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 *

163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12920281)

  • 1. Questions about Russian grant system.
    Prokhortchouk E
    Science; 2003 Aug; 301(5635):917-8. PubMed ID: 12920281
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Russian science. Academy plucks best biophysicists from a sea of mediocrity.
    Allakhverdov A; Pokrovsky V
    Science; 2003 Feb; 299(5609):994. PubMed ID: 12586912
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Rethinking grant review.
    Nat Neurosci; 2008 Feb; 11(2):119. PubMed ID: 18227790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cost of the NSERC Science Grant Peer Review System exceeds the cost of giving every qualified researcher a baseline grant.
    Gordon R; Poulin BJ
    Account Res; 2009; 16(1):13-40. PubMed ID: 19247851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Indeed: Cost of the NSERC science grant peer review system exceeds the cost of giving every qualified researcher a baseline grant.
    Gordon R; Poulin BJ
    Account Res; 2009 Jul; 16(4):232-3. PubMed ID: 20183164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Gulf syndrome research has passed peer review.
    Haley RW
    Nature; 2001 Apr; 410(6830):739. PubMed ID: 11298408
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The real cost of the NSERC peer review is less than 5% of a proposed baseline grant.
    Roorda S
    Account Res; 2009 Jul; 16(4):229-31. PubMed ID: 20183163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Ecstasy agonistes: a retracted study on a controversial substance raises questions about the reliability of government-sponsored research on drugs.
    Bartlett T
    Chron High Educ; 2004 Feb; 50(25):A14-6. PubMed ID: 15287142
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Science policy. Russian expats challenge government's 'disastrous' support for science.
    Allakhverdov A; Pokrovsky V
    Science; 2009 Oct; 326(5951):353. PubMed ID: 19833934
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. NIH revises rules of conflict of interest of grant peer reviewers.
    Shalev M
    Lab Anim (NY); 2004 Mar; 33(3):15-6. PubMed ID: 15235618
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A Nobel lesson: the grant behind the prize.
    Berg JM
    Science; 2008 Feb; 319(5865):900-1. PubMed ID: 18276870
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Research funding. Science foundations: a novelty in Russian science.
    Dezhina I; Graham LR
    Science; 2005 Dec; 310(5755):1772-3. PubMed ID: 16357247
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Science and government. In search of the best grant system.
    Honjo T
    Science; 2005 Aug; 309(5739):1329. PubMed ID: 16123288
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Russian science. Danger to peer review is in eye of beholder.
    Pokrovsky V
    Science; 2001 Feb; 291(5506):959. PubMed ID: 11232565
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A Nobel lesson: the grant behind the prize. Response.
    Capecchi MR
    Science; 2008 Feb; 319(5865):900-1. PubMed ID: 18283726
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Life sciences research. Massachusetts proposes $1 billion plan.
    Holden C
    Science; 2007 May; 316(5827):966. PubMed ID: 17510331
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. New rules propose greater scrutiny for NIH grant recipients.
    Dove A
    Nat Med; 2006 Jan; 12(1):5. PubMed ID: 16397535
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Japan. Summit seeks boost for life sciences.
    Normile D
    Science; 2001 Oct; 294(5543):763-5. PubMed ID: 11679642
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Russian science. Academicians react angrily to draft reform plan.
    Allakhverdov A; Pokrovsky V
    Science; 2004 Sep; 305(5692):1889. PubMed ID: 15448236
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. U.S. science policy. Peer review not popular at Homeland Security.
    Bhattacharjee Y
    Science; 2009 Nov; 326(5954):779. PubMed ID: 19892948
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.