.
    Greenberg D
    Lancet; 1993 Jan; 341(8838):166-7. PubMed ID: 8093759
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Scientific misconduct and research integrity for the bench scientist.
    Pascal CB
    Proc Soc Exp Biol Med; 2000 Sep; 224(4):220-30. PubMed ID: 10964256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. The 'Gallo case': Popovic strikes back.
    Kaiser J
    Science; 1997 Feb; 275(5302):920-1. PubMed ID: 9053992
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.